Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Errors Freaks and oddities ladies and gentlemen if you have some show them. Here are some of mine.
Jeremy
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Sarge
Here is an RD23 SIN 18 with a triple transfer.
Double transfers are difficult to find, triple transfers are extremely rare.
See the arrows, top arrow points out location where double transfers show up, the bottom arrow points to the triple transfer.
Final scan is the reverse!
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
1899,
That is great example of a triple transfer. Thank you for sharing. Keep the EFO's coming people.
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
You asked for more!
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
The low train and slow ship are fairly obvious to someone with experience with postage stamp varieties, but can you please explain the EFO features for the two revenue stamps for those of us that do not collect revenues.
They look normal to a casual eye.
Thanks
Login to Like
this post
Not really, just looks odd to me.
Login to Like
this post
01:28:35pm
I'm only guessing here but the stamp on the bottom left is both an arrow single and a line single. I have never seen that combination before!!
The bottom right has a perfined selvage which would be uncommon. I don't see any oddities in the stamps themselves but maybe I am missing something!!
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
I think the EFO's are really what the owner decides?
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
"I think the EFO's are really what the owner decides?"
Yes, that's correct. But this is not your thread. The OP asked for other people to show their EFOs.
If you don't follow the generally expected definitions, then you should explain why you posted your items and why you believe they are EFOs.
Login to Like
this post
What are the "If you don't follow the generally expected definition" so I know in future?
Login to Like
this post
"What are the "If you don't follow the generally expected definition" so I know in future?"
Most of your posts are so obscure that I (and perhaps others) have no idea what you think an "EFO" might be. (and I was asleep during the class in high school that taught "mind reading").
I am simply asking you to explain why YOU thought the items you posted were "EFOs".
If you can't do that, then you have no business posting in the thread. You are just "trolling".
In another thread, Roy suggested you "dial it back a bit"...
"You are always chiming in with obtuse or contentious comments.
A personal request, please dial it back a bit.
"
Your response was a smart aleck retort:
"I want to know what a bit is, so I know?"
Very little of your dialog adds to the philatelic knowledge on this Board. Please demonstrate your philatelic knowledge, not your poor social skills.
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
1899
I did ask for more and you have contributed some beautiful examples thank you.
Mike L,
The revenue stamps that are in question now for the purpose of this discussion have very subtle double transfers that are almost unrecognizable to the average collector. The one cent on the bottom of the photo has a line arrow and a plate #54 in the selvedge which isn't a considered an error. But makes it very desirable by some collectors and is very relevant to this discussion.
Maybe if one asked this question. How are double transfers ID'd and what do I look for? One might get a better response.
Now I have a rhetorical question for all watching the !@#$ show unfold. Why is this thread turning down this path of !@ and insults? Here is another question. Does anyone have any idea how many potential members are put off and don't become members of this forum by threads that turn south?
I have to go for now.
Jeremy
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Thanks Jeremy, for your clear head (per usual!) and for summing it up.
Please, I find that a STAMP is not reall worthy of a whos wrong argument.
Okay?!
I should note I am NOT the only teenager on this forum.
Posts like these do not affect me, but I cannot say for the others opinions.
All I asking is that we act like the gentlemen & women that WE ARE.
Thank You!
Oh, and I've reposted, but here is an EFO!
P.S. I've gotta club acution to go to...
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Sarge, you wrote:
"The revenue stamps that are in question now for the purpose of this discussion have very subtle double transfers that are almost unrecognizable to the average collector. The one cent on the bottom of the photo has a line arrow and a plate #54 in the selvedge which isn't a considered an error. But makes it very desirable by some collectors and is very relevant to this discussion."
The magic words in your reply are "almost unrecognizable to the average collector".
If this explanation had been provided by the person who posted the scans of his stamps (@1899), then I would have understood his point.
I'm here to learn. But posting the image of a stamp (or a cover), without any explanation as to why it is interesting, or significant, has a flaw that is not visibly obvious, or that it was not properly described on eBay, without telling the audience why, is not productive. All that @1899 had to write was something like the stamp is an EFO because it has a "double transfer" or because the perforated initials were never intentionally punched in the margins, and I would have understood his point, and so would everyone else.
Back to the start of this thread:
Your original post had a clear explanation.
1899's first post identified his stamp as a triple transfer.
His second post offered no explanation, just the four stamps.
I asked for an explanation for the two items I didn't understand. My apologies for being not being all-knowing and actually understanding what was wrong or unusual with the two revenue stamps. We still have not heard from @1899 as to why he included them, other than he can identify any stamp he wants as an EFO without any need to explain.
I'm sorry that you think my remarks were insulting. They were not intended to be, and were not, until my initial request for clarification were met with a snarking reply instead of a respectful explanation. I gave snarky back.
If the moderator believes that I am out of line, would he please contact me privately and I will refrain from posting in future dialogs.
MikeL
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
I understand that somehow this gets discussed almost daily. For example the topic of double transfers. Just as often the #1 question follows from someone posting an example of one. How do we ID one? Then here is the follow-on question. What do we look for? Now remember I just used double transfers as an example.
There are many other EFO's that need to be discussed such as: mis-cuts, fold-overs, mis-perforation, printers waste, pre-printing paper folds, cracked plates, color varieties, vignette shifts, reversed centers, colors omitted, incorrect colors, inverts etc.... The list goes on for a long time. But I think we all get the picture. How does the beginning, novice or even the advanced/expert collector Philatelist in our case recognize/identify these varieties of stamps? Aside from the painfully obvious such as an invert how do we ID, Recognize, Know What to Look For? When it can mean the difference between a stamp worth $8.50 as a normal issue but as an error is worth $15,000. I'm referring to Scott# 233 and Scott 233a in used condition for example . This is a huge difference and one of many examples listed as varieties in the catalog.
