An Interesting Flaw On Proofs Of The 10d Cartier Position 60.

I have examined images of a black plate proof sheet and a blue plate proof sheet. Position 60 on the black proof does not show a flaw on the forehead at this position. Interestingly there is a flaw on the forehead on the blue proof sheet and I have a orange yellow proof pair shown below of position 59 and 60, which shows the flaw.




Closeup of the flaw:





Normal forehead:




Has anyone seen this flaw on an actual stamp?

Mike...Great pair..Wish I had them.
Could the orange/yellow plate may have been thrown out by a proof reader and another plate created before final print..?

Robert

My understanding is all the orange yellow proofs were printed in circa 1864. This would be well after they quit using the plate. The blue proof sheet maybe a proof drawn during production but can not be sure when. The black proof maybe pre-production but again black proofs could have been printed at any time as they would only have to use black ink instead of blue. Love mysteries....

I think the flaw since it is on a blue proof sheet and my pair printed circa 1864 are printed from same plate.

True Mike..Problem is no one that was there is not alive today to tell us what happened with plates/colours..

The blue plate theory sounds about right.

Robert

Another key is I have two stamps from position 60 and neither has the forehead flaw. This indicates to me that the flaw is plate damage that occurred at the printer and not a flaw produced in the laying out of the plate. That is why I feel the black proof is probably pre-production, the blue plate a production proof taken sometime after my two stamps were printed, and the flaw was never repaired because it is present on the orange yellow 1864 proof pair.

Remember, back all those years ago they would do a run, and maybe not finish, when they were asked to stop run to maybe do another smaller run...This has happened to me when I was in printing class in high school...Remove plate, then return to a run latter.

Plate could have been damaged off press....Just my thought.

Robert

Mike..Was this yours, or is it another Scott 32..??
Robert

Hi Robert, The copy I found has a Hamilton date stamp...

<-

You might also note the list of owners in the description...

Dah Mike..Missed that..Me a flyspecker missed it..Shame on me.
Was talking to Ken Lemke, president of BNAPS tonight and he was telling me he had a Unitrade 233ii on cover {cracked ear}....He is trying to find another..Only one recognized so far...Some guys have all the luck..EH..??

Robert