Quote:
Originally Posted by steve B
Now that's interesting.
I haven't looked at all of mine, but have noticed differing glossiness between some of them. Maybe it's time to have a closer look. I know some that I have looked at are on coated stock, not so much to make it glossy, but I think more to make the colors stand out. On those, the fronts uner the magnifier don't really show any fibers, but the backs show them just like all the others.
Sounds like a task for next week, I'm getting stuff ready for my stamp clubs show on Saturday. Filling prize draw envelopes with stamps (20 for 25 cents, makes it not a lottery or raffle.) doing 400 plus getting 40 prizes ready and numbered takes a while.
On the plus side, giving the bunch of T206s a much closer look is long overdue.
|
Hey Steve, have fun at the stamp show.
I don't think you would see the glossy layer unless you're looking at the card under a lighted magnifier except maybe the ones like the Beckley I posted. Most of them you have to tilt just right to see the gloss.
Cards like this Rhoades that are or appear to be a factory print oddity intrigue me.
A couple of people seem to think it was traced on somehow but I'm pretty sure it's under the back printing and I can't see how that could be done by tracing it.
On the Pirate back Chris posted you can see it's on top of the back printing but the Rhoades is under the back printing unless there's a way for it to bleed through from the front without it getting through the back printing.
[IMG]
[/IMG]
[IMG]
[/IMG]
If it is factory there would have been others like this on the sheet and maybe another example will show up like this Mitchell print mark that was printed on several sheets.
If I did a survey of people that haven't seen me post this before I think 100% would say this is a post factory mark
[IMG]
[/IMG]
but I have two of these in my collection and a scan of another one.
[IMG]
[/IMG]
[IMG]
[/IMG]