Possible 1985 One Dollar Error Bill

A lot of people use services like photobucket to upload and display pictures or if you know someone with web space they could host a picture for you.

*Edited to add*

Also don't handle that note more than needed. If you don't have it in some kind of holder (like a Mylar sleeve, or top loading rigid holder) do so now!

spring423 If you would like me to upload the pictures for you I will send you an email you can just respond to my email to you and attach the unedited pictures in the original size and I will resize them and post them so they will be larger on the forum if you would like.

Edit: I have sent you an email, if its not in your inbox you may need to look in your spam folder (that is where the emails from the forum seems to go on some servers)

Here are the pictures cropped and hopefully bigger

Those sure look like red/blue fibers to me.

Spring423, this is a nice error note "worthy of grading". It is not often you see "shifted face on both front and back". Also this error falls between moderate to major. You will only find out during grading IF it is considered a "major" error.

IF "major" the prices would be considerably higher.

No Johnny, no scanners are involved in the cutting of the notes (logical thought though)..... In reality, (and here is where most folks get confused), the sequence of events is not as you might think.

The notes are printed on sheets of paper in the total of 32 notes per sheet (4 horizontally by 8 vertically).

First, the backs of the notes are printed on a Giorgi printing press, next the faces are printed on either the same or another identical Giorgi printing press.

Next, the notes sheets are cut in half (vertically) into half size sheets of 2 horizontally by 8 vertically.

.....................................................................

These half sheets are then hand stacked into stacks of 10,000 sheets and are fed into the COPE-PAK machines.... The COPE-PAK holds four stacks of half sheets (or 640,000 notes).

Since we are talking about sheets here, I will limit the explanation to half of the COPE-PAK's normal operating level (320,000 notes).

Once these two half sheet stacks enter the COPE-PAK, the process is purely mechanical (with an impressive array of computer controlled trouble sensors that can sense over 700 mechanical errors and shut the machine down automatically when a fault is detected).

The first thing that happens in the COPE-PAK is that blowers individually separate the half sheets..... The half sheets are then moved into position for the addition of the overprint (serial and district identifiers) by suction.

This is where your error occurred spring.... suction moved your sheet not far enough to align with the overprint cylinders..... Grippers then moved that half sheet (by mechanical action) to a predetermined distance (on top of the stack that will grow to 100 half sheets).

Next, (after the half sheets are machine stacked into stacks of 100 sheets), they are cut both vertically and horizontally into stacks of 100 individual notes.

After that, these stacks of 100 individual notes are automatically banded.

These banded stacks of 100 notes then proceed to a revolving carousel that collects ten banded stacks and then bands and shrink wraps those ten 100 note stacks together..... four of these (now 1000 note packs) are then collected and shrink wrapped together into a 4000 note pack called a brick.

It is important to remember that there are two very distinct machines that create these notes, the Giorgi press that prints the backs and the faces....... and then the COPE-PAK that applies the overprint and cuts and packages the notes for shipment.

Yes spring, your note is genuine, caused by the simple action of insufficient suction (which was probably due to insufficient separation of the half sheets by the blower), and finally correct action of the grippers.... It is a very neat error to look at, but the effect is lessened when you consider the actual cause.... I think that I would hold onto it though (if I were you), as you just don't see such things that often.

I don't think I'd be so quick as to call it a common error. Maybe the cutting sequence described by zeewool might be *common*, but I don't think the alignment of the printing is.

Well Thanks for the information Zeewool.