|
Post by littleriverphil on Nov 3, 2014 17:47:35 GMT
This O10s is difficult to explain. From the the bottom of the bottom of the vignette oval the scrolls and the value ribbons, words and numeral have very little carmine ink. First, since the ink was applied to the plate with a roller by hand, how did the printer not notice that a 5mm-wide design section was barely inked, with the 2mm gutter between stamps that was a fairly wide strip of polished steel across the plate. More of the design is under-inked. Still seems that the under-inked plate would have been noticeable. Even if it is the bottom row, it and 9 others should have been discarded. After the ink had dried enough, the paper was again dampened and the overprint was applied, and it appears that the sheet of stamps contacted the typeset plate before being fully pressed onto the stamp paper, giving the stamp a kiss overprint. I welcome any other explanations or theories.
|
|
Ryan
Member
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 2,720
What I collect: If I have a catalogue for it, I collect it. And I have many catalogues ....
|
Post by Ryan on Nov 4, 2014 19:06:58 GMT
I have my own albino that has baffled me as well. This US stamp has a Bureau precancel on it, so all stages of production would have been handled officially. I can imagine that somewhere there's a chemical that could strip the ink from the paper, but how would this leave the precancel ink completely untouched? If it was in fact underinked right from the start, it's a rather large error to overlook during production, as there must have been others on the sheet that were also missing ink. Still, much bigger errors than this have managed to sneak through. Ryan
|
|
|
Post by littleriverphil on Nov 5, 2014 16:48:20 GMT
Your Albino is much more noticable than the 5mm strip across mine is. I can understand how both sheets might have slipped by the first time, but how did they pass the overprinting process and remain undetected ? I also wonder how much of the sheet was affected?
|
|
Ryan
Member
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 2,720
What I collect: If I have a catalogue for it, I collect it. And I have many catalogues ....
|
Post by Ryan on Nov 5, 2014 19:28:36 GMT
I've read before that the US Bureau precancels often used lower-quality stamps for overprinting. I guess the idea was that precancels weren't as important as "real" stamps, so if some sheets came out of the perforator poorly centred or the gum was ugly or whatever, then the sheet was more likely to be put in the pile of stamps that needed to be overprinted. But still, missing 98% of the ink on some stamps would make it a candidate for the shredder, I would think.
Ryan
|
|
|
Post by littleriverphil on Nov 6, 2014 16:18:13 GMT
I agree that both should been tossed, but it would be difficult to trash a sheet that has just part of the last row affected or a corner un inked, isn't stamp paper accountable? If it was accountable, wouldn't someone have to explain what happened to the paper?
|
|
Beryllium Guy
Moderator
Posts: 5,654
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps 1840-1930
|
Post by Beryllium Guy on Nov 21, 2020 15:02:40 GMT
I have my own albino that has baffled me as well. This US stamp has a Bureau precancel on it, so all stages of production would have been handled officially. I can imagine that somewhere there's a chemical that could strip the ink from the paper, but how would this leave the precancel ink completely untouched? Thanks for providing the link to this old post, Ryan. Strange as it may seem, I think I have a possible explanation for your stamp after all this time. For me, the clue is that the portion of the printed stamp that remains is brown in color. The 6-cent Garfield issue is supposed to be orange, not brown. But we also know that orange-colored stamps are highly susceptible to sulphuretting, and when that happens, the orange color turns brown, sometimes just in selected areas, but sometimes over the whole stamp. The "cure" for sulphuretting is to re-oxidize the stamp by soaking it in hydrogen peroxide (H 2O 2), which is of course, the same chemical that can be used to bleach one's hair. So, it can be very powerful stuff under the right conditions. I also read in a publication about chemical treatment of stamps that if peroxide is used to remove the effects of sulphuretting, that it is important to remove the stamp from the peroxide solution as soon as the color looks recovered, because leaving it in too long can result in the ink being dissolved altogether. My theory, and it is only a theory, is that your stamp was soaked in peroxide to cure sulphuretting but the peroxide did its job too well and removed much of the ink. In that case, I don't find it surprising that the black ink of the precancel would be unaffected by the treatment, as peroxide is not known to do anything to black ink. Just my two cents on the subject. Thanks for reminding us about this post. I had fun thinking about it!
|
|
Ryan
Member
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 2,720
What I collect: If I have a catalogue for it, I collect it. And I have many catalogues ....
|
Post by Ryan on Nov 23, 2020 18:46:20 GMT
I've seen some stamps in my collection which have a characteristic look of being soaked too long in peroxide, most commonly 3 cent Canada Small Queens, but I've never seen anything that suggests all the ink could be stripped off. But I'm no chemist and I certainly can't claim to know what's possible!
Ryan
|
|