Share your Australian Decimal Stamp Flaws (ACSC listed or not)

castores · Post by **castores** » 20 Jun 2020 18:35

I've started having a look at my Australian decimal stamps and pulling out those that have a flaw listed in ACSC (or not) and thought I may as well share the journey.

Note: ACSC cat. number used throughout.

First off the rank, the 5c Yellow-Tailed Thornbill issued 14 February 1966.

448e: Two green dots under "5c"

448f: White dot over last "L"of "THORNBILL"

Unlisted: Green dot over "E" of "YELLOW" & brown dot in wattle below "O" of "YELLOW"

castores · Post by **castores** » 20 Jun 2020 18:41

7c Humbug Fish issued 14 February 1966

450d: Retouch adjoining left frame at top edge of coral

castores · Post by **castores** » 20 Jun 2020 18:54

10c Anemone Fish issued 14 February 1966

453d: Blue flaw in "rock" over "LI" of "AUSTRALIA"

Unlisted: White spot top right corner

castores · Post by **castores** » 20 Jun 2020 19:03

15c Galah issued 14 February 1966

455 Unlisted: Retouch upper left of galah's head

castores · Post by **castores** » 21 Jun 2020 15:00

40c Abel Tasman issued 14 February 1966

460 Unlisted: Diagonal lines off "c" of "40c"

460 Unlisted: Blue dot above "c" of "40c"

castores · Post by **castores** » 21 Jun 2020 15:07

3c Queen Elizabeth II coil issued 14 February 1966

467 Unlisted: Retouch top right corner

castores · Post by **castores** » 21 Jun 2020 15:10

5c Queen Elizabeth II coil

469 Unlisted: Fawn colour slightly shifted up & vertical line on right

castores · Post by **castores** » 21 Jun 2020 15:14

4c 75th Anniversary of Royal Life Saving Society issued 6 July 1966

470 Unlisted: Swimmer's lower foot and leg joined & line extending up through top leg

castores · Post by **castores** » 21 Jun 2020 15:17

4c 1966 Christmas issued 19 October 1966

471 Unlisted: White area bottom left corner

Global Administrator · Post by **Global Administrator** » 21 Jun 2020 15:32

castores wrote: ↑
21 Jun 2020 15:17
4c 1966 Christmas issued 19 October 1966

471 Unlisted: White area bottom left corner

Unlisted because it is clearly not a printing flaw!

Hold these sort of alleged flaw to a strong LED light and it will be evident they are simply surface abrasions or scrapes in the mail stream etc.

castores · Post by **castores** » 21 Jun 2020 15:36

Thanks Glen, I suppose I didn't mean it as a flaw as such but of interest (to me at least), but I just tend to write the same word next to all. I expect some I post won't really meet the "flaw" word.

In that respect I shouldn't have posted the Royal Life Saving one either.... and the foot join is such a flyspeck.

But, yes, I wrote it so that's what it would be read as. I will attempt to be more conservative in my use of the word and (hopefully) not post them in future.

Global Administrator · Post by **Global Administrator** » 21 Jun 2020 15:42

Yes many of them are printing flaws.

Some get listed in cats, and some do not.

But random obvious surface scrapes and abrasions never will be. You could make 100 in the next hour on spares with a Stanley blade!

castores · Post by **castores** » 21 Jun 2020 15:49

4c 150th Anniversary of Bible Society issued 7 March 1967

This one will meet with approval at least.

473e: "Dark hands"

castores · Post by **castores** » 21 Jun 2020 15:53

4c 5th World Congress of Gynaecology and Obstetrics issued 21 August 1967

477 Unlisted: Retouch to head on right

castores · Post by **castores** » 22 Jun 2020 18:59

2c Sturt's Desert Rose issued June 1973

530m: Red dot on flower at lower right

castores · Post by **castores** » 22 Jun 2020 19:01

10c Sturt's Desert Pea issued 15 January 1975

537d: Broken leaf stem at top centre

castores · Post by **castores** » 22 Jun 2020 19:05

20c Australian participation in Expo 70, Osaka, Japan issued 16 March 1970

518e: Right downstroke of "R" of "AUSTRALIA" extended

castores · Post by **castores** » 22 Jun 2020 19:10

12c Animal Science (Animal Series) issued 5 July 1971

560 Unlisted: White diagonal line on jacket & partial 'coathanger' in front of lamb

castores · Post by **castores** » 22 Jun 2020 19:12

24c Animals aid to man (Animal Series) issued 5 July 1971

562i: Black v-shaped flaw on lad's knee at left

Rigs · Post by **Rigs** » 22 Jun 2020 19:14

These look like damaged stamps, not retouches or flaws?

