The Samovar
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

Printable Version  
 Pages:  1  2
Author: Subject: RSFSR 100r
RSFSR
Major Philatelist
***




Posts: 129
Registered: 9/21/2006
Member Is Offline

Mood: Good

[*] posted on 1/21/2008 at 19:23


This topic is becoming quite interesting to say the least!!!

Let me suggest something ... what if the corrected cliche variety is actually just a plate flaw that was corrected with the 70R ... so the sequence that we all thought was '70R followed by corrected cliche' is actually 'plate deterioration followed by 70R error'?

What information corroborates this theory?

The stamp in pane position 11 (right of the 70R position) in the pane with plate number 4 is just starting to show the indentation in the left of the top frame. All the examples I have of the block of nine with the 70R error show this top frame line is more deteriorated when compared to the plate 4 pane.

The more examples we have of PN 4 pane and the 70R pane (and the 'corrected cliche' pane), the better we might help to solve this mystery with an unexpected answer!!!

I have attached pane position 11 (block of nine position 4) from the bottom right pane of the sheet with the plate number 4. Similar to the flyspecker artcle in the last Rossica Journal, there is the start of the frame deterioration in the top left ...

I eagerly await responses and thoughts on this revelation!!!

(and even if I am wrong, it sure was fun thinking that I might have discovered something new!!!!)



237 PN4 pos 4.jpg - 17kB
View user's profile View All Posts By User
RSFSR
Major Philatelist
***




Posts: 129
Registered: 9/21/2006
Member Is Offline

Mood: Good

[*] posted on 1/22/2008 at 23:04


The more I think about this, the more inclined I am to believe that the 70R came AFTER the 'corrected' cliche.

Greg, would you be kind enough to send me scans of as many blocks of the nine stamps (pos 6 - 8, 11-13, 16-18) as you have.

If anyone else has similar blocks, could you also send them to me. I will then report back as to what I find out.

600 dpi is optimal.

My email address is ged_seiflow@ttx.com

Thank you all in advance.

Ged
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Duck
Czarist
**




Posts: 20
Registered: 12/7/2007
Location: Moscow
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 2/10/2008 at 15:28


Has found out such a stamp, last mail, that basically, proves, that stamps with similar mistakes were in the post reference.

Обнаружил такую марку, прошедшую почту, что в принципе, доказывает, что марки с подобными ошибками были в почтовом обращении.

View user's profile View All Posts By User
Gary
Deceased
****




Posts: 1626
Registered: 10/18/2002
Location: USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 2/22/2008 at 18:36


Did this one get lost in the latest Russian catalog?:sniffle:
View user's profile View All Posts By User
GregMirsky
Rossica Librarian
*********




Posts: 244
Registered: 11/2/2002
Location: Palo Alto,CA
Member Is Offline

Mood: Still Optimistic...

[*] posted on 2/23/2008 at 04:18


Gary,

This variety is not listed in Liapin, Soloviev or Zagorsky (I don't know which one you had in mind). At the same time it is listed (in some form) for many years in Scott and Stanley Gibbons. 100 Rub stamp with extra line outside of the frame listed in Scott as #237b and Stanley Gibbons as#310b.

What we finding now (and this is new information) that these extra lines exist not only in position 12 of the pane (where 70 rub. stamp was located instead of 100 rub.), but also in some other positions and we jointly trying to figure out what technological artefact can cause this.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
 Pages:  1  2

  Go To Top

Powered by the Rossica Society
XMB Forum Software © 2001-2017 The XMB Group
[Queries: 17]