oldteddy
Major Philatelist
Posts: 378
Registered: 12/31/2002
Member Is Offline
Mood: Perplexed
|
|
Methodical issue
In many cases this section entries just show pictures: this is a good one, this is a bad one. I think it would be helpful if some description of
forgeries IN COMARISON with genuine stamp would accompany the pictures. How to tell forgery from genuine stamp? Some nickname would not hurt also:
let's say Andrey shows what he thinks is a CUT-OUT forgery of #1. Can we call it this way: CUT-OUT FORGERY?
|
|
|
Jeff
Super Administrator
Posts: 750
Registered: 10/18/2002
Location: Herndon, Virginia
Member Is Offline
Mood: It's developing...
|
|
Great idea
A comparison of real versus fake is always warrented. When you get a picture of a forgery, you often wonder what the real McCoy looks like. Some of
the RSFSR threads have comparisons of real vs fake.
As for your question: Can we call it this way: CUT-OUT FORGERY?
Call it what you want! But make it descriptive, informative so that when someone reads the description, they KNOW what they are going to look at.
Cheers,
Jeff
|
|
|
Rusalka
DownUnder
Posts: 225
Registered: 2/25/2003
Location: Canberra, Australia
Member Is Offline
Mood: Usually Content
|
|
Cut out but from where?
The term "cut-out" is very broad. From what has the item been cut out is one question which should be considered as well?
(1) Has the re-engineered stamp been clipped to make it appear imperf, sadly a common practice seen with the Zeppelin sets?
(2) Was the stamp "cut out" from a M/S?
(3) Was the stamp trimmed to make it appear to be a # 1 (as an example)?
(4) Was the stamp "cut out" from a catalogue and gummed or freshly printed and cut to the appropriate size in a back yard operation?
(5) Was the stamp copied and then cut and re-touched in any way to make it appear to show a printing flaw?
All these examples are not only attempts at forgery but also an exercise in deception.
|
|
|
![[*]](./images/samovar/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
