John, Can you put photos of them up here? We may be able to help you, and save you the cert cost. (No guarantee, but sometimes it's clear Regums, if you can get the right scans/photos. But, yes, APS is a credible source for cert (APEX).
Greene Foundation in Toronto is , in Canada, regarded as the place to get certs. How do the perf tips feel? The colour of the 10 cent on the gum side doesn't look right and all the perf tips look awfully clean
Attached are pictures of these two stamps from among those I had listed for sale. A quick comparison appears to show similar gum color between the two issues.
I send all of my questionable never-hinged items of sufficient value to warrant the cost of an expert opinion to the APS (minimum $200 catalog value). I just sent off a German stamp from a collection where I have suspicions of regumming. The reason for my suspicion of regumming is that it appears that the front edges of stamp were scraped as if someone had run a very small sander up the edges of the stamp. I had never seen anything like that before, with many of the stamps in this collection having this appearance (see below).
Note how the left and right margins on the front appear to have been scraped and thinned in the process. Although there is an expert ink stamp on the back, there is just enough dissimilarity between this stamp and others examples that I have where I am even questioning the expert ink stamp itself. The stamp above is not the one that I sent off to the APS, the following one is:
Again the same scraping and resultant thinning on the edges of the margins. Also a questionable expert ink stamp on the back. The reason I sent the above stamp off from among the many examples is that (1) I wanted an opinion on the gum (is it original and never hinged) and also (2) what the heck is that scraping that is present on the front margins. Also, this issue can have a sideways watermark that raises the catalog value from $135 to $11,250 if present. It is a watermark that I have a horrible time trying to determine if it is sideways, so thought this would be the one example I send off to get some answers about the gum and the scraping as well as the watermark as an extra. It was sent off only a few weeks ago, so I still probably have two months at least to wait until I get any news.
Anyone want to hazard a guess as to reason for the scraping? Is it a way to cover up excess gum from a regumming process from showing up on the margins?
Good examples in that article. When I come across stamps with an appearance like those examples and the catalog value is not sufficient to justify an expert opinion, I describe the stamp as possibly regummed and make the appropriate deduction in my selling price.
Richard, on the Germany #357...a couple of things. That looks like an upright watermark 126 to me. It should actually be very easy to see in watermark fluid as I can see it with just the scan. Another thing, it kind of looks like to me that it is previously hinged, although lightly. There is one perf at top dead center that looks like it has no gum and just below that there is some discoloration in the gum. If you say it's MNH, I believe you but just from the scan, that is what I see. Can't tell you much on the "scraping". hope APEX can explain that for you.
The watermark was very easy to see, especially with watermark fluid. But I got totally confused as to whether upright or sideways - I just couldn't differentiate between the two. Most likely upright since the sideways watermark has to be very rare to be priced at that level. But since I wanted to get some explanation for the scarping, this one was as good as any other and I could have the watermark checked at the same time.
The gum I always check by holding up to a bright light and gently tilting sideways to see the glare on the gum. Hinging and other gum disturbances usually pop out as readily visible. I trust this method more than an image from a scanner in determining gum condition. Also, the gum appears to have the "ripples" that many German stamps from this period possess. Not sure how easy it would be to duplicate that rippled gum appearance if regumming.
I will the post the expert opinion once it is received. Then someone can say, "I told you so."
John,
Not sure what you mean by reduction, but if you mean the size of the image, most of my smaller stamps are 500 pixels along the longest axis. Let me know if you were asking some other type of question.
