Iain -- your theory works fine - in theory
'ROSTAGE' etc, we know is from a set position in the stamp pane.
it will have a set unit of the gang of 12 large OS perfins punch it.
HOWEVER the PCNZA screamed at me above, that "no-one" knows if those 12 pin positions ever changed, them included, when I suggested the obvious simplicity
of using that system to certify the double perf below. "Yes or No as genuine."
say neither OS perfin matches their "12 Apostles" or any they have ever seen, and that both perfins differ from each other. But STILL
can't declare it as fake or genuine, even saying that! The absolute wrong position to take, if you state you can accurately expertise perfins from photos.
Arthur Gray, Chris Ceremuga, Dr. Geoff Kellow, FRPSL, Glen Stephens and Rodney Perry and others all felt this stamp below was OK. PCNZA say they collectively have absolutely no idea. Hmmmmm. Speaks volumes really.
PCNZA said these 2 perfins did not match their "12 Apostles". And I posted, that surely meant it could then
be branded a fake perfin. (Which as I stated at onset, I did not
feel it was, for several excellent reasons.) It had to be either fake or genuine - not half pregnant.
Then I was pounced on from all sides there by PCNZA, and called an ignorant tosser
etc, which translated, means they have no absolutely idea what occurred, with even large OS perfins, and shooting the messenger was the policy preferred adopted, to cover this very serious vacuum in their knowledge.
So Iain, no-one can be CERTAIN these days. NO-ONE has an opinion that is The Gold Standard on OS perfins.
Provenance is important as always. I do not always agree with Chris Ceremuga's views on all things philatelic, and I am sure he does not always agree with mine, which is healthy, but I am sure we mostly
take very similar positions, and it is obvious we both as here, do not agree with PCNZA re this stamp in discussion is completely genuine, and clearly so.
Many of us with decades in the trade can dismiss as OUTRIGHT fakes many
items, using varying tests and long experience, that the average collector has no idea about. But some stamps, even multiples, are in Limbo.
Multiples do assist of course, and again provenance. I bought stockbooks of OS Kangaroo and KGV perfs from Harmers of Sydney in the late 1970s from the massive and extremely valuable H. F. McNess collection, untouched since WW2. McNess had a liking for them, and amassed the largest holding then known, in an era where they were worth peanuts mostly. I bought them PT as one massive lot. I still have much of that here, and it is my view none
of those are forged due to that PROVENANCE, and as the faking essentially commenced in the 1980's when Seven Seas make album pages for them, and later on SG listed them.
Moving on from that torrent of personal abuse, oddly, none of the PCNZA "Experts" has commented on this block below that I posted.
Clearly stamp 60 here, if later perfinned large OS SHOULD
bear perfin pattern number 6 or 12 from the "gang of 12 Apostles". But it will not
, most likely, as stamp 60 was PO selvedge pasted into position from somewhere from another sheet.
So in ISOLATION as a single
, it will appear "forged" which it clearly would not be. Again PERSONAL EXAMINATION of the stamp is important. The small pieces of selvedge paste up pieces on reverse for instance are key in such cases. You cannot
see those from a facial photo.
Expertising perfins for a fee, without physically inspecting them, is Voodoo Science, and is simply Amateur Hour stuff. One can SEE many
things on a perfin under very close physical
examination that helps verify it - or not.
Such messed up paste-up wrecks was WHAT
Cooke mostly destined for official perfins, so your theory works fine - in theory!
So if PCNZA clearly have zero idea whatever on the short lived Large OS punctures, as to whether any are genuine perfins or not, they clearly have less than zero accurate clue on small OS perfins which covered several decades on Roos.
PCNZA do very good work I had always thought, and I have in the past very actively supported their efforts, until the weird events and hysterical personal abuse and manic rants on this thread - rather than calmly addressing the question, and I had always assumed they had good systems in place.
As PSNZA Committee Member David Coath
has seen above, such rants are not edited or removed here, but stand as clear testimony to the foolishness and childishness of using personal abuse to try and de-rail serious discussions. His foolish actions have set back the good work and standing of PCNZA by about 10 years I'd suggest.
I have personally done FAR more work than ANY
stamp dealer in this country to combat forged OS perfins being offered. Indeed expended more effort than all the other stamp dealers here combined
most likely, continually via this board for over a decade, and global stamp columns for 30 years, and direct contact with ebay etc, to have many of the faker's accounts wiped. And PCNZA of course work to that end too. My reward for those many 100 of hours of work to protect THEIR collections, is to be labelled an ignorant tosser
by a PCNZA Executive, and so be it - I have VERY broad shoulders.
Getting back to Iain's question - the reality is this kind of thing occurred pretty often -
Global Administrator wrote:
David Benson wrote:
The other way of proving it as genuine (or not) would be plate the stamp and the position of the punched OS. if they match, most probably OK but if not, then fake.
That should work, and the Greg Pope handbook would allow that.
The badly positioned OS will be the original
one, and the better placed one done afterwards as Rod surmised. And as being an apparent ready repair might have a different position placement.
However we oddly have been assured
by PCNZA that NEITHER perfin matched their lists, and which lists they agree are not conclusive or consistent in any way. Maybe. They seem unsure.
"Knowledge is Power"
and those less familiar with this issue, will not realise things like this below were sold to the public during WWI at face.
I bought this amazing Monogram block from Arthur Gray auction, and sold it to Peter Schoer, and his Estate sold it back, and it quickly found a new home, and that person sold it back, and I placed it again to a member here.
There were 3 or 4 disparate blocks/strips of 1d from all over the sheet, crudely patched together here with PO repair selvedge tape, as clearly it had been double perfed and ample evidence of that is at base. THIS kind of ugly thing Cooke mostly ordered placed aside to be perfinned OS, so plating these
in OS perfinned, would be a total
waste of time to prove any point.