castores · Post by **castores** » 22 Jun 2020 19:17

Rigs wrote: ↑
22 Jun 2020 19:14
These look like damaged stamps, not retouches or flaws?

Hi Rigs, this is ACSC 562i whether 'we' like it or not

The other markings are all the result of the postmark.

Rigs · Post by **Rigs** » 22 Jun 2020 19:34

castores wrote: ↑
22 Jun 2020 19:17

Rigs wrote: ↑
22 Jun 2020 19:14
These look like damaged stamps, not retouches or flaws?
Hi Rigs, this is ACSC 562i whether 'we' like it or not

Fair enough, I’ll make sure I got my microscope handy next time to better appreciate the stuff you get excited about ...

castores · Post by **castores** » 22 Jun 2020 19:38

Rigs wrote: ↑
22 Jun 2020 19:34

castores wrote: ↑
22 Jun 2020 19:17

Rigs wrote: ↑
22 Jun 2020 19:14
These look like damaged stamps, not retouches or flaws?
Hi Rigs, this is ACSC 562i whether 'we' like it or not
Fair enough, I’ll make sure I got my microscope handy next time to better appreciate the stuff you get excited about ...

A bit uncalled for Rigs, write and tell Brusden White not to include then.

I am very confused why my showing "listed" (as that one is) flaws that are recognised as flaws would have such an affect on someone. Especially someone who appreciates stamps. So confused....

I just thought people who don't have the edition might appreciate seeing the ACSC flaws (that I can show).
Not to mention I enjoy showing them.

You don't have to check the thread if you don't want (much like TV, if you don't like what's on).

Rigs · Post by **Rigs** » 22 Jun 2020 19:52

It’s just a sloppy thread champ.

Flaws mixed in with damaged stamps, or anythIng you can find.

Why not supply clean scans where you have bothered to extract it from your album?

Or straighten them before posting?

This site deserves it.

castores · Post by **castores** » 22 Jun 2020 20:06

Rigs wrote: ↑
22 Jun 2020 19:52
It’s just a sloppy thread champ.

I'm starting to wonder if you follow me on BBC cricket forums? Just a thought...

Flaws mixed in with damaged stamps, or anythIng you can find.

The majority are "listed" Rigs.

Why not supply clean scans where you have bothered to extract it from your album?

These are obviously the best stamps I can provide Rigs.

Or straighten them before posting?

The majority are straight Rigs and I have noticed this and am paying attention to straightening, I apologise if I miss some in the future (I can't edit previous posts as you well know).

This site deserves it.

Yes, and hopefully someone will be moved to update my thread with better examples.

Really Rigs, the question is, in what way have I offended you? Because your comments aren't so much constructive as slightly abusive.

Global Administrator · Post by **Global Administrator** » 22 Jun 2020 20:13

.
Well the great thing is about stamps, those with good eyes can see a lot more than those with eyes like mine.

We have threads here with 1d Red KGV heads flaws all blown up 20 times, that I can barely see even then - see below.

Those that collect KGV heads love them so no harm done, and those that collect Bermuda or Samoa, do not click on those threads. Simple.

Many are ACSC listed and many Decimal flaws are ACSC listed that I'd miss, so does not hurt to show them here.

Others might well have some to add? Keep them coming - that is how this board works.

Glen

Folks really can see thism same sizem with the naked eye!

castores · Post by **castores** » 22 Jun 2020 20:42

Global Administrator wrote: ↑
22 Jun 2020 20:13
Many are ACSC listed and many Decimal flaws are ACSC listed that I'd miss, so does not hurt to show them here.

