Photograph your local culture, help Wikipedia and win!Hide
\nContents hide
\n(Top)
\nThe process of expertisation
\nToggle The process of expertisation subsection
\nStamps
\nCovers
\nThe tools of expertisation
\nExpert certificates and marks
\nFinding experts
\nSee also
\nReferences
\nExternal links
\nPhilatelic expertisation<\/p>\n
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
\nFind sources: “Philatelic expertisation” \u2013 news \u00b7 newspapers \u00b7 books \u00b7 scholar \u00b7 JSTOR (June 2012) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)<\/p>\n
Expertization certificate issued in 2004 for a 1915 Russian 10 ruble postage stamp
\nPhilatelic expertisation is the process whereby an authority is asked to give an opinion whether a philatelic item is genuine and whether it has been repaired or altered in any way.<\/p>\n
Forging and faking, regumming and reperforating of stamps is common in the philatelic marketplace, and increasingly buyers demand an expert certificate before buying a valuable item. Some items are so often faked or altered that they may be almost unsaleable without a certificate.<\/p>\n
The process of expertisation
\nExperts may be individuals or committees but they will all follow a similar process to determine whether an item is genuine.[1] The opinions of experts differ and have evolved over time. Conflicting expert opinions, such as on colour shade or whether a stamp has been reperforated, can have a huge effect on a stamp’s value.[2]<\/p>\n
Stamps
\nExperts will attempt to determine whether a questioned stamp is a genuine example of a particular stamp issue; that is, whether it was printed at the same time from the same plate or stone as that stamp issue. Among the factors they may consider are:<\/p>\n
Is the stamp’s design identical to those of genuine ones? Forged stamps almost invariably differ to a greater or lesser degree from genuine ones.
\nIs the size of the stamp correct?
\nWas the stamp printed using the same printing method, e.g., lithography, engraving, etc.?
\nIs the paper identical to the paper used for genuine stamps? Is the thickness, color, and type of paper (laid or wove) correct?
\nDoes the stamp contain the correct watermark as do genuine ones?
\nAre the perforations correct, e.g., is the spacing of the perforations correct; are they of the same size, type, and shape as those on the genuine stamp?
\nIs the color of the stamp correct? Is it printed with the right inks? Some inks may react to ultraviolet light, for example.
\nDoes the stamp have the correct tagging?
\nDoes the stamp have the correct gum?
\nEven if the stamp was printed from the original plates or stone, is it a reprint made later, either officially or unofficially? There may be subtle differences in color, paper or design.
\nExperts also will ask whether the stamp been altered in any fashion:<\/p>\n
Has the color of the stamp been changed? This sometimes can be done chemically.
\nHave perforations been added or removed to make it appear imperforate or coil?
\nHas the design been changed in any fashion? Sometimes, the denomination on a common stamp from a series has been changed to a rare denomination.
\nHas an overprint been added or removed?
\nHas a cancellation been added or removed? If the stamp is cancelled, is the cancellation genuine and of the proper period for the stamp?
\nHas a grill been pressed out? Used grills of the US 1869 Pictorial Issue can be pressed out to appear to be 1875 re-issues.[2]
\nHave other changes been made? The common 4 annas bicolor stamp of India has been altered by cutting out the image of Queen Victoria and remounting it upside down, or by chemically erasing the image and reprinting it upside down, to make the stamp appear to be the rare invert.
\nExperts will also attempt to determine whether genuine stamps have been repaired or cleaned:<\/p>\n
Has a tear been mended?
\nHas a missing piece been restored?
\nHas a thin spot or hole in the paper been repaired?
\nHas the stamp been cleaned?
\nHas the stamp been regummed?
\nHave short or missing perforations been repaired?
\nHas a crease been repaired?
\nCovers
\nAmong the factors experts may consider for a cover are:<\/p>\n
The cover itself:
\nAre there any repairs to the cover
\nSealed tears
\nStains removed by bleaching
\nCutting down one side of the envelope to remove a torn edge where the envelope was opened
\nErased pencil marks written by earlier stamp collectors
\nIs the cover faked:
\nIs the paper from the time period when the cover went through the mail?
\nThe stamps on the cover:
\nAre the stamps genuine or forged?
\nAre the stamps correctly used? For example, using a stamp years after it is no longer valid for postage
\nHave the stamps been repaired (cleaned, bleached, reperforated)?
\nHave the stamps been removed from the cover and reglued to it? Usually done to identify rare varieties of the stamps
\nHave stamps been removed from the cover?
