Argentina Scott 594 Missing A Lot Of Ocean Blue I Think

The one on the left looks like the others I have seen. The one on the right is missing a lot of blue. It just seems a lot lighter overall. All thoughts welcome. - Thanks Jeff

The brown is also different. Either the stamp was printed lacking enough ink or somehow it bleached out. Both stamps are used, so there is little way of telling what happened
Could they be two different issues?


Peter

Aniline ink?
There seemed to be quite a bit of variation in the colours on these issues not really consistent (that's the whitest I've seen :)

I would be in the bleaching group except that would also bleach out the cancel.

Definitely, a printing/inking error of some sort. They are clearly, in appearance, 2 distinct varieties. Printing/Inking respectfully.

I just grabbed a few of these off of Hipstamp.

Yes I do understand that photos can be manipulated for color changes. My point here is the Blending/bleeding of color.

They clearly show serious differences in how they were printed and or paper quality being used.

This image shows how well the colors blend into the background, filling the ocean. Color is lighter and looks almost faded.


This image shows almost none of that blending/bleeding into the background at all. The color is also much brighter and solid.


This image has those same bright color but with the blend/bleeding into the ocean.


Which opens up that old story of when is it a catalogable difference or not. Clearly these images along with the Original post image show stark differences. Whether its paper or a specific printing method/technique. Should it be catalog notable?

I believe it should. Yet I'm no expert. When I can see differences that obvious, it should be noted in a catalog. IMHO

Jeff, I do not have any Scott numbers for you, but these are two different stamps. There are also some with overprints, and an issue with the names of the oceans on them. You can find all of them on www.stampworld.com .


Peter

Respectfully disagree. The delta may also be in the way they were scanned and saved. Comparing unknown digital images is virtually impossible.

But I agree that this stamp issue has many color variations. How much of the variations are due to environmental conditions (especially on used stamps) is open for debate; making assumptions on the actual print colors decades later is also a mine field.
Don

Peter thank you for reminding me of this place.

Don I agree with you that the debate of how much variations are due to an infinite number of variables could spark a debate lasting as long as this forum has been in existence. Yet that is why we post. To learn and discuss those things. To get them out there, and find out, the more we know. The less we really know.

Talking about Me, Myself, & I LOL

The picture was taken once by my phone and only reduced the size to fit for the forum. No other adjustments to the picture. Not from a scan. Thanks for the lively discussion. Really looks like two varieties to me. Thanks again Jeff

Hello.
Seeing the watermark can clarify the matter, although given the variants of the Argentine Gz catalog, it may complicate it.
The Gz catalog can be downloaded or consulted on the argentinian website of the Lomas de Zamora Philatelic Center (CEFILOZA).
https://cefiloza.blogspot.com/
Regards.

thank you