As is so often the case Philatelists/Us/We are analytical and skeptical by nature. Of course we have to be otherwise we wouldn't find any enjoyment in the thrill of the chase to find those rare/scarce varieties as Errors, Freaks and Oddities EFO's. Even more often the EFO's are pursued by the group of Philatelist's/Stamp Collectors/Specialists known as Fly Speckers who will spend hours looking for EFO's. I happen to be a proud Fly Specker. If not for this elite group of Specialist/Philatelist's we wouldn't have the variety's of stamps to talk about and collect.
More books, articles and threads written about the subject than I care to count. Some are very good, some are well just awful and not worth the price of a roll of toilet paper. I have some books that were written more than 80 years ago and is written very well but would put an insomniac to sleep. The text in many of the books and articles read like home stereo assembly instructions that only an engineer can understand without pictures. Then there are some that have pictures that are useless as well.
That is nothing to say about some of the videos in circulation too. Who here can stand listening to anybody speak in a monotone voice while using a powerpoint slide presentation? Death by powerpoint is also an insomniacs kryptonite.
That is enough of the introduction and rant. I like everyone else here is interested in learning how its done otherwise you wouldn't be reading this thread. So lets hear how it is done. So keyboard commandos get to work and share this knowledge and your methods. Pick a subject that you are familiar with and teach us.
Jeremy
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
05:20:55pm
"When it can mean the difference between a stamp worth $8.50 as a normal issue but as an error is worth $15,000. I'm referring to Scott# 233 and Scott 233a in used condition for example"
I know this is a bit off topic, but how about a more extreme example? Canada #24 ($20 - $50) wove paper and Canada #32 ($150 000 - $350 000) laid paper, only 3 identified so far. The difference between papers is not easy to tell and most people don't even look. The third found copy was found in a bunch of miscellaneous 2 cent green large Queens from a dealer. How many are out there unidentified in stamp collection?
If someone shows a stamp here that is supposed to be an error/variety/EFO the least they can do is say why! Otherwise it's like they are are just playing mind games with us. How are we supposed to learn if people don't at least help us along a bit? All IMHO!!
The exception would be if it was part of a contest, of course!
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
That isn't off topic at all because the thread can morph in any direction at anytime. But is in my eyes a very reasonable request.
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
Thank you for posting your stamp Ari it is a greatly appreciated contribution to this thread. Now if you don't mind I will take the liberty to elaborate some about your stamp why it falls into the EFO category.
PhilatelistMag20's/Ari's stamp is a scott #119 with a vignette shift to the right. This is a very common occurrence for 19th and early 20th century U.S. stamps that are multi colored. Some shifts are more dramatic than others and aren't necessarily considered errors but are considered by many to be freaks or oddities. The definition of freak or oddities really depends upon the day of the week and who you talk to. Either way it is not considered a normal stamp. An error is given a variety and specific catalog #.
In the photos from my first post you may notice very good examples if the famous Vignette shifts with a great variety. The cat # is 702.
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
702 Red Cross Issue.
1931 issue.
Also the Nurses who were wounded finally received their Purple Heart Medals, when 702 was issued.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
That is absolutely correct. Thanks for the help with additional facts to support my post 1899.
Lets keep the posts coming people!!!
Jeremy
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
I have a questions for the sor experts.
#1 would the 1940 Red Revenues Scott numbers R288, R289, R290, R300, R302, over printed with sensitive ink in a bluish-purple showing minute flecks of gold, be considered an EFO?
#2 Could some body scan one so we could see it?
#3 Does anybody know how many were printed?
#4 If they are not consider EFO's why?
#5 How were they made?
#6 What was the purose?
I can't show one as I don't have one!
Login to Like
this post
08:32:16pm
@1899 If you click on the following link you should find all you need, I think!
https://www.stampcommunity.org/topic.asp ...
In my opinion since this event was planned it probably would not be considered an EFO. This is only my opinion!
I do collect US revenues but it is not really a priority with me. The only one of the 5 stamps mentioned that I actually own is R300 and it is in the regular ink, sorry!
Login to Like
this post
MikeL
You are not out of line. Not in the slightest.
Login to Like
this post
The Court has gone AWOL !!
Sc#1894 with a difference.
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
@MikeL
Your postinng dated: 06 May 2025 04:42:32pm
I did not say it was a double transfer!
Login to Like
this post
@londonbus1
Your posting dated: 07 May 2025 12:37:58am
Don't just show.
It would be good to tell us how this happened?
Login to Like
this post
09:01:18am
Any comments on this one. Picked it up from a book here about a year ago. One of my very favourite items!!
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Fold over example, very nice
Login to Like
this post
Another EFO, see scan and arrows pointing to the EFO.
This is Scott Cat. 295.
Perhaps an sor expert can explain this one to me?
I do not know this is even possible, but it does.
The arrows point to a positive orienation 2C, trouble is this 2C should be a negative orientation (like the near by 2C red and a black one)!
If I've left out anything let me know?
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
10:21:01am
Thanks @1899, it's the only example like that I have! You can easily see where the folds were, I didn't want to remove it to show the other side since a few of the perfs are starting to separate a bit - so I handle it as little as possible. I got it from Paul Keuhn here for a very fair price, I hope Paul doesn't mind me using his name. I've got some incredible stuff from him since I joined about 6 years ago.