Ok there is a ton of stuff in this thread, so let me go at them one at a time. First things first @Richard Pauls your 20 Beethoven stamp is not only regummed, it is also reperfed at top and left. The "experts" mark means only that the "expert" looked at it, but I am highly in doubt that that mark is authentic as well. (As I don't really know this expert, or their mark, but it's probably applied after to make people think that there is no need to look further at this stamp). So it is not useful as a reference copy, other than it is regummed. (Side note on expert marks... they should only appear on what at least would have once been a "sound stamp", unless there is another note with it, like an ID of variety. In my view, this stamp is fraudulently applied on both stamps, given the reperforating of the two sides of this stamp, no expert worth their salt would have done this... now that leads me to the other point, there have been a LOT of sham "experts" over the years as well, just taking money and issuing a cert/opinion/mark. So I have no idea the credibility of this "expert" either, so somewhat possible it is authentic, but he was a hack). The 80 Reutches Reich orange stamp is also regummed. One interesting point about this one is look at the top right corner of the stamp (back). Notice how about 8 of the perfs from right inward appear to have no gum on them? Regumming fraudsters often get cautious around the tips, and sometimes a little too cautious (or careless). These tips were mostly missed or had a very thin layer applied while applying multiple layers of gum to the stamp. Another thing to note about both of these is the very transparency of the gum. Now that in itself is not definitive, especially if the stamp is post 1900. But it is a clue, and when you combine all the other elements, these stamps are both regummed.
Your 20c Canadian appears to have disturbed OG. (I would call this "redistributed" OG). This is done usually to cover for gum loss (and there is a difference between a thin, and gum loss. Loss of OG due to flaking of the gum that does not result in paper damage, is not a thin.) In this case, many try to "hide" this loss by sweating the stamp slightly, or using only a lightly damp brush, brush around the stamp and move that original gum to cover over these areas where gum is lost. This is then genuine OG, but it's "Redistributed". This accounts for how uneven the color in your gum is.
For the 10c Canadian, when I just saw the photo without increasing its size, I thought it was a no gum. I'm sorry to say, this stamp is a regum also.
@john o'neil Your first to stamps (10c and 20c) are both OG. Your second (the 8c) also look ok to me, but are these on two different paper types?
Now, I'm not an expert in Canada or Germany, but I'm assuming that the gum traits/properties in these stamps is probably true to what it is for US stamps.
One very strong indicator (that for some reason I don't see written in any text, but was wisdom imparted to me by Irv Miller (current ASDA president) and Bill Weiss (Late Expertizing Genius, who basically taught me everything), is that gums used on US stamps prior to 1900 have an interesting property. No matter how they have been stored, there will ALWAYS be cracking in the gum. Cracking in the gum isn't definitive, but NO cracking is. This can be from slight (like the first 8c issue of Johns example) to obvious (like both of his first two stamps).
Just to make things worse, some of the things that have been mentioned (or referenced) here are also not definitive. Gum in the tips or welts of the perf hole also does NOT mean definitively that a stamp is regummed. There is a condition known as "Gum Sweat" that can result from gum getting warm in humid conditions and essentially breaking down. (This is also why MANY pre-1900 stamps are "no gum", because the gum has essentially evaporated over time, particularly because prior to 1940ish, refrigeration and by extension air conditioning wasn't common place, so storing stamps in "optimal conditions" like we do today, wasn't an option. Home refrigerators didn't appear until 1913, and home air-conditioning didn't appear until 1932, but both took quite a while before they would become common place.)
As a result, no pre-1900 stamps were ever able to be climate controlled. This results in many cycles of hot/cold change which eventually cracks the gum.
If it's not cracked, it didn't suffer those conditions, which means it was applied in modern era. Also, the gum that is applied isn't "postal gum", though one could assume, postal gums have been stolen/replicated to a high degree, that's why we look at the other properties of the gum, including how it was applied to the stamp.
One thing I would say stay away from as a "detection" method of regumming is "curling". There are so many reasons why this doesn't tell you anything, and so many reasons why a page can curl in either direction. So ignore that "advise" from other "stamp sleuths", it's far from definitive. I don't know any expertizer who uses this as a decision point for if a stamp is regummed or not. Not clear on the origin of this advise either. It could be argued that it's "More Likely" to be the case, but if it's not a definitive or collective information point, then it's a useless one.
