One Example Of Reperforation

Well, I was a bit late to this party. From the thread title I did not know a parcel post stamp was involved.

I agree the the accurate comments above, reperfed, individual perf wheels, to improve centering, best from the back and wild guesses not in interest of knowledge.

There are two points I wish to bring up. First not all reperfing is done to improve centering. This Q-10, 50 PP stamp was printed (as were all 17 PP and PP Due values) in sheets of 180 images which was then cut done the center lines to make 4-45 image panes. This results in 8 of the stamps with one edge straight and 1 with two edges straight (forming a corner). Thus in normal production and release 20% of all issued stamps have a straight edge.

Then remember from above, "cut down the center lines" means that a line of the same color of the stamp was used as a guide for when to cut. Some straight edges got the entire line, part of the line and none of the line. This means the real perforated stamps, if centered better than deep average, should have no stamp color on the perf tips. Some examples of reperfing on these (and similar straight edge panes cut along the guidelines) the faker leave a bit or a lot of such center line still visible on the perf tips.

Lines, top with part, right with full, corner with part and full as well as Shanghai cancel:

If the centerlines are close to the reperfed perf tips, they can be sanded off or broken off. Sometimes a trace of the line might show on one or two perf tips, tipping you off that a reperfer has been at work.

There have been old US collections I've seen that were all about collecting the different straight edge positions. They perhaps were gobbled up by reperfers long ago.

To go along with Parcelpostguy's comments, US classics and foreign of similar age are often found reperfed on the side cutting the design, as people generally (apparently still) find that preferable to a damaged side or natural straight edge.

I'm sure Trepel was not amused by the PSE notes, given the stamps were sold in Siegel's May 2021 auction.

The E3 & E10 holding clean PF Certs but both returned as reperfed right by PSE.

Personally, I would trust a 1996 PF cert and a 1999 PF cert over a 2021 PSE cert, but that's just me.

I assume PSE does not describe the indicators that led to their conclusion.

E3 looks reperfed on right but E10 looks good to me. I agree that PSE should state why they find something suspect. Keeping it a secret is weak. Maybe someone here on the forum knows why they do not make background of an opinion known.

The PSE opinions pretty much doom the stamps. Even if one were to follow up and get clean certs from the APS, PF, and PSAG, they would never wipe the negative PSE opinion off the slate.

Ofcourse, the extension lot will probably fetch decent money with the stamps soon to be listed on ebay w/o the PSE certs.

Of course, one could always resubmit them to the PF for new certs and use those.

I believe this is one of the machines used to determine if a stamp is reperforated or not:

It's a bit more scientific then that.

Just a quick point of clarification Rod. In the context of reperfing, there should be no difference between comb and line perf stamps. The teeth and holes should line up side to side and top to bottom. There could be some variation if the perf pins are a bit bent and are not registered to start off in the exact same position. Just my personal experience.

As far as meeting at the corners, this is where the difference lies. Comb perfs are made in one operation so they always line up perfectly at the corners unless there is a bent perf pin. But in this case, the imperfection should repeat itself throughout the sheet. Line perfs infrequently line up in the corners since rows and columns are perfed in two separate operations.