I've got a bunch of Canada and US misperfs that I'll post pictures of in a few days. One of my picture people is suffering from kidney stones at the moment. He's had them a couple times and the pain is real real bad!!! I told him that "this too in time shall pass" and if I had actually been there he probably would have belted me!!
Login to Like
this post
10:32:46am
In the 2 cent red above what do all the letters stand for. That stuff is not my area and I'm just curious! Is it some type of test of the printing or is there more to it than that?
Login to Like
this post
@Harvey
My guess the letters are the plate workers who handled the plates, but this is only a wild guess! (2 plates were required 1 red 1 black)
Login to Like
this post
More EFO's I think?
Engraved numbers, unknown what these numbers mean, there are not plate numbers as such, numbers are 4 and 3, anyone know?
If these are not EFO's let me know?
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
01:09:27pm
A few more from me as well - a few misperfs, missing perfs (no guide lines), a miscut and a privately perfed Newfoundland stamp (should be rouletted). I just noticed that the seal stamp is the incredibly rare total invert!!!
Now I have to put them back where they belong!! I keep stuff like this in the albums next to the actual stamp!
I have a question! I which category, if any, do you put items like line pairs/blocks, arrow pairs/blocks, etc. My guess is that they are not EFO's at all since they just exist depending on how you cut up the sheets. I have huge amounts of this stuff with my Farleys. I'll load one picture out of several below! I have several pages of this stuff - not expensive or rare, just fun!
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Now this is the direction this thread needs to stay in!!! Keep the photos and scans coming.
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
Harvey,
That is a nice lot of miss perforated stamps. I really like the gutters in between varieties.
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
01:28:05pm
You have to be really careful when you buy imperfed gutter blocks or pairs. To actually be worth anything there cannot be lines in the gutters. I have a few more that if you folded on the guide lines the block or pair could be easily separated. In a couple cases I bought them with supposedly no guide lines but with a good loupe they were really there! You have to trust the seller or be ready to return the item!
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Another EFO, but this time it appears to be an invert, but it's not an invert.
The stamp is supposed to be R153, but it's really 279 with a fake over print IAW the Boston book there were no invert errors.
279 were over printed and made to look like "I. R." into R153 and the fake over print was printed inverted on purpose!
This is why it looks inverted but was printed this way on purpose!
Reverse side with something that I cannot ID?
Login to Like
this post
2 more EFO's
My guess is the matrix moved for the I. R. over print.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Yesterday I had a couple of lots of stamps that I purchased on eBay from the same dealer that I got my basket case #226 which is in the first photo of the OP that I started the thread with. Anyway in the one lot I got has 500 unused never hinged stamps that I got especially for my sons collection. You all should know the type of lot. It is what dealers who cherry pick collections discard as duplicates or postage and consider them common book stuff. Common Book Stuff... You just have to love or hate some of the Philatelic slang.
I prey upon these types of dealers and have done so for years. For a couple of reasons. The #1 reason is they are lazy and miss stuff all of the time. The #2 reason is the usually sell what they consider the common book stuff cheap. In this lot for instance I have gone through it to set my boy up for success by placing the stamps into complete year sets or of as complete as possible so it is easy for him to find the correct spot in his album. I do that to keep him interested. Then I find and separate the EFO's that I had already spotted in the listing photo at my time of purchase. Whatever real duplication is left gets used as postage.
Out of this lot of 500+ stamps I have added 3 new to me EFO's to my collection and an unlisted color shade variety for the cat# 1021. The block of 4 is a dull shade of green in unused NH condition and the single is a brighter shade of green. Heck I'll let the pictures say the rest in my next post.
I have to go pick up the little man from school.
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
Here is the color shade variety of 1021. Does anyone else have this variety too?
The stamp on the left is normal. The one on the right has the EFO characteristics. Note the crack from the perforations at the top right that goes all the way to the top of the right eyebrow and there is lines of shading giving the look of a right black eye. 
Jeremy
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Another EFO
The stamp is R191, 1902 series and was supposed to have the over print same as the 1902 series, but instead it has the over print of R185 (1901 series).
In addition it does not have the varnish square like the 1902 series, instead the varnish goes from margin to margin!
My guess this is printers waste! Would printers waste be considered an EFO?
Comments/questions anyone?
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
1899,
Printers waste is considered an EFO. On page 203 in the Catalog of Errors on U.S. Postage Stamps lists printers waste as an error. Not you stamp of course. But printers waste is a category of errors.
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
More EFO's
Two examples of missing over prints.
Two examples with correct over prints.
Reverse sides of missing over print in the corect orientations.
sor members let all see what other members have?
These missing over prints are fun and often the sellers do not realize what they have!
If I missed any thing please let me know!
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Would this be considered an EFO?
See hand scribed "1/2 Documen"
Reverse scan
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
1899,
I'd say an oddity at the very least especially if it came from print that way. At any rate it is still a very nice discussion piece.
Jeremy
Nice avatar flyboy.
Login to Like
this post
Sarge
Thanks.
I have no idea if this , is as it came from the govertment or if someone made it up.
Do you think I should stop posting my EFO's for awhile or continue posting?
Dave
Login to Like
this post
Heck no Dave.
Keep them coming. Others here must be suffering from the effects of a gas leak. I'm just kidding.
Someday they will catch on that you're teaching us all something.
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
Thanks Sarge
I make this strip out to be R208, the EFO is the invert "2"
The 2 is located just to the left of "CENT"
Reverse side
If I made a mistake let me know!
Login to Like
this post
Another what I think is an EFO.
Any question/comments, or if you disagree let me know!
I've added arrows pointing to two numbers and these two numbers is what I'm calling EFO.
I have no idea what these two numbers (see arrows), are meant for or the reason they are even there?