I read everyone of these and i say knowledge is power! I am soaking it all up. I Opened a store on HipStamp thinking i would sell my collection. Now i realize i have very little knowledge if what stamps I actually have vs. what i thought i had. 3-4K stamps right now and possible more. I an starting from stamp 1 and moving forward to becoming a reliable and knowledge collector and or seller. My collection was in storage for several years, i stop collecting and forgot about them until my son wanted to learn about stamps. That is all it took. I am here to learn , ask and participate when I can. This is a great group of communicators and experts that some day would enjoy meeting. There is so much to learn. If there is a PHD available I think Scott get the first one.,,.., Or is there such thing
Comments
Can you put photos of them up here? We may be able to help you, and save you the cert cost. (No guarantee, but sometimes it's clear Regums, if you can get the right scans/photos.
But, yes, APS is a credible source for cert (APEX).
I send all of my questionable never-hinged items of sufficient value to warrant the cost of an expert opinion to the APS (minimum $200 catalog value). I just sent off a German stamp from a collection where I have suspicions of regumming. The reason for my suspicion of regumming is that it appears that the front edges of stamp were scraped as if someone had run a very small sander up the edges of the stamp. I had never seen anything like that before, with many of the stamps in this collection having this appearance (see below).
Note how the left and right margins on the front appear to have been scraped and thinned in the process. Although there is an expert ink stamp on the back, there is just enough dissimilarity between this stamp and others examples that I have where I am even questioning the expert ink stamp itself. The stamp above is not the one that I sent off to the APS, the following one is:
Again the same scraping and resultant thinning on the edges of the margins. Also a questionable expert ink stamp on the back. The reason I sent the above stamp off from among the many examples is that (1) I wanted an opinion on the gum (is it original and never hinged) and also (2) what the heck is that scraping that is present on the front margins. Also, this issue can have a sideways watermark that raises the catalog value from $135 to $11,250 if present. It is a watermark that I have a horrible time trying to determine if it is sideways, so thought this would be the one example I send off to get some answers about the gum and the scraping as well as the watermark as an extra. It was sent off only a few weeks ago, so I still probably have two months at least to wait until I get any news.
Anyone want to hazard a guess as to reason for the scraping? Is it a way to cover up excess gum from a regumming process from showing up on the margins?
This should be helpful, John
Good examples in that article. When I come across stamps with an appearance like those examples and the catalog value is not sufficient to justify an expert opinion, I describe the stamp as possibly regummed and make the appropriate deduction in my selling price.
As far as your expertizer mark....here is some info on that...https://www.filatelia.fi/experts/namesm.html
Here are the other two.....thanks for all the help and comments.
The watermark was very easy to see, especially with watermark fluid. But I got totally confused as to whether upright or sideways - I just couldn't differentiate between the two. Most likely upright since the sideways watermark has to be very rare to be priced at that level. But since I wanted to get some explanation for the scarping, this one was as good as any other and I could have the watermark checked at the same time.
The gum I always check by holding up to a bright light and gently tilting sideways to see the glare on the gum. Hinging and other gum disturbances usually pop out as readily visible. I trust this method more than an image from a scanner in determining gum condition. Also, the gum appears to have the "ripples" that many German stamps from this period possess. Not sure how easy it would be to duplicate that rippled gum appearance if regumming.
I will the post the expert opinion once it is received. Then someone can say, "I told you so."
John,
Not sure what you mean by reduction, but if you mean the size of the image, most of my smaller stamps are 500 pixels along the longest axis. Let me know if you were asking some other type of question.
https://www.hipstamp.com/store/okstamps
First things first @Richard Pauls your 20 Beethoven stamp is not only regummed, it is also reperfed at top and left.
The "experts" mark means only that the "expert" looked at it, but I am highly in doubt that that mark is authentic as well. (As I don't really know this expert, or their mark, but it's probably applied after to make people think that there is no need to look further at this stamp).
So it is not useful as a reference copy, other than it is regummed.
