Some weeks ago I found the stamp to the left in the scan in a small lot. I was puzzled by the missing dot after POSTFRIM; which reminded me of the 8 ๘re OM.1. So, let's try to plate the stamp: print 21, bottom row.
A look at the full sheet of the postal museum, and there it is: position 98!
Another look in LN, pg. 474, for confirmation: yes it has RM.5D, partly hidden under the cancellation. But it also should have OF.2.5 ?! A closer look at the stamp, well I had overlooked the small colourfilling between ovalline and oval in west.
So the next question: is the missing dot a constant flaw and additional sign for OF.2.5 or only accidental in this print? Therefore I checked all the sheets of the postal museum, with the following result: The dot was missing on 3๘13 pos.99, 3๘21 pos.98, 3๘24 pos.65, 3๘26 pos.27 and 3๘27 pos.27. The dot was visible (but only very weak!) on 3๘10 pos.15, 3๘12 pos.58, 3๘14 pos.11, 3๘15 pos.21, 3๘19 pos.65, 3๘20 pos.94, and 3๘28 pos.27.
Conclusion: the missing dot is just an additional +/- sign for OF.2.5
Anyhow I was lucky to get the second stamp (it's 3๘15 pos.21) just after Christmas as addition to my collection.
Another story tells the stamp to the right in the scan: also a (almost) missing dot, but 3๘28 pos.100 does not have OF.2.5. But a final check of the postal museum's sheets showed the missing dot on 3๘26, 3๘27 and 3๘28 (all three prints with the same ovalsetting!) pos.100.
Any additions to my observations are welcome!
Bernd Stein, 12.01.2007
Bernd Stein, 12.01.2007