Any body have factual knowledge of this?
Scan of reverse
Login to Like
this post
These markings are a product of the process of creating the plates which printed the stamps.
Most (All?) are the result of employees of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing who add the markings as part of the documentation of their work.
There are a variety of reasons for the initials and numbers. See for example the following page from the Marginal Markings committee of the United States Stamps Society.
https://www.usstamps.org/resources/margi ...
While they are unusual, I would think these are not an oddity, as they were part of the normal production process during a long period of time.
Mike
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Thank you!
Do you think the numbers 1 & 3 would have been created at the same time, or different times?
Login to Like
this post
Same Time.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Mike,
That is a very interesting link you posted. If I am understanding the link correctly then all of the letters and numerals in the selvage/margins are nothing more than proof marks denoting each employee that handled the sheet from the engraver to the one operating the perforation machine. So then my guess would be that no regard was given to the correct orientation the proof marks were applied to the margin or selvage because it wasn't meant to be kept in the first place.
Dave,
It is a very interesting plate block of six and I believe that it is very appropriate for this discussion in this thread. I did magnify the block with my computer's program and it looks like there are some of the stamps in the plate block that exhibit some double transfers. Am I correct in saying that there are some double transfers?
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
Sarge,
I really can't answer your question because this is not a field where I have either knowledge or collecting interest beyond pointing you in this direction. I was aware of this website primarily because I am the Chairman of a related group also sponsored by the United States Stamp Society.
I suspect that the answer is somewhere in the many articles that the Marginal Markings group had published, but unfortunately, the Society has all the issues behind the "membership wall".
Maybe someone in that group is reading this forum, and will jump in with some answers.
It looks like a fascinating topic to explore and collect.
Mike
Login to Like
this post
Sorry this is not a plate block.
I have not checked this block for double transfers yet.
If there is double transfer(s) then I would think the numbers 1 & 3 would have been created at different times, accounting for the reworking of the transfer roll!
The reversed 2C (numbers and letters) are not proof marks.
Think I covered everything here?
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Another EFO, in this case RB48 with double impression, notice the lettering, especially top and bottom label!
If I got anything wrong let me know.
If you see anything I missed, please let me know!
I also ran it thru ImageSeluth, you can see the value of using it!
Reverse
Then using ImageSeluth
Login to Like
this post
U305 with I think is an EFO.
It appears to me a partial positive image was some how appears over the first positive image.
If I missed something please let me know?
If there is any questions/comments let me know.
Do any soR member have another one, let's all see it?
A close up scan
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
It isn't an EFO. But the image should be an excellent comparison to the one Dave has.
Jeremy
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
RC4a double overprint!
3 scans, one scan is enhanced!
The parent stamp is an offset printed, now then the overprint and why is it doubled I do not know.
Any sOr member know how the over print was producted and why it is doubled, please inform us?
The over print might (I do not know) may have been by the offset method?
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
It looks like it was sent through a typewriter twice. That is my best guess. But that can't be right because if it was sent through a type writer the paper would show evidence of that theory on the back as if it would be embossed from a hammer strike of sorts. It is definitely intriguing.
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
Thank you!
I did not think of a typewriter, but I see your point.
Just thinking out loud, I wonder if a typewriter was ever used to cancel stamps.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Dave,
After I took a second look at your stamp in your post. It has just dawned on me you have a type set double impression error. Why it was run through twice is the 10 million dollar question.
Here are some images of some of my revenue stamps that are in post from another thread and merit attention to this thread also. In particular if you all will take notice of the series date on the 5 dollar documentary stamp Scott catalog # R502 it shows a clear type set error of the word series it is misspelled. It is spelled ( Sarles ) not ( Series ) like it should be. There isn't any evidence of being run through a type writer on the back of the stamp. I can't help wondering how many others are in existence.
The reason for the picture of the 3 stamps together is proof that they were used on the same document on the same date of December 21, 1949 and all display the same series date.
Jeremy
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Wow, that is outstanding discovery!
Maybe some type of research could be conducted.
Thank you for posting this outstanding stamp!
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Thank you for the kind words Dave.
I have been trying to do some research and have been coming up short. The one question I have and maybe someone else can answer it. How where the overprints added after the printing process was completed?
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
I found the answer to my own question while waiting for my minion to get out of school. Overprints are applied with a separate die after the initial printing process and naturally errors of all types occurred ranging form double impressions, reverses, mis-spellings and many others. These are highly prized in the philatelic world and I am the proud owner of a few. Some are recognized with catalog Id numbers or as so often is the case a variety designation.
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
08:15:33pm
EFO's.
Errors Freaks and oddities ladies and gentlemen if you have some show them. Here are some of mine.
Jeremy
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: EFO's
Sarge
Here is an RD23 SIN 18 with a triple transfer.
Double transfers are difficult to find, triple transfers are extremely rare.
See the arrows, top arrow points out location where double transfers show up, the bottom arrow points to the triple transfer.
Final scan is the reverse!
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
11:47:58am
re: EFO's
1899,
That is great example of a triple transfer. Thank you for sharing. Keep the EFO's coming people.
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
re: EFO's
The low train and slow ship are fairly obvious to someone with experience with postage stamp varieties, but can you please explain the EFO features for the two revenue stamps for those of us that do not collect revenues.
They look normal to a casual eye.
Thanks
Login to Like
this post
This is my diabetic cat OBI! I think, therefore I am - I think! Descartes, sort of!
06 May 2025
01:28:35pm
re: EFO's
I'm only guessing here but the stamp on the bottom left is both an arrow single and a line single. I have never seen that combination before!!
