Does this look regummed? Canada Scott 226
The gumming on the stamp on the left looked "Too good" to me. The stamp on the right is that same mint Canada 226 from my store. I posted this on another site I frequently visit, and folks there agreed the stamp on the left had something done to the gum. However, one responder said the stamp on the right did not look proper either. What the hey. This regumming thing is driving me crazy, and is making me very leary of buying early single mint stamps. What do you folks think?
As an aside, I was licked off that site for a week for using "Scott 226" in the title of my post, after getting completely trashed by the site adninistrator. I probably don't even need to name the clown.
Comments
While I'm not a Canada specialist, what I can see here are some flags of regumming.
The stamp at right has a curl in it, that's not present in the stamp at right. If these stamps were printed as flat plate prints, then there is no reason for the stamp to curl. This is a common sign of regumming. However, it is not on it's own conclusive either.
The gum is disturbed as well. If it has been heated during a high humidity period, and is in a dealer card, or a plastic backed album page, then the gum can melt and take on a smooth surface, sometimes with bubbles that will leave impressions.
One thing that will help is if you can send images from the front as well, and then individual scans (flat, without the curve in the stamps), as high a resolution as possible, that would be helpful.
After checking some of my stamps from that set, I'd say the gum on the stamp on the right looks closer to mine. One thing with these Canadian stamps, they will have very sharp impressions of the engraved image visible on the back. Re-gumming may dull that look.
This is somewhat similar to how glossy photographs were produced, back in the day. After developing and rinsing the print in the darkroom, the print would be placed on a polished stainless steel “ferrotyping tin” face down, with a blotting cloth clamped down over the backside to dry the print. This would create a glossy finish on the print. The same print on the same paper air dried would give you a matte finish.
My highly scientific test for regumming is to very gently feel the perf tips. If the tips are "stiff" it's probably regummed. If the tips are "soft" it's probably original gum . Phil Merrill above also mentions that the design can often be seen on the gum side. My memory wants to say that applies from some of the Admiral issues up to the time "synthetic" gums came into use.
You can also see how the gum has been sweated by the color of it.
The crystal mounts were a tube type mount. They were clear mounts with an adhesive strip at the top, on the back of the mount. They were prone to shrinkage, gun disturbance, and also those mounts would adsorb the colors from the stamps into the mount itself.
Here is a picture of them.
And wow, it's been 100 years since I've seen a pack of them.
Would: "Made of Mylar, STAMPMOUNTS are flexible, crystal clear, tear-proof and resist yellowing with age" be considered a Crystal mount?