Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Scott notes that forgeries are plentiful. Are there any tell-tale signs to look for on these two stamps?
Thanks, Dave.
Login to Like
this post
Hi Dave,
I think these two are ok but the images aren't very sharp.
I've not checked mine before but using Bynof-Smith as a reference (a general forgery guide) I seem to have a genuine mint set and very nicely cancelled "used" set of forgeries.
In my forgeries the dates at the top are smaller and to my eyes the figure "8" has a different shape.
There are other differences but they really need a sharper scan to be clear.
These differences involve the shape of the ornaments at the middle left, the form of the letters "A" in the text at the left, the detail on the outstretched hand of the fallen soldier etc.
Maybe someone more experienced with this issue could confirm or correct what I've written?
Login to Like
this post
There are two types of forgeries of this issue. In both types of forgeries, look at the year date "1902" in the upper right corner of the stamp. If the foot of the number "2" touches the frame line, it is a forgery. In the genuine stamps the foot of the numeral does not touch the frame line.
Login to Like
this post
Thanks Nigel & Michael.
Here's a closeup with higher resolution and some colour adjustments. Neither of the feet of the 2 touch the frame, which is good. But it is certainly closer on #70 (top image) than #71 (bottom).
Interestingly on #70 the numbers are thicker, the top of the 2 is tilted more into the 0, and the foot is more curved than flat.
Login to Like
this post
Hi Dave and Michael,
Here is the same corner from my three forgeries scanned first at at 300 dpi then 2400 dpi:
.. 
..
and a scan of the complete stamps with two different cancels:
Login to Like
this post
Assuming the copies I have are legit another noticeable difference is seen in the scroll that surrounds the year-date. On the forgeries there is a clear break between the vertical lines and the “coat-hanger” shape on top.
Cheers, Dave
Login to Like
this post
Dave, I think your two are genuine. I also think that the 5 ct (red) stamp looks like a heavy inking.
Login to Like
this post
Thanks Michael.
I agree that the red stamp features look thicker because of a "heavy inking".
The paper is very flimsy and seems porous. And the printing reminds me of days as a kid in the 1960s doing silkscreens. Is there a similar process for printing stamps? If so, that would lend further credence to your observation.
Another thing that struck me is the odd tilt on the "2". I wonder if the "190" was printed first and the "2" on a second pass - perhaps to leave it open for issues in 1903, 1904, etc? I quickly looked for such info but did not find anything useful.
Thanks for all the great responses Michael & Nigel.
Cheers, Dave.
Login to Like
this post
The always informative 1840-1940 Big Blue blog has an excellent article regarding this issue, along with some history. It has illustrations of genuine and forged examples with many distinguishing features between the two.
http://bigblue1840-1940.blogspot.com/2015/03/bulgaria-1902-battle-of-shipka-pass.html
-Les
Login to Like
this post
Wow Les, thanks for that link.
VERY interesting (the history especially as I collect WWI and WWII issues and like to get the "deep" background of previous wars, disputes, and political forces that lead to new countries, shifts of territories between countries, etc).
I've bookmarked Big Blue as I suspect there may be a wealth of great info there.
Cheers, Dave.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
These are Scott #70-71 (issued 1902 for those using Michel).
Scott notes that forgeries are plentiful. Are there any tell-tale signs to look for on these two stamps?
Thanks, Dave.
Login to Like
this post
re: Bulgaria - Possible Forgeries - How To Tell?
Hi Dave,
I think these two are ok but the images aren't very sharp.
I've not checked mine before but using Bynof-Smith as a reference (a general forgery guide) I seem to have a genuine mint set and very nicely cancelled "used" set of forgeries.
In my forgeries the dates at the top are smaller and to my eyes the figure "8" has a different shape.
There are other differences but they really need a sharper scan to be clear.
These differences involve the shape of the ornaments at the middle left, the form of the letters "A" in the text at the left, the detail on the outstretched hand of the fallen soldier etc.
Maybe someone more experienced with this issue could confirm or correct what I've written?
Login to Like
this post
re: Bulgaria - Possible Forgeries - How To Tell?
There are two types of forgeries of this issue. In both types of forgeries, look at the year date "1902" in the upper right corner of the stamp. If the foot of the number "2" touches the frame line, it is a forgery. In the genuine stamps the foot of the numeral does not touch the frame line.
Login to Like
this post
re: Bulgaria - Possible Forgeries - How To Tell?
Thanks Nigel & Michael.
Here's a closeup with higher resolution and some colour adjustments. Neither of the feet of the 2 touch the frame, which is good. But it is certainly closer on #70 (top image) than #71 (bottom).
Interestingly on #70 the numbers are thicker, the top of the 2 is tilted more into the 0, and the foot is more curved than flat.
Login to Like
this post
re: Bulgaria - Possible Forgeries - How To Tell?
Hi Dave and Michael,
Here is the same corner from my three forgeries scanned first at at 300 dpi then 2400 dpi:
.. ..
and a scan of the complete stamps with two different cancels:
Login to Like
this post
re: Bulgaria - Possible Forgeries - How To Tell?
Assuming the copies I have are legit another noticeable difference is seen in the scroll that surrounds the year-date. On the forgeries there is a clear break between the vertical lines and the “coat-hanger” shape on top.
Cheers, Dave
Login to Like
this post
re: Bulgaria - Possible Forgeries - How To Tell?
Dave, I think your two are genuine. I also think that the 5 ct (red) stamp looks like a heavy inking.
Login to Like
this post
re: Bulgaria - Possible Forgeries - How To Tell?
Thanks Michael.
I agree that the red stamp features look thicker because of a "heavy inking".
The paper is very flimsy and seems porous. And the printing reminds me of days as a kid in the 1960s doing silkscreens. Is there a similar process for printing stamps? If so, that would lend further credence to your observation.
Another thing that struck me is the odd tilt on the "2". I wonder if the "190" was printed first and the "2" on a second pass - perhaps to leave it open for issues in 1903, 1904, etc? I quickly looked for such info but did not find anything useful.
Thanks for all the great responses Michael & Nigel.
Cheers, Dave.
Login to Like
this post
04:32:40pm
re: Bulgaria - Possible Forgeries - How To Tell?
The always informative 1840-1940 Big Blue blog has an excellent article regarding this issue, along with some history. It has illustrations of genuine and forged examples with many distinguishing features between the two.
http://bigblue1840-1940.blogspot.com/2015/03/bulgaria-1902-battle-of-shipka-pass.html
-Les
Login to Like
this post
re: Bulgaria - Possible Forgeries - How To Tell?
Wow Les, thanks for that link.
VERY interesting (the history especially as I collect WWI and WWII issues and like to get the "deep" background of previous wars, disputes, and political forces that lead to new countries, shifts of territories between countries, etc).
I've bookmarked Big Blue as I suspect there may be a wealth of great info there.
Cheers, Dave.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.