|
|
Post by jamesw on Dec 6, 2014 16:40:56 GMT
Well perhaps missing is overstating. This 1982 Christmas stamp was surcharged in 1983 (SC#797) But the country name which appeared in the lower left corner in white, seems to be masked. When I tilt the stamp to the light I can see the 'ghost image' of the text, matt against the gloss of the ink. The white text would mean there is no ink there, like the type at the top of the stamp, just the white of the paper.
 So what gives? Has something just stained the text so it appears to disappear or has it been deliberately altered? I defer to the experts. |
|
rod222
Member 
Posts: 9,878 
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps, Ephemera and Catalogues
|
Post by rod222 on Dec 6, 2014 22:15:16 GMT
Well perhaps missing is overstating. This 1982 Christmas stamp was surcharged in 1983 (SC#797) But the country name which appeared in the lower left corner in white, seems to be masked. When I tilt the stamp to the light I can see the 'ghost image' of the text, matt against the gloss of the ink. The white text would mean there is no ink there, like the type at the top of the stamp, just the white of the paper. So what gives? Has something just stained the text so it appears to disappear or has it been deliberately altered? I defer to the experts. Opinion. I think this is a wonderful example of explaining that once a stamp is used, it no longer can be used as an example of shade, colour, or appearance. Who knows what experience the stamp / article has passed through. I recently saw someone I regarded as a reliable collector, advocating soaking stamps in boiling water ! (Eek) Your stamp has been abused, it has bled near the bottom left, and goodness knows what else. In auctions, you often see a term "fresh" when describing a 100 year old stamp, this refers to it's genuine state. I put your image against mine, which is reasonably more "fresh"   |
|
stainlessb
Member
qaStaHvIS yIn 'ej chep
Posts: 4,642
What I collect: currently focused on most of western Europe, much of which is spent on France, Belgium, Germany and Great Britain Queen Victoria
|
Post by stainlessb on Feb 12, 2019 2:46:45 GMT
I have Scotts 2017 and I've scanned the pages multiple times and I'm just not seeing this the flaw at the lowerright red printed border, as well as the gross pixilation of the printing (and this is what it looks like) makes me wonder if this is a forgery? although uncanceled, it was amoung the glued stamp blocks I've been dealing with... have a look! and thanks for looking!  |
|
Jerry B
Departed
Rest in Peace
Marietta, Georgia USA
Posts: 1,485
|
Post by Jerry B on Feb 12, 2019 11:24:52 GMT
Hi
I cannot tell from the scan, but my first impression was a scuff mark or a piece of paper stuck on the stamp. It could also be some ink got scraped off.
Jerry B
|
|
|
|
Post by feebletodix on Feb 12, 2019 12:30:25 GMT
Hi, my SG shows this as a 1965 Christmas stamp but has the notation 'The above stamps were valid for postal use only on November 2nd, They were subsequently used as postal employees charity labels'. The coarse printing is the same on my copy so I would assume it is valid and that Jerry is correct in describing the mark as a result of being stuck together.
Regards
Gavin
|
|
stainlessb
Member
qaStaHvIS yIn 'ej chep
Posts: 4,642
What I collect: currently focused on most of western Europe, much of which is spent on France, Belgium, Germany and Great Britain Queen Victoria
|
Post by stainlessb on Feb 12, 2019 15:06:28 GMT
@feebltodix thanks! SC # 494 I don't know how many times I scanned through the pages and didn't see it-, but with the year, went right to it!
and Jerry is probably correct- I have so many blocks of stamps that were stored somewhere once damp (or maybe humid...but it doesn't get that humid out my way)
|
|