(Side note on expert marks... they should only appear on what at least would have once been a "sound stamp", unless there is another note with it, like an ID of variety. In my view, this stamp is fraudulently applied on both stamps, given the reperforating of the two sides of this stamp, no expert worth their salt would have done this... now that leads me to the other point, there have been a LOT of sham "experts" over the years as well, just taking money and issuing a cert/opinion/mark. So I have no idea the credibility of this "expert" either, so somewhat possible it is authentic, but he was a hack).
The 80 Reutches Reich orange stamp is also regummed. One interesting point about this one is look at the top right corner of the stamp (back). Notice how about 8 of the perfs from right inward appear to have no gum on them? Regumming fraudsters often get cautious around the tips, and sometimes a little too cautious (or careless). These tips were mostly missed or had a very thin layer applied while applying multiple layers of gum to the stamp.
Another thing to note about both of these is the very transparency of the gum. Now that in itself is not definitive, especially if the stamp is post 1900. But it is a clue, and when you combine all the other elements, these stamps are both regummed.
Your 20c Canadian appears to have disturbed OG. (I would call this "redistributed" OG). This is done usually to cover for gum loss (and there is a difference between a thin, and gum loss. Loss of OG due to flaking of the gum that does not result in paper damage, is not a thin.) In this case, many try to "hide" this loss by sweating the stamp slightly, or using only a lightly damp brush, brush around the stamp and move that original gum to cover over these areas where gum is lost. This is then genuine OG, but it's "Redistributed". This accounts for how uneven the color in your gum is.
For the 10c Canadian, when I just saw the photo without increasing its size, I thought it was a no gum. I'm sorry to say, this stamp is a regum also.
@john o'neil Your first to stamps (10c and 20c) are both OG.
Your second (the 8c) also look ok to me, but are these on two different paper types?
Now, I'm not an expert in Canada or Germany, but I'm assuming that the gum traits/properties in these stamps is probably true to what it is for US stamps.
One very strong indicator (that for some reason I don't see written in any text, but was wisdom imparted to me by Irv Miller (current ASDA president) and Bill Weiss (Late Expertizing Genius, who basically taught me everything), is that gums used on US stamps prior to 1900 have an interesting property. No matter how they have been stored, there will ALWAYS be cracking in the gum.
Cracking in the gum isn't definitive, but NO cracking is.
This can be from slight (like the first 8c issue of Johns example) to obvious (like both of his first two stamps).
Just to make things worse, some of the things that have been mentioned (or referenced) here are also not definitive. Gum in the tips or welts of the perf hole also does NOT mean definitively that a stamp is regummed. There is a condition known as "Gum Sweat" that can result from gum getting warm in humid conditions and essentially breaking down. (This is also why MANY pre-1900 stamps are "no gum", because the gum has essentially evaporated over time, particularly because prior to 1940ish, refrigeration and by extension air conditioning wasn't common place, so storing stamps in "optimal conditions" like we do today, wasn't an option. Home refrigerators didn't appear until 1913, and home air-conditioning didn't appear until 1932, but both took quite a while before they would become common place.)
As a result, no pre-1900 stamps were ever able to be climate controlled. This results in many cycles of hot/cold change which eventually cracks the gum.
If it's not cracked, it didn't suffer those conditions, which means it was applied in modern era. Also, the gum that is applied isn't "postal gum", though one could assume, postal gums have been stolen/replicated to a high degree, that's why we look at the other properties of the gum, including how it was applied to the stamp.
One thing I would say stay away from as a "detection" method of regumming is "curling". There are so many reasons why this doesn't tell you anything, and so many reasons why a page can curl in either direction. So ignore that "advise" from other "stamp sleuths", it's far from definitive. I don't know any expertizer who uses this as a decision point for if a stamp is regummed or not. Not clear on the origin of this advise either.
It could be argued that it's "More Likely" to be the case, but if it's not a definitive or collective information point, then it's a useless one.