Here's a list of all the notes I believe to possibly be errors. Please do no mistake me to be a pro at error note collecting. Please also try not to trash on me if you see something totally outrageous that doesn't at all resemble an error note. Just like you, I am on here to learn about this subject, I know very little about errors, and all these I have pulled out of general circulation. If any of you have any pricing ideas on the notes, I would appreciate that as well. Put it this way: What would you pay for it top? I am not trying to sell them, just trying to get an idea on the value. But still mainly, what I really want to know is are they error ntoes. So you guys be the judges: 1990 $100 H00355171A XF+ possible BEP strike error on face (I have seen this note with the exact same marking on it in a book once about paper money, since then I have not been able to find that book, or find a similar note to mine, that is why I believe it could be an error, otherwise I wouldn't). 1957 $1 STAR *07537419C CHCU possible misasligned print, "SERIES 1957" is adjusted slightly over to the left, as are the signatures. I have gone throught hundreds and hundreds of silver's, but I have never seen one like this, I am not sure if it is bad enough to be considered an actual 'error note'. In this picture, I have posted a similar note same series, prefix and suffix. The one on the top is normal and the one on the bottom is the one I think might be an error. 1999 $1 STAR E03049325* XF possible low ink error in left lower serial number. The last '2' and '5' of the serial number are sort of low on ink, they weren't inked on all the way. Believe me when I say, the photo does no justice at all for the note. Well thats it for now. Please give me your opinions. Thank you! Travis...
Over inking and under inking are very minor errors and carry minimal premiums. Unless a number or letter or detail is actually missing it really isn't worth much more than face. As for the misaligned notes, we'll have to wait for someone else.
Well reguardless of if its an error or not, it's still a 1999 $1 star note in pretty good condition so it does come with some premiums. The fact that the serial number is a little underinked, that might just be something extra maybe an extra dollar or two in preimums at the most. Either way, I'm going to hold onto it for a while, so Im not too worried about it carrying additional value yet.
I am unable to determine if the $100 note has a BEP error or a partial teller stamp. The under inking/over inking needs to be more dramatic to command a premium. Misaligned errors vary by denomination, degree of misalignment, and note condition. I'm no expert, it's just my observation.
I had been thinking the same on the partial teller stamp because it looks as if there's a letter within the portrait. As for the misalignment of the 1957 star note, I don't feel it's dramatic enough to be considered an error. Although you can plainly see it is slightly off it would be way better if the serial number was touching another part of the note. Keep digging through the notes, there's gold out there. Here's an example of a serious shift:
The best way to see the difference between a teller stamp and an overinking from the BEP is to look at the note under magnification, a microscope actually, if possible. I have been able to detect some fake errors that way and it also works for stamps from individuals and banks post BEP-production. As for your misalignment, it is very minimal, so it woould not command a high premium. maybe a dollar or two to the right collector, but other than that, not too much. It would hav to be a more dramatic shift of the thrid printing in order to see much more over face value. For the insufficient inking note, look at it under magnification as well. If it is from it being worn, you will be able to tell from the fibers surrounding the number. They will have more of a worn look as well.
I have a Sony Cybershot that has infrared (night vision) which I used to detect whether the printing is added later (such as a teller stamp). It shows up cleary.
I'm not going to comment on your $100... Not familiar with that type of defect. This appears to be be a minor error. When one feature touches another, as with this one, the series is barely touching the artwork, it's an error. The more pronounced, the more the bill is worth. In my opinion, this bill would command a slight premium. This is also a minor under-inking error. This bill would also command a small premium. My opinions are based on having examined over 100,000 bills over the past several years. Thanks, Doug
Maaaannnn boy would that be handy right about now. Would you mind me asking how much you paif for it or where you got it?
Wait my mistake... I misinterpreted what you wrote. You are speaking of a camera. At first thought I thought you were speaking of some kind of special device. No I have a nighshot camcorder. Will this work? How does this work?
I do have a microscope. At best, I can go 15x40. I actually even tried looking at it under a microscope before I ever even posted this thread, but I am not sure really how to tell using that? What characteristics do I look for of an error? What characteristics do I look for of a fake?
The main thing to look for is the type of ink used by the BEP and the ink on the note. Teller stamps will have a variation in their ink splotches under magnification and a different look when they dry. If you can notice a difference, then it's a post-BEP ink on the note. If there isn't a discernable difference, then it's probably an inking error.
I really can't see a difference. But I don't even really trust my own opinion just for the simple fact that I want it to be an error so bad that I might be seeing it the way I want to see it in my own mind. I am going to submit 2 pictures that I am taking with my phone camera through the lens of my microscope. One will of the similar inking found on the bill. The other will be what I hope is an error inking. If it turns out to be an error, does anybody know what it would be worth?
This one to the left is a picture taken through my microscope if where the grey overinking is. This one below is a different area of the bill.
Like I stated in the original post. The photo does the bill no justice. The '5', '2', and '3' are affected by this defect.
Yeah I had figured that out last night looking at it under my microscope... Too bad, I have yet to find a true nice error in circulation . Oh well, I'm sure they'll come to me some day...:hail: