A Used 60 Premiere Gravure Or 70c Reddish Color Variant

A large part of collecting is about minutia, subjective or otherwise.

Of course a lot of stamp collecting is about minutia, but when it gets to the point where there is no consensus about a major catalog number with thousands of dollars in difference in the value, we've fallen off the cliff. There is hardly any difference between a #5 and a #9 - only super specialists in that issue should care. . .but that stamp got 6 major catalog numbers assigned. . .but at least you can tell them apart. In this case, there apparently isn't a consensus whether this is a 60 or a 70c, so is there really any difference between the two?

Since one is a trial color proof (70TC6, formerly 60, supposedly in a distinctive shade) and one is a stamp on similar paper and in a similar but not quite the same shade, I would say there is a significant difference.

It's a question of violet vs dark violet; unfortunately it is a fugitive color. A long time has passed, not only since they were issued but since the certs were issued, and no one knows how they were kept all this time. So no one knows what if any changes in the color/shade have occurred over the years. So it might well be very different from what it looked like decades ago.

If it is now different than what is the point of the exercise.

The problem is that no one around today knows what it looked like in 1961. The only thing anyone can go by is what it looks like today. And as I said, it's well known to be a fugitive shade; all the violets and lilacs are.

I think the point that rodgcam and Philazilla are trying to make is if the violet and red lilac shade are fugitive and the stamp was originally certified as Scott 60, then what is the point of having it recertified, or believing the updated opinion as opposed to the original opinion when according to rev collectors own statement natural processes could have changed the color over time which does not invalidate the original opinion at the time it was certified.

Said another way: just because you age and your hair turns gray, you are still you.

Funcitypapa. Totally agree with your assessment about this stamp.

Another case where one really wonders why in US stamps and their certification nobody ever talks about UV colors. Other countries like Germany and Australia use UV light just like normal to identify slight color differences, so that they are even mentioned in the catalog. No certification would be possible for some stamps without usage of UV light. When do the US experts start?

so by that logic when I renew my drivers license, I can list my hair color back before it turned gray, and maybe list my high school weight?

If I have a stamp with a cert as a sound stamp, and I accidentally crease it or tear it, should the cert still list the condition as what it once was?

For a fugitive color, the cert can only list the color at the time the cert is issued.

I know you're asking Funcitypapa, but as it just matches so well into my thoughts:

If there is a specific UV reaction of a color, then this UV reaction could still be obvious even if the daylight stamp color has changed a bit. So UV colors can be helpful - why should this not be true for US stamps? So in this direction, yes, the stamp could be still the certified color even if it has lost its appearance a bit. (same would be true for specific ink properties)

Color is not a physical property of a stamp. Stamps do not possess color but rather stamps reflect wavelengths of light which are perceived by our brains.


Colors are perceptions and these perceptions differ from one person to another.

Women are typically are much better at detecting colors than men because they have more cones in their retinas. It is estimated that 12% of all women actually have a fourth, additional color-detecting photo pigment cell (having four types of cones is called tetrachromacy). People who have this trait can detect as many as 100 million additional colors. And on the other side of the scale, men are more likely to have color vision deficiencies (there are 9-12 different types of color deficiencies). As many as 10% of the male population may have at least one type of color vision deficiency.

There are also notable color vision deficiency deltas between geographic and demographic populations. So the take away here is that men are much less likely to correctly identify color than women and that variations between how any two humans perceive a color is almost inevitable.

Stamp color is the most subjective criteria there is, more so than even grading. It is on par with trying to get people to agree on a stamp being 'pretty'.
Don

Don. Interesting point you raise about sexual differences how we perceive color.
Maybe there should be more woman stamp experts to render expert opinions.

It is strange to me that a collectible can degrade from its original state to a point where it is almost impossible to come to an identification consensus but if a consensus is reached the item becomes exponentially more valuable than its more common counterpart. Every other collectible category seems to involve making a positive ID of what the item is and then assigning a condition. Coins with patina, a Renoir with fading and so on. In this case the authentication and condition (ink degradation or changes) are codependent. It just seems so very subjective that a certificate comes to the edge of being not very confirmatory. Especially if one needs to be fearful of having the opinion revalidated at some point (change of ownership).

UV is used regularly in the US to check stamps for a variety of reasons.