Others might well have some to add? Keep them coming - that is how this board works.

Glen
.

Well, thanks Glen. I was in the middle of making my last post on this thread as it really seemed it wasn't appreciated for what I was attempting to do. And really I was done with it.

So thanks for the words of encouragement AND please people if you can update my images with better examples or add other flaws, listed or of interest - go for it.

For Rigs, I was in the middle of the following (last post):

A clean muh bottom right lower corner block with no distinguishing features to the margins. It is shown to you here today in a (close as I can get it) straightened, squared off, vertically aligned image. I apologise as it is another tiny little speck of a flaw that BW has lowered themselves to include.

The example is that of the the 18c Famous Australian Aviator, Charles Ulm issued in 1978 and is listed as 793d: Blue dot on engine of lower plane.

Note: As I was only up to early '70s I hadn't got to any 'nice' stamps to show.

MarkM · Post by **MarkM** » 22 Jun 2020 20:45

I might be saying anything, but I am enjoying this thread. And I agree with Glen that my eyes would be struggling with some of what you are showing.

castores · Post by **castores** » 22 Jun 2020 20:51

MarkM wrote: ↑
22 Jun 2020 20:45
I might be saying anything, but I am enjoying this thread. And I agree with Glen that my eyes would be struggling with some of what you are showing.

Thanks Mark, hopefully you mean the stamps I have shown.

And I have to say it if it wasn't for scanners I certainly wouldn't be finding any of these!

My eyes are as old as me

And my avatar just got updated to current feelings.

Lakatoi 4 · Post by **Lakatoi 4** » 22 Jun 2020 22:36

castores, you will need to show that there are more examples of any of the flaws you’ve shown here otherwise they could be considered as simply transient flaws.

castores · Post by **castores** » 22 Jun 2020 22:51

Lakatoi 4 wrote: ↑
22 Jun 2020 22:36
castores, you will need to show that there are more examples of any of the flaws you’ve shown here otherwise they could be considered as simply transient flaws.

Hi Lakatoi 4 (Lakatoi - nice stamps), I'm not suggesting my 'stamps of interest' written here as "unlisted" are anything. Unlisted means they are unlisted, whether transient or not.

I recognise anything with only one example is 99% transient. Maybe you or someone else might say "hey, I have that" Now its not transient.

Maybe, like Glen, you'll point out something that is clearly a piece of crab and I will be thankful for it, we all learn.

As per a post earlier, I welcome any better examples of stamps listed and anything of interest. I will amend future posts of "unlisted" (on this thread if I bother) as "possible transient, possible constant, possible oddity, possible postal machinery, possible sunlight, possible chemical treatment, possible 11th dimension transitional".

I do appreciate your input.

Please note, I am but a trainee.

Edit:

I think this stamp is worth showing on StampBoards, if anything it resulted in responses as to how it can occur and how one of my stamps could occur. I hope The Pom is okay with me showing it here.

castores · Post by **castores** » 22 Jun 2020 23:30

5c Pioneer Society (1972 Pioneer Life Definitives) issued 15 November 1972

606:

possible transient, possible constant, possible oddity, possible postal sorting machinery, possible sunlight, possible chemical treatment, possible 11th dimension transitional

Thanks to another thread showing how (possibly) postal sorting machines can catch and affect a stamp, I guess this is one of those.

castores · Post by **castores** » 22 Jun 2020 23:49

Glen wrote:

We have threads here with 1d Red KGV heads flaws

And yes Glen, I will be a sucker for those

If I'm not mistaken (one of) the very first stamp/s I posted was, what I considered, a mess. I didn't even understand flaws. That stamp is probably the most expensive stamp I have (should I have not posted it?).

die II sub-cliche NWPI overprint:

complete wattle line, one member told me they thought it was the best example they had seen

Pale-rose? Pale-crimson? (compared to the above... and that would make the above?)

Back to the reason for the post, not all will be as such but if you don't post the image how will you ever know?

In the context of this post I hope everyone understands the reason for showing pre-decimals here.

castores · Post by **castores** » 23 Jun 2020 00:21

Nothing wrong with your eyes Glen, better than mine for sure

Global Administrator · Post by **Global Administrator** » 23 Jun 2020 00:33

Yes here it is, the same size as the stamp.

