|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 26, 2022 3:52:13 GMT
If someone can confirm my doubts are correct pls help with the below stamp it looks weird  |
|
|
|
Post by PostmasterGS on Nov 26, 2022 4:28:39 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 26, 2022 5:01:32 GMT
Thanks for that buddy!! nice link .... yeah, mine is definitely 100% fake ... Maybe that stamp is one of those many times when Mum got ripped off (robbed) and when I had gone over there to visit her, she was pouring her eyes out after realizing she had been scammed ... I used to start telling her jokes to try make her laugh but that didnt work every time... then I start telling her Dooooont woooorrry about ittt Muma its only money who cares ... that used to make her feel bit better  |
|
khj
Member 
Posts: 1,524 
|
Post by khj on Nov 26, 2022 5:24:05 GMT
but more likely it’s a fake. Visnjic reproduction? decentguy, can you show the back of the stamp, and also the full sheetlet including ID number? PostmasterGS, your sheetlet... drool drool drool |
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 26, 2022 5:42:14 GMT
Hi Kim, I can't not yet anyways once I find it if I do hopefully then I will ... I am only here going fairly quickly through Mum's stamps ... About that particular one I had the feeling it was fake and oldmate (postmasterGS) also confirmed it ... he easily convinced me and left me with NO CHOICE but to Zip it |
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 26, 2022 5:46:21 GMT
but more likely it’s a fake. Visnjic reproduction? decentguy , can you show the back of the stamp, and also the full sheetlet including ID number? PostmasterGS , your sheetlet... drool drool drool Ahhh Hang on Kim what is Visnjic reprodction mean ?! .... I think you got a lot information stored in your smart brain... you put any computer to shame |
|
khj
Member
Posts: 1,524
|
Post by khj on Nov 26, 2022 5:50:03 GMT
One of the reproductions that I am aware of was made by Visnjic. The reason I asked for image of backside is he made a mark on the later ones. But I'm not sure the backside was marked on his initial reproductions, which is why I asked for a front-side image showing the ID number.
|
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 26, 2022 5:52:57 GMT
One of the reproductions that I am aware of was made by Visnjic. The reason I asked for image of backside is he made a mark on the later ones. But I'm not sure the backside was marked on his initial reproductions, which is why I asked for a front-side image showing the ID number. I can't recall seeing any marks.... but pls give me few minutes I will scan the back and post it |
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 26, 2022 5:54:30 GMT
|
|
khj
Member
Posts: 1,524
|
Post by khj on Nov 26, 2022 6:15:00 GMT
OK, thanks for so quickly supplying the backside pic. It's not one of his later reproductions, which have REPLICA in red on the back. Too bad your copy is trimmed, so we can't see the ID number.
|
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 26, 2022 6:19:06 GMT
OK, thanks for so quickly supplying the backside pic. It's not one of his later reproductions, which have REPLICA in red on the back. Too bad your copy is trimmed, so we can't see the ID number. I agree not having much luck here ... Can you please check the new Thread I just created Like I said once before YOUR opinion counts ... Cheers |
|
|
|
Post by gstamps on Nov 26, 2022 12:35:10 GMT
Hi decentguy and khj I don't have this stamp and I want to learn about identifying the fake. Apart from "white paper and poor printing" I did not find enough data to recognize the forged stamp. I think the perforation corresponds to the one in the Michel catalog. "Poor printing" could be due to the use of a different printing method than the one mentioned in Michel –Rastertiedfruck = photogravure. I don't have a scanner, but with the mobile phone camera I can make images on which the printing methods can be recognized:   decentguy or khj can you tell me what printing method the forged stamp has? |
|
|
|
Post by PostmasterGS on Nov 26, 2022 13:18:44 GMT
Now that I'm back on my computer instead of mobile, here are some detailed shots of my sheet.   Note the shade of the paper, which should be a light yellow, and the details of the finer printing, particularly in the dates, border lines, and the thinner parts of the larger letters ("E" & "T" in "DEUTSCHES REICH"). khj , Unfortunately it's without gum, but at the time that was the only way I could afford one, and it's hard to justify investing in another one considering all the other juicy items out there begging for me to blow thousands on them. |
|
|
|
Post by daniel on Nov 26, 2022 13:38:20 GMT
I think, at times, one can over-analyse a fake stamp. I believe that khj is spot on with his suggestion that decentguy's stamp was produced by 'Scott Visnijc', I have one and I'll scan it if I can find it. It is also a 'cut down' version and would have been produced as such by him. gstamps, the stamps you show both look perfectly fine until you look at them under high magnification. decentguy's stamp looks terrible without much magnification. As to the printing method, photocopy of a copy! 😁 Daniel |
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 26, 2022 14:09:30 GMT
