No products in the cart.
One of the major security feature of the Portrait series is the addition of a hologram. The octagon-shaped hologram is applied to a guilloche on the left of the digit.
From the first issue of the Portrait series banknotes, we can see the hologram is applied with a lot less precision. This is clearly demonstrated by the four $2 notes with running serial numbers: the hologram is applied within the guilloche but they are all off-centred at four different positions.
This is especially prominent in the $2 notes but a lot less on the other notes. In fact, if you observe the latest $50 Tharman note, which is still in paper, the horogram is also off-centred.
The hologram when tilted, shows a multi-coloured image of the “$”, “BCCS” and the number 2.
This is the $10 note with the serial number OJF912530– perfectly printed. But take a look at the next note.
This is the $10 note with the serial number OJF912531. Can you see the difference between this and the previous?
There is very obvious bleeding on the intaglio prints at four positions. This could be the most serious bleeding I’ve ever seen and I’m surprised quality control did not pick this up, for some known or unknown reasons. But surely and I’m assuming, quality control has been tightened in later batches and “imperfect” notes are rare.
If you observe closely, out of the three $10 notes in the money bag, the first note OJF912529 also has bleeding at the coat of arms and “SINGAPORE”. Together with 531, that’s 2 out of 3 imperfect notes.
OAA 1st series $5 notes in running numbers: perfectly printed but hologram is off-centred.
Have you made similar observations in earlier notes or even recent notes that have this type of imperfections? Are these “imperfect” notes collectible since they’re not major error notes?
Tell us about your experience and share with us on our Facebook page.