[Archive]

Posted By: ali_lapoint

i'd like to see kevin's response as well. i respect his opinion and his work with alterations but i just don't see how any rational person, much less an expert, could conclude that the stamp is an underprint and penetrates so deep into the card that it remains after paper loss. if it is a true underprint some portion of it would have been removed when the paper was lost. i know of no such ink that will penetrate so deeply but not appear visible on the front of the card.