Neat printing error. I have a 2014 U.S. .70 non-machinable surcharge stamp in which the butterfly is missing the top coat of brown ink. I suppose that the printer ran out of that color. The error isn’t noted anywhere that I know of but it is cool to find something like that. Sounds as if you have multiples of this error or variant.
Neat printing error. I have a 2014 U.S. .70 non-machinable surcharge stamp in which the butterfly is missing the top coat of brown ink. I suppose that the printer ran out of that color. The error isn’t noted anywhere that I know of but it is cool to find something like that. Sounds as if you have multiples of this error or variant.
Do you mean the strange "track" or "smear" at top left? Might be sort of a friction burn from postal machinery, probably from a blocked roller. Many modern stamps are printed on paper coated with some sort of polymer, and friction heat can melt this, leading to smeared print.
re: France Scott # 4260
Neat printing error. I have a 2014 U.S. .70 non-machinable surcharge stamp in which the butterfly is missing the top coat of brown ink. I suppose that the printer ran out of that color. The error isn’t noted anywhere that I know of but it is cool to find something like that. Sounds as if you have multiples of this error or variant.
re: France Scott # 4260
Neat printing error. I have a 2014 U.S. .70 non-machinable surcharge stamp in which the butterfly is missing the top coat of brown ink. I suppose that the printer ran out of that color. The error isn’t noted anywhere that I know of but it is cool to find something like that. Sounds as if you have multiples of this error or variant.
re: France Scott # 4260
Do you mean the strange "track" or "smear" at top left? Might be sort of a friction burn from postal machinery, probably from a blocked roller. Many modern stamps are printed on paper coated with some sort of polymer, and friction heat can melt this, leading to smeared print.