Stamp design errors
edbmb.net
edbmb.net
I had no idea that Pitcairn existed, it's a little island inhabited by descendants of the mutineers of a famous English ship called the Bounty[1]. It's inhabited by only 60 people[2] and the only settlement is the 2nd smallest capital in the world.
It's even got it's own TLD: .pn[3]
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutiny_on_the_Bounty
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adamstown,_Pitcairn_Islands
The story is just nuts. 1/3 of the male population of the island was indicted in 2004 (including the mayor) -- and were convicted of -- a number of sexual assaults against children. [2] If I'm not mistaken [citation needed] they had to build the jail to put them, then when they were released tear it down.
As you can probably tell I went down this rabbit hole when I first learned about Pitcairn too ^_^ I think visiting would be fascinating but I hear they turn down most requests.
[1] https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/pitcairn-island/ent...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pitcairn_sexual_assault_trial_...
Nope, you can buy fully functioning ones, from several manufacturers even.
There's even the building with the tree shadow. If the tree shadow was in the foreground it would not even be visible on the stamp. If the light source was really respected, the building would be casting a shadow on the entire scene and the building would probably look poorly lit itself. More than likely, the image was drawn based on a view where the light source created the best light on the building thus the shown shadow of the tree. However, that left the sky empty - so let's just draw in the sun and it looks great. Is it photo accurate? No, but it doesn't make it an error.
And it's something I personally do all the time. I'm in photoshop zoomed in to perfect some detail, then I zoom out and it looks like garbage. So I purposely make an "error" so it looks better at 100%.
I don't know why you insist on having such a literal photo realistic illustration or else the only rational explaination is that artist must have made an error. Error implies unintentional, which many of these are. But many are not.
For the bird one, the shape of the bird in that cage is different than the other yellow birds, but is identical to the black one. So that bird was probably originally black, then was edited to be yellow but they forgot to restore the black bars over it.
For the moon one, that's extremely implausible. It's a tiny rope, right next to a large shape that clearly cuts across the moon. Having it go behind the moon doesn't make the moon stand out any more, it's simply an error. In addition, the moon isn't even the focal point of that image, it's a fairly incidental detail (hell, it's almost hidden behind the house).
The toe one is the only one that I think is plausibly intentional.
For the tree one, I agree that the scene was likely drawn without a sun, then the sun added in after. But that does make it an error, because they decided to stick a sun somewhere that clearly contradicts the lighting on the rest of the stamp.
this is completely compatible with telemark skis, where the toe is anchored but the heel is free.
Fun read though!