Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
The following 2 photos are zooms of the plate numbers.
But perhaps my old eyes are deceiving me. The 12 sure looks like a 12 and the 13 looks like it has a 3 in it.
I did not see any mention of this type of error in an SG concise or Scotts and a limited internet search didn't come up with anything. Any thoughts or information on this one would be appreciated. Thanks,
David
Login to Like
this post
Hi David,
This is quite striking on first sight; however, looking at it more carefully, I believe the lower image with an apparent "13" has a "12" with part of the "2" obscured by dirt so that the eye sees a "13" instead, subconsciously including part of the background as the cross stroke of a three.
Login to Like
this post
07:47:57pm
They're definitely both 12's.
Login to Like
this post
Login to Like
this post
i see nothing but 12s
Login to Like
this post
Thank you for all your input. I can sort of see a 2 with a little imagination, but that cross stroke really is deceiving. Ningpo, what is the green scan you provided? Is it from reveal.org?
David
Login to Like
this post
The 'green scan' is an over-layed, cut and paste section, with negative colours just for comparison. I used PhotoFiltre 7.
I tried numerous tweaks, such as changing colour channels, hue, saturation etc. This was to no effect. I also put this through Retroreveal; again nothing was 'revealed'.
However, using the negative image, I used those parts that show as whitish, to plot a possible line. This is what I came up with:
But this is not at all conclusive, as it is too easy to manipulate what is little more than guesswork. And remember, these whitish parts are non-white on the positive image.
I think there are three factors that may have influenced the numeral looking like a 3:
Firstly; smudging of the ink used to cancel the stamp at the base of the numeral. Secondly; over-inking (spreading) of the red during printing and thirdly, imprecise engraving of the numeral, with the possibility that the engraver made a slight slip giving the impression of a middle bar of a '3'.
There is also the possibility that the apparent middle bar was actually present (as part of the design) before the plate number was engraved; notice the middle bar extends to the right of the numeral.
I hope you can make sense of this!
Login to Like
this post
In looking at the stamp below it appears that the RH side plate number is 12, while the left hand side number is 13.
The following 2 photos are zooms of the plate numbers.
But perhaps my old eyes are deceiving me. The 12 sure looks like a 12 and the 13 looks like it has a 3 in it.
I did not see any mention of this type of error in an SG concise or Scotts and a limited internet search didn't come up with anything. Any thoughts or information on this one would be appreciated. Thanks,
David
Login to Like
this post
re: GB SG48/49;S58, Plate #'s different on same stamp?
Hi David,
This is quite striking on first sight; however, looking at it more carefully, I believe the lower image with an apparent "13" has a "12" with part of the "2" obscured by dirt so that the eye sees a "13" instead, subconsciously including part of the background as the cross stroke of a three.
Login to Like
this post
It is during our darkest moments that we must focus to see the light. - Aristotle Onassis
07 Jan 2016
07:47:57pm
re: GB SG48/49;S58, Plate #'s different on same stamp?
They're definitely both 12's.
Login to Like
this post
re: GB SG48/49;S58, Plate #'s different on same stamp?
Login to Like
this post
re: GB SG48/49;S58, Plate #'s different on same stamp?
i see nothing but 12s
Login to Like
this post
re: GB SG48/49;S58, Plate #'s different on same stamp?
Thank you for all your input. I can sort of see a 2 with a little imagination, but that cross stroke really is deceiving. Ningpo, what is the green scan you provided? Is it from reveal.org?
David
Login to Like
this post
re: GB SG48/49;S58, Plate #'s different on same stamp?
The 'green scan' is an over-layed, cut and paste section, with negative colours just for comparison. I used PhotoFiltre 7.
I tried numerous tweaks, such as changing colour channels, hue, saturation etc. This was to no effect. I also put this through Retroreveal; again nothing was 'revealed'.
However, using the negative image, I used those parts that show as whitish, to plot a possible line. This is what I came up with:
But this is not at all conclusive, as it is too easy to manipulate what is little more than guesswork. And remember, these whitish parts are non-white on the positive image.
I think there are three factors that may have influenced the numeral looking like a 3:
Firstly; smudging of the ink used to cancel the stamp at the base of the numeral. Secondly; over-inking (spreading) of the red during printing and thirdly, imprecise engraving of the numeral, with the possibility that the engraver made a slight slip giving the impression of a middle bar of a '3'.
There is also the possibility that the apparent middle bar was actually present (as part of the design) before the plate number was engraved; notice the middle bar extends to the right of the numeral.
I hope you can make sense of this!
Login to Like
this post