The bottom right has a perfined selvage which would be uncommon. I don't see any oddities in the stamps themselves but maybe I am missing something!!
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: EFO's
I think the EFO's are really what the owner decides?
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: EFO's
"I think the EFO's are really what the owner decides?"
Yes, that's correct. But this is not your thread. The OP asked for other people to show their EFOs.
If you don't follow the generally expected definitions, then you should explain why you posted your items and why you believe they are EFOs.
Login to Like
this post
re: EFO's
What are the "If you don't follow the generally expected definition" so I know in future?
Login to Like
this post
re: EFO's
"What are the "If you don't follow the generally expected definition" so I know in future?"
Most of your posts are so obscure that I (and perhaps others) have no idea what you think an "EFO" might be. (and I was asleep during the class in high school that taught "mind reading").
I am simply asking you to explain why YOU thought the items you posted were "EFOs".
If you can't do that, then you have no business posting in the thread. You are just "trolling".
In another thread, Roy suggested you "dial it back a bit"...
"You are always chiming in with obtuse or contentious comments.
A personal request, please dial it back a bit.
"
Your response was a smart aleck retort:
"I want to know what a bit is, so I know?"
Very little of your dialog adds to the philatelic knowledge on this Board. Please demonstrate your philatelic knowledge, not your poor social skills.
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
03:59:18pm
re: EFO's
1899
I did ask for more and you have contributed some beautiful examples thank you.
Mike L,
The revenue stamps that are in question now for the purpose of this discussion have very subtle double transfers that are almost unrecognizable to the average collector. The one cent on the bottom of the photo has a line arrow and a plate #54 in the selvedge which isn't a considered an error. But makes it very desirable by some collectors and is very relevant to this discussion.
Maybe if one asked this question. How are double transfers ID'd and what do I look for? One might get a better response.
Now I have a rhetorical question for all watching the !@#$ show unfold. Why is this thread turning down this path of !@ and insults? Here is another question. Does anyone have any idea how many potential members are put off and don't become members of this forum by threads that turn south?
I have to go for now.
Jeremy
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Approvals
re: EFO's
Thanks Jeremy, for your clear head (per usual!) and for summing it up.
Please, I find that a STAMP is not reall worthy of a whos wrong argument.
Okay?!
I should note I am NOT the only teenager on this forum.
Posts like these do not affect me, but I cannot say for the others opinions.
All I asking is that we act like the gentlemen & women that WE ARE.
Thank You!
Oh, and I've reposted, but here is an EFO!
P.S. I've gotta club acution to go to...
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: EFO's
Sarge, you wrote:
"The revenue stamps that are in question now for the purpose of this discussion have very subtle double transfers that are almost unrecognizable to the average collector. The one cent on the bottom of the photo has a line arrow and a plate #54 in the selvedge which isn't a considered an error. But makes it very desirable by some collectors and is very relevant to this discussion."
The magic words in your reply are "almost unrecognizable to the average collector".
If this explanation had been provided by the person who posted the scans of his stamps (@1899), then I would have understood his point.
I'm here to learn. But posting the image of a stamp (or a cover), without any explanation as to why it is interesting, or significant, has a flaw that is not visibly obvious, or that it was not properly described on eBay, without telling the audience why, is not productive. All that @1899 had to write was something like the stamp is an EFO because it has a "double transfer" or because the perforated initials were never intentionally punched in the margins, and I would have understood his point, and so would everyone else.
Back to the start of this thread:
Your original post had a clear explanation.
1899's first post identified his stamp as a triple transfer.
His second post offered no explanation, just the four stamps.
I asked for an explanation for the two items I didn't understand. My apologies for being not being all-knowing and actually understanding what was wrong or unusual with the two revenue stamps. We still have not heard from @1899 as to why he included them, other than he can identify any stamp he wants as an EFO without any need to explain.
I'm sorry that you think my remarks were insulting. They were not intended to be, and were not, until my initial request for clarification were met with a snarking reply instead of a respectful explanation. I gave snarky back.
If the moderator believes that I am out of line, would he please contact me privately and I will refrain from posting in future dialogs.
MikeL
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
04:51:08pm
re: EFO's
I understand that somehow this gets discussed almost daily. For example the topic of double transfers. Just as often the #1 question follows from someone posting an example of one. How do we ID one? Then here is the follow-on question. What do we look for? Now remember I just used double transfers as an example.
There are many other EFO's that need to be discussed such as: mis-cuts, fold-overs, mis-perforation, printers waste, pre-printing paper folds, cracked plates, color varieties, vignette shifts, reversed centers, colors omitted, incorrect colors, inverts etc.... The list goes on for a long time. But I think we all get the picture. How does the beginning, novice or even the advanced/expert collector Philatelist in our case recognize/identify these varieties of stamps? Aside from the painfully obvious such as an invert how do we ID, Recognize, Know What to Look For? When it can mean the difference between a stamp worth $8.50 as a normal issue but as an error is worth $15,000. I'm referring to Scott# 233 and Scott 233a in used condition for example . This is a huge difference and one of many examples listed as varieties in the catalog.
As is so often the case Philatelists/Us/We are analytical and skeptical by nature. Of course we have to be otherwise we wouldn't find any enjoyment in the thrill of the chase to find those rare/scarce varieties as Errors, Freaks and Oddities EFO's. Even more often the EFO's are pursued by the group of Philatelist's/Stamp Collectors/Specialists known as Fly Speckers who will spend hours looking for EFO's. I happen to be a proud Fly Specker. If not for this elite group of Specialist/Philatelist's we wouldn't have the variety's of stamps to talk about and collect.
More books, articles and threads written about the subject than I care to count. Some are very good, some are well just awful and not worth the price of a roll of toilet paper. I have some books that were written more than 80 years ago and is written very well but would put an insomniac to sleep. The text in many of the books and articles read like home stereo assembly instructions that only an engineer can understand without pictures. Then there are some that have pictures that are useless as well.
That is nothing to say about some of the videos in circulation too. Who here can stand listening to anybody speak in a monotone voice while using a powerpoint slide presentation? Death by powerpoint is also an insomniacs kryptonite.
That is enough of the introduction and rant. I like everyone else here is interested in learning how its done otherwise you wouldn't be reading this thread. So lets hear how it is done. So keyboard commandos get to work and share this knowledge and your methods. Pick a subject that you are familiar with and teach us.
Jeremy
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
This is my diabetic cat OBI! I think, therefore I am - I think! Descartes, sort of!
06 May 2025
05:20:55pm
re: EFO's
"When it can mean the difference between a stamp worth $8.50 as a normal issue but as an error is worth $15,000. I'm referring to Scott# 233 and Scott 233a in used condition for example"
I know this is a bit off topic, but how about a more extreme example? Canada #24 ($20 - $50) wove paper and Canada #32 ($150 000 - $350 000) laid paper, only 3 identified so far. The difference between papers is not easy to tell and most people don't even look. The third found copy was found in a bunch of miscellaneous 2 cent green large Queens from a dealer. How many are out there unidentified in stamp collection?
If someone shows a stamp here that is supposed to be an error/variety/EFO the least they can do is say why! Otherwise it's like they are are just playing mind games with us. How are we supposed to learn if people don't at least help us along a bit? All IMHO!!
The exception would be if it was part of a contest, of course!
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
05:27:17pm
re: EFO's
That isn't off topic at all because the thread can morph in any direction at anytime. But is in my eyes a very reasonable request.
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
06:16:38pm
re: EFO's
Thank you for posting your stamp Ari it is a greatly appreciated contribution to this thread. Now if you don't mind I will take the liberty to elaborate some about your stamp why it falls into the EFO category.
PhilatelistMag20's/Ari's stamp is a scott #119 with a vignette shift to the right. This is a very common occurrence for 19th and early 20th century U.S. stamps that are multi colored. Some shifts are more dramatic than others and aren't necessarily considered errors but are considered by many to be freaks or oddities. The definition of freak or oddities really depends upon the day of the week and who you talk to. Either way it is not considered a normal stamp. An error is given a variety and specific catalog #.
In the photos from my first post you may notice very good examples if the famous Vignette shifts with a great variety. The cat # is 702.
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
re: EFO's
702 Red Cross Issue.
1931 issue.
Also the Nurses who were wounded finally received their Purple Heart Medals, when 702 was issued.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
07:06:41pm
re: EFO's
That is absolutely correct. Thanks for the help with additional facts to support my post 1899.
Lets keep the posts coming people!!!
Jeremy
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: EFO's
I have a questions for the sor experts.
#1 would the 1940 Red Revenues Scott numbers R288, R289, R290, R300, R302, over printed with sensitive ink in a bluish-purple showing minute flecks of gold, be considered an EFO?
#2 Could some body scan one so we could see it?
#3 Does anybody know how many were printed?
#4 If they are not consider EFO's why?
#5 How were they made?
#6 What was the purose?
I can't show one as I don't have one!
Login to Like
this post
This is my diabetic cat OBI! I think, therefore I am - I think! Descartes, sort of!
06 May 2025
08:32:16pm
re: EFO's
@1899 If you click on the following link you should find all you need, I think!
https://www.stampcommunity.org/topic.asp ...
In my opinion since this event was planned it probably would not be considered an EFO. This is only my opinion!
I do collect US revenues but it is not really a priority with me. The only one of the 5 stamps mentioned that I actually own is R300 and it is in the regular ink, sorry!
Login to Like
this post
re: EFO's
MikeL
You are not out of line. Not in the slightest.
Login to Like
this post
re: EFO's
The Court has gone AWOL !!
Sc#1894 with a difference.
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: EFO's
@MikeL
Your postinng dated: 06 May 2025 04:42:32pm
I did not say it was a double transfer!
Login to Like
this post
re: EFO's
@londonbus1
Your posting dated: 07 May 2025 12:37:58am
Don't just show.
It would be good to tell us how this happened?
Login to Like
this post
This is my diabetic cat OBI! I think, therefore I am - I think! Descartes, sort of!
07 May 2025
09:01:18am
re: EFO's
Any comments on this one. Picked it up from a book here about a year ago. One of my very favourite items!!
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: EFO's
Another EFO, see scan and arrows pointing to the EFO.
This is Scott Cat. 295.
Perhaps an sor expert can explain this one to me?
I do not know this is even possible, but it does.
The arrows point to a positive orienation 2C, trouble is this 2C should be a negative orientation (like the near by 2C red and a black one)!
If I've left out anything let me know?
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
This is my diabetic cat OBI! I think, therefore I am - I think! Descartes, sort of!
07 May 2025
10:21:01am
re: EFO's
Thanks @1899, it's the only example like that I have! You can easily see where the folds were, I didn't want to remove it to show the other side since a few of the perfs are starting to separate a bit - so I handle it as little as possible. I got it from Paul Keuhn here for a very fair price, I hope Paul doesn't mind me using his name. I've got some incredible stuff from him since I joined about 6 years ago.
I've got a bunch of Canada and US misperfs that I'll post pictures of in a few days. One of my picture people is suffering from kidney stones at the moment. He's had them a couple times and the pain is real real bad!!! I told him that "this too in time shall pass" and if I had actually been there he probably would have belted me!!
Login to Like
this post
This is my diabetic cat OBI! I think, therefore I am - I think! Descartes, sort of!
07 May 2025
10:32:46am
re: EFO's
In the 2 cent red above what do all the letters stand for. That stuff is not my area and I'm just curious! Is it some type of test of the printing or is there more to it than that?
Login to Like
this post
re: EFO's
@Harvey
My guess the letters are the plate workers who handled the plates, but this is only a wild guess! (2 plates were required 1 red 1 black)
Login to Like
this post
re: EFO's
More EFO's I think?
Engraved numbers, unknown what these numbers mean, there are not plate numbers as such, numbers are 4 and 3, anyone know?
If these are not EFO's let me know?
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
This is my diabetic cat OBI! I think, therefore I am - I think! Descartes, sort of!
07 May 2025
01:09:27pm
re: EFO's
A few more from me as well - a few misperfs, missing perfs (no guide lines), a miscut and a privately perfed Newfoundland stamp (should be rouletted). I just noticed that the seal stamp is the incredibly rare total invert!!!
Now I have to put them back where they belong!! I keep stuff like this in the albums next to the actual stamp!
I have a question! I which category, if any, do you put items like line pairs/blocks, arrow pairs/blocks, etc. My guess is that they are not EFO's at all since they just exist depending on how you cut up the sheets. I have huge amounts of this stuff with my Farleys. I'll load one picture out of several below! I have several pages of this stuff - not expensive or rare, just fun!
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
01:17:42pm
re: EFO's
Now this is the direction this thread needs to stay in!!! Keep the photos and scans coming.
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
01:22:03pm
re: EFO's
Harvey,
That is a nice lot of miss perforated stamps. I really like the gutters in between varieties.
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
This is my diabetic cat OBI! I think, therefore I am - I think! Descartes, sort of!
07 May 2025
01:28:05pm
re: EFO's
You have to be really careful when you buy imperfed gutter blocks or pairs. To actually be worth anything there cannot be lines in the gutters. I have a few more that if you folded on the guide lines the block or pair could be easily separated. In a couple cases I bought them with supposedly no guide lines but with a good loupe they were really there! You have to trust the seller or be ready to return the item!
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: EFO's
Another EFO, but this time it appears to be an invert, but it's not an invert.
The stamp is supposed to be R153, but it's really 279 with a fake over print IAW the Boston book there were no invert errors.
279 were over printed and made to look like "I. R." into R153 and the fake over print was printed inverted on purpose!
This is why it looks inverted but was printed this way on purpose!
Reverse side with something that I cannot ID?
Login to Like
this post
re: EFO's
2 more EFO's
My guess is the matrix moved for the I. R. over print.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
03:57:23pm
re: EFO's
Yesterday I had a couple of lots of stamps that I purchased on eBay from the same dealer that I got my basket case #226 which is in the first photo of the OP that I started the thread with. Anyway in the one lot I got has 500 unused never hinged stamps that I got especially for my sons collection. You all should know the type of lot. It is what dealers who cherry pick collections discard as duplicates or postage and consider them common book stuff. Common Book Stuff... You just have to love or hate some of the Philatelic slang.
I prey upon these types of dealers and have done so for years. For a couple of reasons. The #1 reason is they are lazy and miss stuff all of the time. The #2 reason is the usually sell what they consider the common book stuff cheap. In this lot for instance I have gone through it to set my boy up for success by placing the stamps into complete year sets or of as complete as possible so it is easy for him to find the correct spot in his album. I do that to keep him interested. Then I find and separate the EFO's that I had already spotted in the listing photo at my time of purchase. Whatever real duplication is left gets used as postage.
Out of this lot of 500+ stamps I have added 3 new to me EFO's to my collection and an unlisted color shade variety for the cat# 1021. The block of 4 is a dull shade of green in unused NH condition and the single is a brighter shade of green. Heck I'll let the pictures say the rest in my next post.
I have to go pick up the little man from school.
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
09:17:54pm
re: EFO's
Here is the color shade variety of 1021. Does anyone else have this variety too?
The stamp on the left is normal. The one on the right has the EFO characteristics. Note the crack from the perforations at the top right that goes all the way to the top of the right eyebrow and there is lines of shading giving the look of a right black eye.
Jeremy
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: EFO's
Another EFO
The stamp is R191, 1902 series and was supposed to have the over print same as the 1902 series, but instead it has the over print of R185 (1901 series).
In addition it does not have the varnish square like the 1902 series, instead the varnish goes from margin to margin!
My guess this is printers waste! Would printers waste be considered an EFO?
Comments/questions anyone?
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
10:13:54pm
re: EFO's
1899,
Printers waste is considered an EFO. On page 203 in the Catalog of Errors on U.S. Postage Stamps lists printers waste as an error. Not you stamp of course. But printers waste is a category of errors.
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
re: EFO's
More EFO's
Two examples of missing over prints.
Two examples with correct over prints.
Reverse sides of missing over print in the corect orientations.
sor members let all see what other members have?
These missing over prints are fun and often the sellers do not realize what they have!
If I missed any thing please let me know!
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: EFO's
Would this be considered an EFO?
See hand scribed "1/2 Documen"
Reverse scan
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
02:22:38pm
re: EFO's
1899,
I'd say an oddity at the very least especially if it came from print that way. At any rate it is still a very nice discussion piece.
Jeremy
Nice avatar flyboy.
Login to Like
this post
re: EFO's
Sarge
Thanks.
I have no idea if this , is as it came from the govertment or if someone made it up.
Do you think I should stop posting my EFO's for awhile or continue posting?