\nHave stamps been added to the cover which were not present when the cover passed through the mail? For example, adding a rarely used stamp to an existing cover to make an ordinary cover extremely valuable
\nHave the stamps been removed and replaced with different stamps? For example, removing a stamp in excellent condition and replacing it with one having damage to the back, giving that the damaged backside of the stamp will not be visible.
\nThe postal markings on the cover
\nAre the postal markings genuine?
\nAre the postal markings appropriate from the time period used?
\nHave extra faked postal markings been added to the cover to make it more valuable?
\nIs the ink genuine and from the time period used?
\nThe tools of expertisation
\nExperts will often maintain their own library of fakes and forgeries, and they also have access to the records of past genuine items that they have seen. They will usually have a large library of philatelic literature to refer to.<\/p>\n
Scientific equipment is essential, including:<\/p>\n
Binocular and comparison microscopes
\nPaper micrometers
\nUltraviolet and infrared energy sources
\nPhotometric colour determination equipment
\nX-ray fluorescence and spectro-photometry equipment.
\nCommon sense and above all, experience, are also vital.<\/p>\n
Expert certificates and marks<\/p>\n
Stamp expertisation mark of Alfred Forbin
\nOnce an item has been examined, the expert(s) will issue a certificate giving their findings which will include identification, genuineness or otherwise and comments about any alterations or unusual features. The certificate will normally feature a photograph of the item and be signed. It may also be embossed or have other security features. In the past it was common for experts to sign or add their mark to the back of stamps, however, this is nowadays uncommon as it is by some regarded as an undesired alteration. In Germany (BPP) it is still common practise to sign many items, but generally not the most valuable.<\/p>\n
There have been instances where expert certificates have themselves been faked [3] and in the “Bl\u00fcm Case”, a forger produced false expertizing marks that were applied to German colony stamps and others.[4]<\/p>\n
Finding experts
\nIn the United States, the Philatelic Foundation, American Philatelic Society and numerous specialized stamp collecting organizations have committees who will perform expertisation for a fee. In Great Britain The Royal Philatelic Society London has a renowned expert committee which is also the oldest in the world, and of equal fame is the BPA expert committee.[5] German experts usually belong to the Bund Philatelistischer Pr\u00fcfer (BPP). Specialized in their countries issues are e.g. the expert committees of NVPH (Netherlands), COMEX (Spain), Isphila (Turkey). – In addition, the International Association of Philatelic Experts (AIEP) is a worldwide organisation for independent stamp experts.<\/p>\n
The results of expertisation may be challenged, and in some cases further research has shown the genuineness of an item considered a forgery, or vice versa.<\/p>\n
Expertisation
\nPhilatelic fakes and forgeries
\nReferences
\nThe Expertizing Process. Archived 2012-02-24 at the Wayback Machine The Philatelic Foundation, 2012. Retrieved 8 June 2012. Archived here.
\nA Sharp Eye on collecting US Classics (Sharp Photography Publications, 2021) ASIN B091MBTGJ7 (read online)
\nJean-Fran\u00e7ois Brun, Out-Foxing the Fakers, American Philatelic Society, State College, Pennsylvania (1993), pp. 113-115.
\nThe Bl\u00fcm Case, 2006
\nBPA Expertising Ltd was originally set up by the “British Philatelic Association” which is now defunct and has been superseded by the “Association of British Philatelic Societies” (ABPS, http:\/\/www.abps.org.uk\/Home\/index.xalter). The current BPA Expertising Ltd has no connection with ABPS.
\nExternal links
\nAspects of Philatelic Expertising – Part I by Simon Dunkerley
\nFilatelia.fi list of philatelic experts (Includes more than 1700 experts, past and present, with their marks.)
\nCategory: Philatelic fakes and forgeries
\nThis page was last edited on 24 June 2023, at 00:30 (UTC).
\nText is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 4.0; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia\u00ae is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
\nPrivacy policyAbout WikipediaDisclaimersContact WikipediaCode of ConductDevelopersStatisticsCookie statementMobile viewWikimedia FoundationPowered by MediaWiki
\nToggle limited content width<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Photograph your local culture, help Wikipedia and win!Hide Contents hide (Top) The process of expertisation Toggle The process of expertisation subsection Stamps Covers The tools of expertisation Expert certificates and marks Finding experts See also References External links Philatelic expertisation This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations … <\/p>\n