Obsolete currencies

Omnihemoic

New to the forum and was hoping someone could tell me about this note.

Omnihemoic

I've added some better quality macro pics

vonlettow

This is a copy. I don't see a $3.00 note from this series. That does not mean it does not exist, I just could not find any auction or sale listings for the $3.00.

Regardless, a genuine note would have hand signatures, date and serial numbers. these are all printed on this example.

Omnihemoic

@vonlettow said:
This is a copy. I don't see a $3.00 note from this series. That does not mean it does not exist, I just could not find any auction or sale listings for the $3.00.

Regardless, a genuine note would have hand signatures, date and serial numbers. these are all printed on this example.

Interesting, how does one tell the difference between printed and hand signed? Also is the paper it's on a kind of cheaper paper?

Omnihemoic

@Omnihemoic said:

@vonlettow said:
This is a copy. I don't see a $3.00 note from this series. That does not mean it does not exist, I just could not find any auction or sale listings for the $3.00.

Regardless, a genuine note would have hand signatures, date and serial numbers. these are all printed on this example.

Interesting, how does one tell the difference between printed and hand signed? Also is the paper it's on a kind of cheaper paper?

Is it common for counterfeit to bear a watermark?

JBK

A counterfeiter might try to replicate a watermark. A later copy or fantasy issue would almost certainly not have a watermark.

If you think your note has one please post a photo so people can assess.

JBK

@Omnihemoic said:

@vonlettow said:
This is a copy. I don't see a $3.00 note from this series. That does not mean it does not exist, I just could not find any auction or sale listings for the $3.00.

Regardless, a genuine note would have hand signatures, date and serial numbers. these are all printed on this example.

Interesting, how does one tell the difference between printed and hand signed? Also is the paper it's on a kind of cheaper paper?

Here is a banknote from the same era as yours, pulled from another thread. Note the handwritten signatures and serial number. Also notice the way the paper looks on this very heavily circulated bill.

Also, to me the "Emery County" text on yours doesn't look right to me. The type style seems modern.

Omnihemoic

@JBK said:
A counterfeiter might try to replicate a watermark. A later copy or fantasy issue would almost certainly not have a watermark.

If you think your note has one please post a photo so people can asses

Appears to be mountains in the distance and of course this is to an untrained eye.
I also took better quality pics of the small tear and corner of the note as to get an opinion on if this is the right or wrong type of paper. I realize how difficult this can be to ascertain from a photo.

I do however accept that this note is likely a reprint or however it's classified. I suppose my question now is why this specific one and why invest so much effort only to get key features wrong?

Omnihemoic

@Omnihemoic said:

@JBK said:
A counterfeiter might try to replicate a watermark. A later copy or fantasy issue would almost certainly not have a watermark.

If you think your note has one please post a photo so people can asses

Appears to be mountains in the distance and of course this is to an untrained eye.
I also took better quality pics of the small tear and corner of the note as to get an opinion on if this is the right or wrong type of paper. I realize how difficult this can be to ascertain from a photo.

I do however accept that this note is likely a reprint or however it's classified. I suppose my question now is why this specific one and why invest so much effort only to get key features wrong?

I have seen many notes of the same era and of Salt lake city corporation on Heritage Auctions with identical what seems to be preprinted serial numbers, obviously not the same number but the same nonetheless.

JBK

A watermark shows up when the bill is held up to a light source located behind it. The features that look like mountains seem to be on the surface of the bill, either printing or dirt.

Serial_no_8

I agree with @lettow & @JBK that the OP is a copy. The paper is all wrong: far too white (they did not bleach the rag paper-cotton substrate). Bleached substrate started to do in the 1940's/50's.

Great close-up photos (esp #3) reveals the signature was printed. "Campbell" signature probably is lithographed (or some photocopied), too precise & not faded. All signatures (& even serial numbers) were hand signed (or individually numbered) back then.

Wear looks completely manufactured/doctored (an attempt to make a bright white note look old/circulated).

Omnihemoic

@Serial_no_8 said:
I agree with @lettow & @JBK that the OP is a copy. The paper is all wrong: far too white (they did not bleach the rag paper-cotton substrate). Bleached substrate started to do in the 1940's/50's.

Great close-up photos (esp #3) reveals the signature was printed. "Campbell" signature probably is lithographed (or some photocopied), too precise & not faded. All signatures (& even serial numbers) were hand signed (or individually numbered) back then.

Wear looks completely manufactured/doctored (an attempt to make a bright white note look old/circulated).

I have involuntary muscle movements therefore taking close-up photos was a bit of a challenges so your compliment makes having to almost threaten my motor skills with legal action worth the trouble.

As for the "banknote" it's a bummer but at least I learned more about what to look for. I appreciate everyone's help.

vonlettow

@Omnihemoic said:

I do however accept that this note is likely a reprint or however it's classified. I suppose my question now is why this specific one and why invest so much effort only to get key features wrong?

To sell as a souvenir.