Second Graduation Test, Sc#209

Second graduation test, a SC#209, which has several interesting details on which I would like to obtain your opinion...
-Soundness: Fault. Reason, the stamp has no breaks, folds or damage, it does not have a hinge... but it does have some small brown spots on the back that do not affect the front. Furthermore, the teeth and perforations are not broken but have some irregularities of barely noticeable size. It is only perforated on 3 sides, possibly because its position on the plate was the left column. Although this detail seriously affects the standards of beauty of a stamp, it offers interesting information about it that seems to me to be taken into account, evidently as a serious defect of beauty but also as a source of valuable information about the stamp that corresponds to its original manufacture. Another detail is that between the teeth it still has the small perforation cutout, this is a detail that seems incredible to me and that I see in many stamps, how can those small pieces still remain there after the trajectory of a used stamp of more than 100 years old? I guess that's a beauty defect too.
-Centered: it is not totally perfect since the lower margin is slightly narrower, but it is very good, in this field I would give it an 80/85.
-Cancellation: slight, very weak, most likely VL-8 New York. Neither addition nor subtraction.
All of this would give it, always from my point of view, a graduation of 50. Almost a gap filler hahaha. I know that for many it will not be like that, but its non-perforated side makes it an interesting stamp in my opinion.

a close exam of the left side may reveal the perfs have been trimmed off for some reason. the edge is irregular, sloping from top to bottom,
might I suggest that you review the introductory pages of the Scott specialized catalog or review your questions using the stampsmarter feature of this forum?

Honestly, I don't think they are cut...one because of the size of the margin and two because of the last perforation in the lower left corner...but it respect your theory.
I could do it and I do, but I also like to talk...and learn of others

Definitely seem to be residual signs of perforations on the left side.

mmmm... maybe you're right, someone could have cut them to make it look centered...

Murasama, look up the word "Graduate". Maybe you mean to say "Grade "?


Peter

Sorry, I do need to graduate...

It was cut but not to make it look centered. That makes no sense. Are you gloing to call it well centered damaged stamp?

There is no point in cutting it, whatever the reason...but if there was any, I imagine it would be for that.

It could easily have been cut by the original user in separating it from a multiple. People did that all the time back in the day. Or it could have gotten cut when it was removed from the cover it was on. It's 140 years old, and there is no way to know exactly how it wound up this way and saying "there was no point" in cutting it is frankly meaningless. It is what it is, regardless of how it got this way.

I would suggest not being too worried about coming up with a "score" rating for any stamp, but rather a general overall appreciation that centering quality is one of the most important aspects sought. You will soon "get an eye for it" without even thinking about it.

As the for left side. There are two main scenarios:
1. a natural straight edge caused as part of the normal manufacturing process, typically perfectly straight. Minor downside to value.
2. a straight edge caused by trimming, typically a wavy or slanted cut and viewed as serious damage to the stamp and major downside to value. (Your example here.)

As for "VL-8 NY", I have no idea what you mean.

It is trimmed. How it happened is anyone's guess and not important. Could have been trimmed by a non-collector cutting it off a cover saving it for a collector.

The first odd thing in that picture is the stamp itself. It looks like a photograph taken with a cheap cell phone. The left frame line is vertical, the right one bends inward. The top frame bends outwards toward the the top which is a sign of bad lense distortion.
The left edge looks like a left side margin copy (the knife that cut the sheet was worn so it shows a "fuzzy" line structure. I do not see perf residuals). However, the top bends inwards with a sharp edge structure so this is a sign someone used scissors (maybe to cut the stamp from an envelope and was too close to the stamp, or careless).
The stamp cancel is weak maybe due to someone trying to remove the stains, but did not succeed completely.

My first thought was the same as drkohler. Looks simply like a natural straight edge with the top section cut off. Probably when clipping it from an envelope. Back then, carefully clipping stamps wasn't much of a thing so often times they got cut too close. Many times they'd clip envelopes in stacks to save time. Not saying this is the case here, but I can see how it could have been cut off when clipping an envelope.

It is gratifying to read these "old" posts, how many things have changed in my way of seeing things since then, and how much this forum has taught me…I am giving you some new photos making a size comparison with stamps from the same issue…although It is true that it is a bad cut seen in detail (not so much in the global vision)... the size of the stamp tells me that the cut should not have taken much of the original in front, that is, it was cutting perfectly at least to the limit of the perforations. That is why I am inclined to think, since I have seen (and have copies) of this issue that have a width of up to 25mm, being perfectly perforated on both sides, it could well have been costed to give it a "standard" and more visually pleasing size.. although the success was relative..