I got ten dollars cash back at the supermarket today and the cashier gave me this note, below.. I noticed it was different right off the bat but I just casually put it in my wallet until I got back to work to look at it closer. I did some research here and thought it might be a bleach job but the back isn't "white" like the front on one side. And the additional over print passes seem to be like normal in the white area. I provided a closeup scan of the transition area on the front. Currency is not my specialty, coins are, so I wanted to ask the experts here. If someone needs a closer view of a section let me know.
looks like someone applied a chemical to it on the obverse. Maybe sponged it on. Looks like the seal is affected and the paper is in a condition that looks like it was wet.
I didn't think about the sponge thing. Seems like it would affect all of the ink. But only the light orange inked pattern is mostly affected. The black ink, the red ink, and the yellow small "10"'s around the torch do not seem to be affected at all when I look at it in person. The color shifting torch is partially in the white area is also not affected. This makes me think of a couple scenarios: --It happened at the BEP, between the stages of production. Where something foreign was spilled or introduced to the original sheet. And it went unnoticed through the other over-print ink passes and only affected the orange ink. --The note was introduced to a specific solvent that only affects the orange ink , outside of the BEP. But I'm betting 99.9999% of the public wouldn't have intimate knowledge of the specifics of the ink composition because it'd be a security risk, for it to be public. I dug around the internet some tonight and can't find any science experiments that schools have kids do that would cause this like turning a copper cent "golden" by heating a zinc coated cent, and etc.
It went through the laundry with the whites. It's been bleached. It was most likely was sticking out of a shirt pocket. The reverse was stuck to the shirt and the other part was inside the pocket so only the left side got a good dousing with bleach. The other inks were not effected because they are denser colors and thus not effected as much. You could most likely sell it on ebay for $25-$40 bucks but it's only worth 10.
I would not rush to any conclusions here folks..... i would welcome the opprotunity to view the note in person, no charge to the owner, to verify a possible inking problem. knowing how these technicolor designs are applied, it is possible this is a genuine error, but one can not tell from a scan. paper needs to be examined by "eyes-on" inspection. Ask around, i am a recognized expert in the field of currency with a specialty in errors. some of the forum members can tell you who i am. if it is real, could be worth a few hundred bucks!! Private Message me if interested be well, Lew
When bleach is mixed with water in a washing machine it get diluted as everyone knows....if this were in a machine, the entire note would get wet regardless of where it was located....the centrifugal force of the spin cycle would assure it! I do not think this is what happened to this note. If the note was subject to solvent or bleach it would have to be wiped on by a moist sponge in order not to soak the reverse of the note. Still with the paper mix of linen and cotton 25% and 75% it would wick water to the reverse. Lew just may have a point here...the inking plates may have been cleaned and what we are seeing could be the front plate print with the solvent not completely dried...look at the dividing line on the note...it is even and not sporadic or splotchy.... I would also like to see the note in hand! RickieB
PM sent to Lewminator. Thanks. This question just crossed my mind today: At what stage is the colored background inked on for these newer notes? Before anything else? Or is it the last step? Or what? Thanks all!
The background tints are the first thing printed on the paper. So if this note *is* a printing error, then it would've had to make its way through all the subsequent printing operations and inspections without being noticed. Not impossible, but it probably explains why we don't see errors involving the underprint very often....
I'm with lewminator on this one. I know the background colors are put on first, and I thought they were regular offset printing (versus dry intaglio printing for the actual designs). Given the apparent quality of all the subsequent printings, I would definitely say that this note needs at least one good look from a qualified expert. OP if you end up taking it to a coin show for an opinion, get as many as you can. Some dealers who focus on coins, may still give you an opinion, but err on the conservative side when they don't know for sure. As for the seals, I would not place as much faith in the seals as I used to for questioning ink errors. All the notes I've looked at closely in the last few years have pretty poor quality in the overprints. The federal reserve seal almost looks like it was applied with a rubber stamp.
Thanks for the advice gatzdon. For some reason I didn't think of coin shows. There's not enough of them in the Columbia area for it to cross my mind. I usually have to go up to Greenville, SC if I go to one. I will be letting lewminator look at it in person sometime in early of January. I just can't make the trip up yet due to the Holidays. But I will definitely post his opinion afterwards. I'd like to give RickieB the chance to see it too, but the distance is just too great to travel. Here is another 100% scan crop from the far left side I though that might be useful:
