Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
My original #3:
The suspect #3:
Thanks
Brian
Login to Like
this post
I could be mistaken, but isn't this a very common stamp? If so, why would anyone want to put in the effort of creating a forgery?
On the other hand, there is a clear difference between the two. Perhaps there are different printings, I would have to check Michel to find out more.
Login to Like
this post
I don't know the printing details, but such a common stamp would not be worth forging. The colours shown are correct for the issue. Red at top, rose at bottom.
Login to Like
this post
I thought the same as both of you, it is a minimal value stamp, but who said it needs to make sense? Perhaps someone wanted practice before going on to a more 'worthy' subject.
In Scott the only other listing I found is for the perforated version. On Colnect all the values I saw look like my first one. I just found this on StampData where both versions are shown.
http://stampdata.com/stamp.php?id=31922
Login to Like
this post
I have a number of the 5's that have varying degrees of coarseness. I would think that earlier printings have fresh plates, but they wear down after a while, giving poorer prints. Just my opinion.
The later perfed stamps that I have seem to be more consistent in quality.
Peter
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Whenever I have that question, the first thing I do is ask myself, "Could this just be over/under-inking?"
When I look two stamps side-by-side, I look for design differences that could NOT be explained by over- or under-inking. Then, I compare the shapes of letters. This is often how forgeries manifest. I'm thinking of an early St. Lucia stamp. Spiro forgeries, which are very good ("dangerous") are distinct because the "S" in POSTAGE is not symmetrical top-to-bottom on the forgery. The top loop is a little more squat than the bottom loop.
Especially on older stamps, you also have to distinguish plate varieties, which can be very prevalent in some issues.
I don't see anything definitive when I compare your two Czech stamps.
stampforgeries.com is an excellent starter resource...
FWIW,
-Paul
Login to Like
this post
these look to be different impressions. the width of the 10 is quite different.
For a while I was a member of a Czech society, and the wealth of differences among the stamps was astounding. Printer's waste alone is mammoth.
I maintained some pages with color variations, which on any given issue might be astoundingly broad.
Login to Like
this post
Believe the resource you want/need is entitled "The Philately of Czechoslovakia" by Phillips B Freer. Published by The Society of Czechoslovak Philately.
Login to Like
this post
Thank you all for your comments.
I will put this stamp down as a printing variety based on your comments and more research. Probably not a forgery. One site put it this way:
"Upon taking over responsibilities for the posts, the new Czechoslovakian government engaged the firm Graficka Unie for the production of postage stamps. Neither the printing company nor the new government had experience in stamp production. Combined with this inexperience, issues with papers and inks and the need to regularly repair and replace the letterpress plates resulted in extensive variation"
Other sources I looked at included:
https://www.hradcany-stamps.com/
https://worldstampsproject.org/philately-of-czechoslovakia-hradcany-10h-stamp/
Brian
Login to Like
this post
Brian.
Thank you for posting the link to the world stamp project.
The varieties described therein far exceed the info within the resource I cited. Which has now caused me to take yet another look at my duplicates of this issue/series.
Ah, the work of a philatelist is never done!
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
I have what I called a scott #3 in my album and recently from an old album I bought somewhere I found another similar but it looks more crude or coarse. I'm thinking it is a forgery. Here are both for your opinion. Maybe both are fake. I have others of that set with the finer lines of my original #3.
My original #3:
The suspect #3:
Thanks
Brian
Login to Like
this post
Approvals
re: Czechoslovakia, Scott #3 forgery? - Not
I could be mistaken, but isn't this a very common stamp? If so, why would anyone want to put in the effort of creating a forgery?
On the other hand, there is a clear difference between the two. Perhaps there are different printings, I would have to check Michel to find out more.
Login to Like
this post
re: Czechoslovakia, Scott #3 forgery? - Not
I don't know the printing details, but such a common stamp would not be worth forging. The colours shown are correct for the issue. Red at top, rose at bottom.
Login to Like
this post
re: Czechoslovakia, Scott #3 forgery? - Not
I thought the same as both of you, it is a minimal value stamp, but who said it needs to make sense? Perhaps someone wanted practice before going on to a more 'worthy' subject.
In Scott the only other listing I found is for the perforated version. On Colnect all the values I saw look like my first one. I just found this on StampData where both versions are shown.
http://stampdata.com/stamp.php?id=31922
Login to Like
this post
re: Czechoslovakia, Scott #3 forgery? - Not
I have a number of the 5's that have varying degrees of coarseness. I would think that earlier printings have fresh plates, but they wear down after a while, giving poorer prints. Just my opinion.
The later perfed stamps that I have seem to be more consistent in quality.
Peter
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
09:12:33am
re: Czechoslovakia, Scott #3 forgery? - Not
Whenever I have that question, the first thing I do is ask myself, "Could this just be over/under-inking?"
When I look two stamps side-by-side, I look for design differences that could NOT be explained by over- or under-inking. Then, I compare the shapes of letters. This is often how forgeries manifest. I'm thinking of an early St. Lucia stamp. Spiro forgeries, which are very good ("dangerous") are distinct because the "S" in POSTAGE is not symmetrical top-to-bottom on the forgery. The top loop is a little more squat than the bottom loop.
Especially on older stamps, you also have to distinguish plate varieties, which can be very prevalent in some issues.
I don't see anything definitive when I compare your two Czech stamps.
stampforgeries.com is an excellent starter resource...
FWIW,
-Paul
Login to Like
this post
re: Czechoslovakia, Scott #3 forgery? - Not
these look to be different impressions. the width of the 10 is quite different.
For a while I was a member of a Czech society, and the wealth of differences among the stamps was astounding. Printer's waste alone is mammoth.
I maintained some pages with color variations, which on any given issue might be astoundingly broad.
Login to Like
this post
06:32:06pm
re: Czechoslovakia, Scott #3 forgery? - Not
Believe the resource you want/need is entitled "The Philately of Czechoslovakia" by Phillips B Freer. Published by The Society of Czechoslovak Philately.
Login to Like
this post
re: Czechoslovakia, Scott #3 forgery? - Not
Thank you all for your comments.
I will put this stamp down as a printing variety based on your comments and more research. Probably not a forgery. One site put it this way:
"Upon taking over responsibilities for the posts, the new Czechoslovakian government engaged the firm Graficka Unie for the production of postage stamps. Neither the printing company nor the new government had experience in stamp production. Combined with this inexperience, issues with papers and inks and the need to regularly repair and replace the letterpress plates resulted in extensive variation"
Other sources I looked at included:
https://www.hradcany-stamps.com/
https://worldstampsproject.org/philately-of-czechoslovakia-hradcany-10h-stamp/
Brian
Login to Like
this post
04:12:58am
re: Czechoslovakia, Scott #3 forgery? - Not
Brian.
Thank you for posting the link to the world stamp project.
The varieties described therein far exceed the info within the resource I cited. Which has now caused me to take yet another look at my duplicates of this issue/series.
Ah, the work of a philatelist is never done!
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.