I Need Help In Locating This 8 Cent Franklin In Scott

Need help in Id'ing this 8 cent Franklin, 11 x10, no watermark.
Thanks in advance

https://stampsmarter.org/1847usa/wa...408perf.html
https://stampsmarter.org/1847usa/19...ntifier.html

There was no 11x10 variety.
Don

NOTE: This thread was started over in this one https://goscf.com/t/80553

470 probably. Looks like perf 10 - are you using a perforation gauge (or counting?) Counting does not work.

And like the parcel post stamps in the original thread here https://goscf.com/t/80553, the image of the 8 cent above is clearly skewed. Look how one side is much higher than the other side (the stamp is not simply scanned tilted, the image is actually skewed. Something is going on with the imaging software.

Here is Scotty's original image with a perfect square removed, you can clearly see how it is skewed.

Don

Ignore my post

Is this a photo or scan of the stamp? If a photo, then the camera may not be aligned correctly. I don't see how a scan can be skewed, unless the software is doing something, as suggested.

I used both the correcto gauge and Stanley Gibbons transparent Instanta gauge...both gauges read Perf 11's top and bottom, Perf 10's on the two sides. I'll post a larger picture here. It was scanned on a new HP Photo printer and when imported into Photoshop it lines up correctly with photoshops horizontal and vertical rulers. I don't see how skewing could happen when the rulers are mathematically at perfect 90 degrees to each other.
(btw, I suffered a serious stroke and seizure two years back, maybe my brain is now playing tricks with my eyesight. :0

That is a perf 11 stamp. If no watermark, it is a 508. This design came only in perf 10, 11, and 12 - sides and top must match or you have a badly reperforated stamp.

The bottom perfs look a little 'off' to me. The perf holes are a little farther away from the design at right than at left. The perfs at top (the right side of the top perfs) look like something is going on there, too. The perf holes have some extra 'topography'. I suspect this started out as a perf 10 stamp (maybe even a bit extra tall stamp) and was re-perfed at top and bottom to help someone think they have an unlisted rarity. To my eye, the side perfs look 'larger' than the top & bottom perfs - like someone was shooting for 11x10.

Of course, I could be 100% wrong. I don't think I am, though.

ETA: What I am about to relay is NOT the correct way to determine perf gauging, but I will explain my logic later. I count 11 perf holes on the bottom. I count 11 perf holes on the left. We know this stamp is taller than it is wide. That says to me that the side and top/bottom perfs are not the same. Even though they only come the same from the USPO. Something has happened to the perfs of this stamp after it left the USPO.

Okay...it must have been a perf 11 once upon a reperfer, or it was a perf 10 before it has "surgery" from the same reperfer. So now at 11x10 it is sadly an orphan? Should orphans go looking for a cert (which could identify it) or should this orphan end up in the wastebasket? I hate to deprive some future flyspecker this head scratcher. lol
By the way, with a 10x power magnifier three of the sides show those tiny "tell-tail remnants of correctly separated perfs" on the perf tips that seem to say, genuine perf here. Only the bottom perfs (perf 11's) seem too clean of them.

Scott 508c might have been an option except for the fact yours is perf 10 top and bottom and 11 on both sides. The 508c is perf 10 at top OR bottom and perf 11 on the sides. The pic below show the top and bottom perfs matched up.

The horizontal perfs gauge the same. And the vertical perfs gauge the same. But they are not the same gauge. Either something is reperforated or it is an unknown variety. My money would be on reperforation.

My ten cents, between errands. It looks to be a perf 10 issue with fake 11-gauge perfs top and bottom. The holes at top do not present as genuine to me, but that is a long conversation. However, the top and bottom margins are unusually narrow betraying a perf wheel spacing that is not natural.

This is an altered or damaged (by alteration) stamp. It will always be the stamp number as produced, but altered via damage (reperfing). In this case the waste basket is not the best home.

You spoke of certificates and as such I am trusting you know how to get one. That said, don't get a certificate but if you don't want the same, sent it to the APS (American Philatelic Society) for their reference collection of fakes and forgeries.

Otherwise if you want to keep the stamp you could make a notation on the back, "reperfed T & B" for future owners. Such notation would not further diminish the value.

Thanks Parcelpostguy for the suggestion about noting the issue on the backside. This stamp though is never hinged with complete o.g., so I don't think writing on the backside onto the gum would be the best way to proceed on this without knowing what it actually is. I doubt the 508c could be here with BOTH top and bottom perf 11s. I will try to overlay the strange 8 center with some of the other 8 cent Franklins I have on hand here to see how the perfs either line up or not.
btw, I posted a Parcel post stamp query here today. Thought maybe you might take a gander at it and give me some helpful feedback.
Thanks

Just learning the possibilities of using photoshop to help in answering philatelic questions. I superimposed the unknown 11x10 over two known copies of 470. Setting the opacity at 50% on the unknown it clearly showed that the good 470s both had wider bottom margins, while the top perf 11 on the unknown had close to the same height of the known 470s. It looks to me like the person who reperfed the top stamp had two jumbo margins at the top and bottom..hence where the foul deed was done.
That said, looks like Tipzi wins the door prize on this album weed.