I think, at times, one can over-analyse a fake stamp. I believe that khj is spot on with his suggestion that decentguy 's stamp was produced by 'Scott Visnijc', I have one and I'll scan it if I can find it. It is also a 'cut down' version and would have been produced as such by him. gstamps , the stamps you show both look perfectly fine until you look at them under high magnification. decentguy 's stamp looks terrible without much magnification. As to the printing method, photocopy of a copy! 😁 Daniel I agree with you Daniel ! .... but what I agree with you most is Khj is spot on .... |
|
|
|
Post by gstamps on Nov 26, 2022 16:40:34 GMT
I translated from Michel the characteristic elements of the 2 printing methods: PHOTOGRAVURE: Jagged effect on lines, fonts and image borders. Screen dots roughly the same size with frequent color shadows towards the middle of the screen dot. Branding appears blurry in magnification, high color intensity pearlescent print possible, wide range of tones in many places (color flow structure) OFFSET: Uniformly colored colored areas clean edges, not frayed, not pinched no stamping visible on the back Tonal gradation by rasterization Draw dots of different sizes but with the same intensity of color. Many stamps and blocks from Germany (1947 -1950) were forged using the OFFSET printing method. decentguy stamp (as far as I can see) shows the characteristics of the PHOTOGRAVURE printing corresponding to the genuine stamp. Unfortunately, I can't see enough characteristics (of the ones described above) in PostmasterGS stamp to be able to decide if it is offset or photogravure print. daniel - I understand that the fake stamp is printed with photogravure, but the plate is made very poorly (photocopy of copy)? |
|
khj
Member
Posts: 1,524
|
Post by khj on Nov 26, 2022 18:43:49 GMT
Unfortunately it's without gum, but at the time that was the only way I could afford one, and it's hard to justify investing in another one considering all the other juicy items out there begging for me to blow thousands on them. Feel free to send it my way if it keeps resulting in sleepless nights for you! We need you healthy and contributing to the forum!  For something you can barely see and often results in problems/damage, sometimes I think gum is more valuable per ounce than gold or branded inkjet cartridge ink! daniel, thanks for letting us know about the cut-down versions. As I don't collect cinderellas, I don't often get to see as many variations as I would like. If you do find it, please post a pic for comparison (and for me to pilfer  ). Thank you! I do know his later offerings have REPLICA in red on the back, and are full sheetlets. The former, was likely due to online marketplace rules imposed on vendors. gstamps, good info/points. I'm not sure what printer he uses -- possibly a commercial grade printer based on what I have seen of his original-design cinderellas. Definitely not printed from plates. Beyond that, I'd rather not discuss methods of making reproductions in public. |
|
renden
Member
Posts: 9,162
What I collect: Canada-USA-France-Lithuania-Austria--Germany-Mauritius-French Colonies in Africa
|
Post by renden on Nov 26, 2022 20:13:29 GMT
khj So, we are discussing a Cinderella here  Cannot find the S/S in the German Reich Semi-Postals LOL !! So no Scott/Michel etc number A long thread for the aficionados........ which I am not Thanks René
|
|
khj
Member
Posts: 1,524
|
Post by khj on Nov 26, 2022 21:02:46 GMT
renden, Sorry, I started talking about the reproduction. I consider all private reproductions cinderellas. I realize that others may have a difference of opinion on definition of cinderella, and I respect that. The original presentation sheetlet (shown by PostmasterGS), I do not consider a cinderella -- as far as I know, it was actually valid for postage. It is listed in Michel as Block 1. In the Scott catalog, look at the end of the Czechoslovakia listings and you will find it as Bohemia & Moravia #B20(28May1943) with the sheetlet listed in the note immediately beneath the listing. In 2018 Scott, the sheetlet is priced at US$15K. EDIT: I see PostmasterGS was posting at the same time. Please see his post below.
|
|
|
|
Post by PostmasterGS on Nov 26, 2022 21:05:46 GMT
The sheet isn't a cinderella. It's Bohemia & Moravia MiNr. Block I, with the individual stamp being MiNr. 131. Here are the latest English (2016) and German-language (2022) Michel listings.   |
|
renden
Member
Posts: 9,162
What I collect: Canada-USA-France-Lithuania-Austria--Germany-Mauritius-French Colonies in Africa
|
Post by renden on Nov 26, 2022 21:20:48 GMT
You both made my day - My first impression was a Semi-Postal but I di not look at the right place - For non aficionados like me, I believe you guys could give us the basics (for newbies) - like a Scott #/Michel/Yvert&Tellier etc
Got it now !! and I love S/S
Thanks for the responses - I did not include names as I knew you would check LOL !
René
|
|
|
|
Post by gstamps on Nov 27, 2022 12:18:05 GMT
khj Thank you - Finally I found out that the "Visjnjic" forgeries were made on a commercial printer. My question was simple: by what printing method were the "Visnjic" forgeries made? I have come across this type of forgery used for overprints or postal cancellations. I think that this "Kamerun" overprint made on a printer, I posted it before.  You can see the dots on the outside of the letters (printing pixel by pixel characteristic of a printer) I think these forgeries are harder to detect on stamps printed by photogravure, where "jagged effect on lines, fonts and image borders" normally appears. I hope that more "aficionados" will read this thread and learn what I have learned.
|
|
). Thank you!
