Elusive 530c Triple Impression

Has anyone ever seen a 530c Triple Impression? None are listed by Siegel, and the PF database includes only submissions that were turned down as triple impressions ard reclassified as double impressions. I can find only one ever listed on the internet and it was in a Schuyler Rumsey auction back in 2014 advertised as a 'triple' but was actually one of the ones reclassified by the PF and called a 'double'.

My curiosity is piqued.

530c is a fairly recent addition to the catalog. It is not in 2003, but is in the 2009 Specialized catalog. No doubt the listing is based on an example being certified in that era and Scott being notified. It may be a stamp now recertified as a double impression as you describe. I would recommend sending a note to Scott asking them to check their files for background info. They should have the cert number that 530c is based on. If there is a match, they may be unaware of the the cert changes and need to delist 530c?

2009 cert
http://psestamp.com/Cert/1208326

Don

It wasn't certified by the PF. The triple impressions sent to them all turned out to be double impressions.

Need a much better scan then that to have an opinion.

Here is the lot description from the initial post, Rumsey sale #58 of Dec 8-11, 2014. Lot 1501. Interesting that it does not mention any cert.



Add: the later PF cert # for this stamp is 525207, as a double impression.

I only see two sets of frame lines, which is a big problem. Obviously a triple impression needs three sets of frame lines. The frame lines are the area most likely to appear relatively unaffected by multiple impressions.

Thanks John, Don and Rev. I have come to the conclusion that it simply does not exist and I will contact the Scott folks. This is somewhat related to a 2/18 post of mine where I was shown mine was not a triple.
Don's PSE cert image from above:


John's image (same stamp PF said is not a triple):


My original image from 2/18 (from a block of 4):


Stamperix's double impression 'created' image using photoshop:


To my eye they all exhibit the same qualities and per the PF (on several occasions) they are all doubles!

Yes, the lines should be three times there. I made the image to show that the numbers "3" cann fool the viewer, as there always appear to be 3x the numbers, although it's only 2x the image. It will be interesting to hear the source for the Scott listing, looking forward to reading it here then.

The term "double impression" is misleading. The second "impression" would have remained from improper wiping of residual ink from the blanket on the offset cylinder. If ink remained from multiple prior rotations of the blanket the impression would appear to be blurred like a poorly printed copy of the local paper.

Cfrphoto.

45 years ago senior collectors use to call such stamps ..'Ghosted double impression'. Terms evolve.

Interesting! All those photo'd here look like double impressions. It WOULD be interesting to see what Scott says. My 2011 cat says it is worth $1750, in italics.

I must say, though, that the double impression does jar the optic nerve! I wonder if someone argued that one of the impressions is, in fact, a closely spaced double impression. If you hear back from Scott, update us, please!!

There is no way that the sheet went through the press twice. The offset blanket was not completely cleaned after the previous impression. The impression appears to be doubled because the new ink did not line up exactly with the ink from the previous impressions. Note that the impressions are vertically aligned because the plate and roller can only shift positions relative to each other in the direction of paper motion. Sheets of paper were fed by the press from a stack at the front of the press and land in a stack at the back of the press. I operated a similar press at various times when I worked at the local newspaper.

Caper123,

That Cert' 'may be' correct...in a way. Stamps being a visual hobby and I see THREE 3's left side. I can't convince myself there's only 2. Magnificent stamp either way.

I prepared and sent an in-depth email along with pics to Scott last week. No reply yet. I'll share when/if they respond!

I just came accross this discussion and would like to share (2) of these double vision stamps which I had labeled 529a. The second one seams to have (3) images of the 3 on the right bottom.