I just selected it as the KGV nuts are going into delirium over such stuff this week.

I can barely see the large circles - forget about the gnat specks they are highlighting.

Does my head in .. but whatever floats anyone's boat!

castores · Post by **castores** » 23 Jun 2020 00:39

Global Administrator wrote: ↑
23 Jun 2020 00:33
Yes here it is same size as stamp.

I just selected it as the KGV nuts are going into delirium over such stuff this week.

Does my head in .. but whatever floats anyone's boat!

I am so excited!!!!

No I'm not

But as anyone should know I like the flaws

Considering the time, the lack of inks, paper, control, I understand the mess the KG Vs got into and I am going to (unfortunately for my wallet) get into them at some point. Not sure the example you gave is first on the list

Edit:

I just saw the little black circles

castores · Post by **castores** » 23 Jun 2020 00:48

Glen wrote:

I just selected it as the KGV nuts

But its only a bust!
.....well, head.....

castores · Post by **castores** » 04 Jul 2020 09:24

I'll come back to my earlier years of rather crappy examples, so this thread is no longer in order.

I have never looked at these until now. Rather surprised that out of 7 stamps from the set I've ended up with varieties on 4. These come from 7 x blocks of 20.

1972 Pioneer Life

5c Society
ACSC 606d retouch over "U" of "AUSTRALIA" and dent in oval at top

ACSC 606f retouch in grey left of "5c"

10c Water
ACSC 609ea white flaw adjoining top of pump - retouched:

15c Food
ACSC 611d weak "LIA" of "AUSTRALIA"

80c Commerce
ACSC 618d retouch under bow of ship

ACSC 618f retouch left of "80c"

ACSC 618g retouch in lower left corner below "Pio" of "Pioneer"

Does anyone have views as to whether I should split some up, for example, the 5c could be broken into 2 x 4 blocks for both varieties and forget about the middle? They would actually fit into hagners where at the moment they don't.

Anita · Post by **Anita** » 04 Jul 2020 10:07

Thanks for the thread castores

Sometimes the pics in the ACSC can be really unclear. It always helps to have additional images to refer to when trying to figure out if you have a listed variety or not.

While some of your images do appear to be surface damage, I also think it's really helpful to show unlisted flaws as well. That's one of the few ways to discover new varieties - when someone else says "hey, I have one like that too". Like the discovery of the Dirk Hartog island roo variety

I recently acquired this 75c Cook stamp (the upper stamp) that has a large pale area in the top left corner. It appears to be a genuine printing anomaly rather than damage. I'd love to know if anyone else has the same flaw. I've put the normal stamp underneath.

(Sorry, should have added that these are both BW# 462.)

castores · Post by **castores** » 04 Jul 2020 10:14

Anita wrote: ↑
04 Jul 2020 10:07
Thanks for the thread castores Sometimes the pics in the ACSC can be really unclear. It always helps to have additional images to refer to when trying to figure out if you have a listed variety or not.

While some of your images do appear to be surface damage, I also think it's really helpful to show unlisted flaws as well. That's one of the few ways to discover new varieties - when someone else says "hey, I have one like that too". Like the discovery of the Dirk Hartog island roo variety

I recently acquired this 75c Cook stamp (the upper stamp) that has a large pale area in the top left corner. It appears to be a genuine printing anomaly rather than damage. I'd love to know if anyone else has the same flaw. I've put the normal stamp underneath.

(Sorry, should have added that these are both BW# 462.)

That's really nice Anita!

My Cook's are standard

And them's the words: "hey, I have one like that too"

Thanks for adding to the thread.

In respect to the ACSC pictures: some are atrocious!

Peter

Rigs · Post by **Rigs** » 04 Jul 2020 10:35

castores wrote: ↑
04 Jul 2020 09:24
Rather surprised that out of 7 stamps from the set I've ended up with varieties on 4.

Castores, you assert they are varieties.

May I suggest all the stamps in this particular Pioneer Life post exhibit surface damage/abrasion?

