Have you ever seen an "error" like this? Or even heard mention of it? My one acquaintance owns this and is, like me, completely stumped! Some say it's an adhesion but I'm inclined to disagree as you can clearly see the design bleed into the lettering. Anyway check it out and so you know this is NOT mine and sorry about the resolution. I cropped it out and blew it up.
I never seen it either nor ever seen it listed in any reference material. I wish the owner on the other board would scan in high resolution. I was just fishing for other opinions and to see if anyone has ever ran into this before was all. I may change my mind on the adhesion theory. Might be just something stuck to it because if it were in the design it would be on a lot more since someone would have to have had altered the actual printing die. Just an E.F.O. (Error-Freak-Oddity) as far as I'm now concerned.
Wow, you must be very meticulous to notice this! This is the first time I have encountered such typo. I'll check mine to make sure they're all well printed. Are you sure they were not photoshoped or could that part just faded, what do you think?
I know for a fact that the images were not Photoshopped but very well may have been a bad repair job.
The solution to this - your problem is simply to find another similar flaw. To qualify as a flaw with the possibility to have it listed if not already in some literature, you need to find similar used and mint or even on cover. Mint in part sheets or full sheet. Then you must know how many sheets were printed in one application - 2 sheets or 4 sheets ? If no other similar fkaw is found and the flaw is caused during a printing session it may be contstant if the plate was damaged at some instance, may even have been repaired ! My bet is if none are found, it was a intrusion of a foreign object during printing and wiped clean very soon depending how sticky the opject was. As wiping was probably done by hand in those days a few may have printed. This flaw (intrusive object) could even have wandered if not cleaned probably. So at best it is an oddidty allowing for speculation till others are found. Enjoy the hunt.
I completely agree philactica! Without having the stamp in my possession it would be impossible to tell for sure exactly what it is but I think you have nailed it. I thought it was either a bad repair job or a one-off E.F.O.. Again it's not my stamp but a members on another board I frequent. Thank you.
The good move is showing, so others can look to find a similar. This is the basis and one starting point in my view of stamp collectiing. Going through thousands of the same stamp to look for errors/flaws. They can be modern or en masse 100 year oldies. So the bundled 100 of the same stamps of 40 years ago may have hidden new surprises not looked for 4 decades. I have never been disappointed buying 100x same but then I know before hand what I will be looking for and do scrutinise them with the current information available. That too may be outdated in a few decades and they would then be sought for other reasons.
and add to that the scanning capabilities we have these days where a stamp can be blown up to at least 10x its original size, if like me you have the stamp microscope that is linked to my pc, with digital resolution i sit here for days with my victoria, edward and george stamps with the concise gb victoria and kings catalogues scanning and seaching for that 1 colour shade, inverted or sideways watermark or extra dot and scream out loud when i find one lol when i get back i will have to show a few off for you