Dave
Login to Like
this post
02:48:33pm
re: EFO's
Heck no Dave.
Keep them coming. Others here must be suffering from the effects of a gas leak. I'm just kidding. Someday they will catch on that you're teaching us all something.
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
re: EFO's
Thanks Sarge
I make this strip out to be R208, the EFO is the invert "2"
The 2 is located just to the left of "CENT"
Reverse side
If I made a mistake let me know!
Login to Like
this post
re: EFO's
Another what I think is an EFO.
Any question/comments, or if you disagree let me know!
I've added arrows pointing to two numbers and these two numbers is what I'm calling EFO.
I have no idea what these two numbers (see arrows), are meant for or the reason they are even there?
Any body have factual knowledge of this?
Scan of reverse
Login to Like
this post
re: EFO's
These markings are a product of the process of creating the plates which printed the stamps.
Most (All?) are the result of employees of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing who add the markings as part of the documentation of their work.
There are a variety of reasons for the initials and numbers. See for example the following page from the Marginal Markings committee of the United States Stamps Society.
https://www.usstamps.org/resources/margi ...
While they are unusual, I would think these are not an oddity, as they were part of the normal production process during a long period of time.
Mike
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: EFO's
Thank you!
Do you think the numbers 1 & 3 would have been created at the same time, or different times?
Login to Like
this post
03:43:47pm
re: EFO's
Mike,
That is a very interesting link you posted. If I am understanding the link correctly then all of the letters and numerals in the selvage/margins are nothing more than proof marks denoting each employee that handled the sheet from the engraver to the one operating the perforation machine. So then my guess would be that no regard was given to the correct orientation the proof marks were applied to the margin or selvage because it wasn't meant to be kept in the first place.
Dave,
It is a very interesting plate block of six and I believe that it is very appropriate for this discussion in this thread. I did magnify the block with my computer's program and it looks like there are some of the stamps in the plate block that exhibit some double transfers. Am I correct in saying that there are some double transfers?
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
re: EFO's
Sarge,
I really can't answer your question because this is not a field where I have either knowledge or collecting interest beyond pointing you in this direction. I was aware of this website primarily because I am the Chairman of a related group also sponsored by the United States Stamp Society.
I suspect that the answer is somewhere in the many articles that the Marginal Markings group had published, but unfortunately, the Society has all the issues behind the "membership wall".
Maybe someone in that group is reading this forum, and will jump in with some answers.
It looks like a fascinating topic to explore and collect.
Mike
Login to Like
this post
re: EFO's
Sorry this is not a plate block.
I have not checked this block for double transfers yet.
If there is double transfer(s) then I would think the numbers 1 & 3 would have been created at different times, accounting for the reworking of the transfer roll!
The reversed 2C (numbers and letters) are not proof marks.
Think I covered everything here?
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: EFO's
Another EFO, in this case RB48 with double impression, notice the lettering, especially top and bottom label!
If I got anything wrong let me know.
If you see anything I missed, please let me know!
I also ran it thru ImageSeluth, you can see the value of using it!
Reverse
Then using ImageSeluth
Login to Like
this post
re: EFO's
U305 with I think is an EFO.
It appears to me a partial positive image was some how appears over the first positive image.
If I missed something please let me know?
If there is any questions/comments let me know.
Do any soR member have another one, let's all see it?
A close up scan
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
02:12:57pm
re: EFO's
It isn't an EFO. But the image should be an excellent comparison to the one Dave has.
Jeremy
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: EFO's
RC4a double overprint!
3 scans, one scan is enhanced!
The parent stamp is an offset printed, now then the overprint and why is it doubled I do not know.
Any sOr member know how the over print was producted and why it is doubled, please inform us?
The over print might (I do not know) may have been by the offset method?
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
01:30:34pm
re: EFO's
It looks like it was sent through a typewriter twice. That is my best guess. But that can't be right because if it was sent through a type writer the paper would show evidence of that theory on the back as if it would be embossed from a hammer strike of sorts. It is definitely intriguing.
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
re: EFO's
Thank you!
I did not think of a typewriter, but I see your point.
Just thinking out loud, I wonder if a typewriter was ever used to cancel stamps.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
02:51:39pm
re: EFO's
Dave,
After I took a second look at your stamp in your post. It has just dawned on me you have a type set double impression error. Why it was run through twice is the 10 million dollar question.
Here are some images of some of my revenue stamps that are in post from another thread and merit attention to this thread also. In particular if you all will take notice of the series date on the 5 dollar documentary stamp Scott catalog # R502 it shows a clear type set error of the word series it is misspelled. It is spelled ( Sarles ) not ( Series ) like it should be. There isn't any evidence of being run through a type writer on the back of the stamp. I can't help wondering how many others are in existence.
The reason for the picture of the 3 stamps together is proof that they were used on the same document on the same date of December 21, 1949 and all display the same series date.
Jeremy
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: EFO's
Wow, that is outstanding discovery!
Maybe some type of research could be conducted.
Thank you for posting this outstanding stamp!
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
03:50:58pm
re: EFO's
Thank you for the kind words Dave.
I have been trying to do some research and have been coming up short. The one question I have and maybe someone else can answer it. How where the overprints added after the printing process was completed?
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post
04:44:27pm
re: EFO's
I found the answer to my own question while waiting for my minion to get out of school. Overprints are applied with a separate die after the initial printing process and naturally errors of all types occurred ranging form double impressions, reverses, mis-spellings and many others. These are highly prized in the philatelic world and I am the proud owner of a few. Some are recognized with catalog Id numbers or as so often is the case a variety designation.
Jeremy
Login to Like
this post