Anita · Post by **Anita** » 04 Jul 2020 10:38

I've got an example here of the 7c Humbug Fish with retouch adjoining left frame at top edge of coral (BW# 450d). It seems to need both the pale patch plus the dark dot.

castores · Post by **castores** » 04 Jul 2020 10:52

1974 Marsupial definitives

75c Feather-Tailed Glider
ACSC 663f horizontal green line through leaf at left
I've added the block to show off the autotron

castores · Post by **castores** » 04 Jul 2020 10:53

Rigs wrote: ↑
04 Jul 2020 10:35

castores wrote: ↑
04 Jul 2020 09:24
Rather surprised that out of 7 stamps from the set I've ended up with varieties on 4.
Castores, you assert they are varieties.

May I suggest all the stamps in this particular Pioneer Life post exhibit surface damage/abrasion?

What are you basing your assertions on?

I've listed the ACSC number and if you really like (though it's not good for the book) I'll scan the Brusden White picture. Do you have a copy yourself?

But of course you can send me a few $s for any damage if you like

PS. My pics are better than BWs.

castores · Post by **castores** » 04 Jul 2020 10:54

Anita wrote: ↑
04 Jul 2020 10:38
I've got an example here of the 7c Humbug Fish with retouch adjoining left frame at top edge of coral (BW# 450d). It seems to need both the pale patch plus the dark dot.

It's a better example than mine!

Thanks Anita, keep them coming.

And anyone else, follow Anita's example and provide a better image... those I haven't shown... your own oddity... go for it.

Often I have only 1 or 3 stamps and I find a variety, have a good look at your stamps - having 4 doesn't mean you won't find anything.

castores · Post by **castores** » 04 Jul 2020 11:36

Anita wrote: ↑
04 Jul 2020 10:07
Like the discovery of the Dirk Hartog island roo variety

Do you have it? I don't know of it but I assume what you're saying is that it resulted from a 'transitional' posting?

Anita · Post by **Anita** » 04 Jul 2020 12:16

Josto, here on Stampboards, discovered the Dirk Hartog Island flaw on the orange 4d roo (the orange mark off the West Australian coast):

josto wrote: ↑
02 Aug 2008 22:49
Hi!

Does anyone know about this flaw! A few month ago I found a 4d roo with an inking flaw at western australia coast that I thought to be a kind of flyspeck but now I found a second one with the same flaw! Does anyone know this flaw? Is it a kind of constant flaw?

Thanks

Then more and more people came forward with their own examples. It's now a listed ACSC variety. You can go back through the "Flaws on Aust Kangaroo stamps? Help from the experts please!" thread to see the discovery evolve. It's really

I don't have that variety myself, but it's definitely on my wish list!

castores · Post by **castores** » 04 Jul 2020 12:20

Anita wrote: ↑
04 Jul 2020 12:16
Josto, here on Stampboards, discovered the Dirk Hartog Island flaw on the orange 4d roo (the orange mark off the West Australian coast):

josto wrote: ↑
02 Aug 2008 22:49
Hi!

Does anyone know about this flaw! A few month ago I found a 4d roo with an inking flaw at western australia coast that I thought to be a kind of flyspeck but now I found a second one with the same flaw! Does anyone know this flaw? Is it a kind of constant flaw?

Thanks
Then more and more people came forward with their own examples. It's now a listed ACSC variety. You can go back through the "Flaws on Aust Kangaroo stamps? Help from the experts please!" thread to see the discovery evolve. It's really

I don't have that variety myself, but it's definitely on my wish list!

Blown Away!

Thanks for responding...

Well done Josto!

It's on my list too! (but that's a list I just actually haven't even started writing).

Anita · Post by **Anita** » 04 Jul 2020 12:28

I also have examples of your 80c Pioneer ship varieties:

BW# 618f retouch left of "80c"

And BW# 618g Retouch in lower left corner below "Pio" of "Pioneer"

Anita · Post by **Anita** » 04 Jul 2020 12:33

castores wrote: ↑
04 Jul 2020 12:20
It's on my list too! (but that's a list I just actually haven't even started writing).

I ACTUALLY have a list of the varieties I still want printed out so I can remember which ones to look out for when I'm at stamp fairs