1913/1914 China Junk $1 Stamp With Interesting Multilingual Cancel

Can't find this inverted any info on this stamp would be great thanks.


*** Moved by Staff to a more appropriate forum. ***

Jvpool, your image ( photo ? ) does not enlarge very well. Could you please post a better and bigger scan ?


Peter

Your stamp doesn't exist ,looks like someone was having fun and games . There exist a $2.00 stamp ,blue and black with a inverted center. It is from the Second Republican issue ,the first Beijing printing .

I also need to know how hi I should go on the these stamps before I miss out thanks.

Miss out ,would be the better choice , but then again I would be willing to buy them at $1.00 or $ 2.00 each . The real inverts are a duller/lighter shade .

Thanks for the help guys.

ebay Seller, laimo-fr had this sold listing yesterday (appears to be OPs stamp)

Don

In my opinion, nikokara-52 seller has VERY similar listings.

Many similarities in the way they do listings (identical Item Specifics, same blue font color in item description, etc.)
https://www.ebay.com/itm/374609163999
I am dubious.
Don

If you look down below in in each listings boilerplate you will see:




Nothing he sells is genuine.

£57 for a piece of junk paper....nice day's work!

I don't understand the relevance to the thread title (apart from the "junk stamp"
which is appropriate)

Is Reproduction the same as Reprint or Replica?

Rob Roy - I would say 'no' to your question in the sense that it is not likely an OFFICIAL reprint or replica. A better word would be 'fake'. The seller would likely say that it was done to allow people that could not otherwise afford such a stamp to get something to fill a space. The rest of us would likely say he is doing it to make a butt-load of money. Bury the truth deep in a description, and it will be missed by enough people to get the bidding up.

Thank you mootermutt987. I understand that sellers can misuse terms.
My main reason to ask was for philatelic education: Of the 3 terms that I've mentioned, Reproduction is not included in our site's glossary, so I wondered what the differences are between the 3 terms.

Opinion
"Reproduction" can be the descriptor, for any of the three mentioned
It is a "use all" adjective.

Reproductions: stamps made from a new plate to imitate the original issues as the U.S. Special printing of 1875

Bib : Askphil

US Stamp reproduction
Uncancelled US stamps reproduced in authentic colours must be shown either less than 75% or more than 150% of actual size.

Facsimile: A reproduction of a genuine postage stamp, intended for souvenir value, and not meant to defruad

Ergo: If the original posters stamp had "facsimile" printed on back, then a "reproduction", as it did not, then a "fake" (intended to defaud)

Thank you, Rod, for the detailed explanation.


Can it be used for postal use too, like if the old plate was too warn?


Does that mean that the new plates need to be less than 75% or more than 150%?
In this thread the size is 100% - does it mean that it's not a reproduction?
Where do "reprints" and "replicas" fit in? Are they not for postal usage?

Getting a bit beyond my knowledge
I'll answer best of my ability.



No, then it will be a new plate number (as genuine) or if part of plate renewed then a "cliche" depending on how the plate was engineered.




A: This means that plates used to "reproduce" genuine postage stamps
(eg: stamp albums, catalogues, private souvenir sheets, promotional material)
Without the angled cross bar cancelling the stamps (and in original colours)
Then they must follow that % rating.

Reprints, these can fit in in various guises, original plates, but they may have "secret markings" identifying reprints (China) or use differing colours,
differing papers etc.

Replica is a Facsimile.