Discussion:
Photocopying banknotes
(too old to reply)
John Dean
2009-09-17 22:04:58 UTC
Permalink
The story has been around for a while that if you try to photocopy a
banknote your copier will either a) refuse b) introduce an obvious error or
c) notify the Feds (or d) any two out of three
I can't see anything on Snopes. Is this documented / debunked anywhere?
--
John Dean
Oxford
danny burstein
2009-09-17 22:26:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Dean
The story has been around for a while that if you try to photocopy a
banknote your copier will either a) refuse b) introduce an obvious error or
c) notify the Feds (or d) any two out of three
I can't see anything on Snopes. Is this documented / debunked anywhere?
It's kind of true, depending on the copier.

I can give you first hand experience from 15 years ago when
I was working at a print shop. Ricoh had a brand of high
quality digital/laser colo[u]r copiers, and just brought out
a new model.

Just about every print shop will, indeed, try making a copy
of a dollar bill just to see what it looks like. (We did
so, too. Shhhh).

Anyway, our Ricoh technician grumbled to us that he'd just
spent the past few days resetting a half dozen of the new
machines which... people had tried copying dollars with.

There are a couple of other tricks these use:

1: I don't think any current units freeze up, but
a hefty number will "fuzz out" any image that matches
specified profiles.

2: many, make that MANY, of the current copiers _do_
include a "hidden", serial number in the print. This
lets "them" backtrack any paper to the duplication machine.

"Investigating Machine Identification Code Technology in
Color Laser Printers"
...
"At the request of the United States Secret Service,
manufacturers developed mechanisms that print in an
encoded form the serial number and the manufacturer's
name as indiscernible markings on color documents. The
Secret Service and manufacturers would be able to decode
these values from the markings and in the event a color
machine was used to print a suspected counterfeited document,
these values would be used with customer information to
discover the identity of the machine's owner..."

http://www.eff.org/wp/investigating-machine-identification-code-technology-color-laser-printers
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
***@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
John Dean
2009-09-18 01:05:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by danny burstein
Post by John Dean
The story has been around for a while that if you try to photocopy a
banknote your copier will either a) refuse b) introduce an obvious
error or c) notify the Feds (or d) any two out of three
I can't see anything on Snopes. Is this documented / debunked
anywhere?
It's kind of true, depending on the copier.
I can give you first hand experience from 15 years ago when
I was working at a print shop. Ricoh had a brand of high
quality digital/laser colo[u]r copiers, and just brought out
a new model.
Just about every print shop will, indeed, try making a copy
of a dollar bill just to see what it looks like. (We did
so, too. Shhhh).
So what *exactly* happened when you laid your dollar bill on the platen and
pressed the button?
--
John Dean
Oxford
Mike Williams
2009-09-18 01:30:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Dean
The story has been around for a while that if you try to photocopy a
banknote your copier will either a) refuse b) introduce an obvious error or
c) notify the Feds (or d) any two out of three
I can't see anything on Snopes. Is this documented / debunked anywhere?
It certainly happens with my scanner. An error pops up:

Action Not Supported

This application does not support the unauthorised
processing of banknote images.

And suggests that I visit http://www.rulesforuse.org
--
Mike Williams
Gentleman of Leisure
Joachim Pense
2009-09-18 04:39:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Williams
Post by John Dean
The story has been around for a while that if you try to photocopy a
banknote your copier will either a) refuse b) introduce an obvious error
or c) notify the Feds (or d) any two out of three
I can't see anything on Snopes. Is this documented / debunked anywhere?
Action Not Supported
This application does not support the unauthorised
processing of banknote images.
And suggests that I visit http://www.rulesforuse.org
Does this apply to US Dollars only, or do they have a general specification
of what resembles a Banknote?

Joachim
Dave Garland
2009-09-18 05:29:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joachim Pense
Post by Mike Williams
Post by John Dean
The story has been around for a while that if you try to photocopy a
banknote your copier will either a) refuse b) introduce an obvious error
or c) notify the Feds (or d) any two out of three
I can't see anything on Snopes. Is this documented / debunked anywhere?
Action Not Supported
This application does not support the unauthorised
processing of banknote images.
And suggests that I visit http://www.rulesforuse.org
Does this apply to US Dollars only, or do they have a general specification
of what resembles a Banknote?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EURion_constellation
But IIRC there was a means of detecting at least US currency even
before the current design, possibly based on size and color. Can't
find a reference for that, though.

Dave
Mike Williams
2009-09-18 09:53:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joachim Pense
Post by Mike Williams
Post by John Dean
The story has been around for a while that if you try to photocopy a
banknote your copier will either a) refuse b) introduce an obvious error
or c) notify the Feds (or d) any two out of three
I can't see anything on Snopes. Is this documented / debunked anywhere?
Action Not Supported
This application does not support the unauthorised
processing of banknote images.
And suggests that I visit http://www.rulesforuse.org
Does this apply to US Dollars only, or do they have a general specification
of what resembles a Banknote?
I'm in the UK, so I used a British 20 GBP note.
--
Mike Williams
Gentleman of Leisure
Lon
2009-09-19 00:21:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joachim Pense
Post by Mike Williams
Post by John Dean
The story has been around for a while that if you try to photocopy a
banknote your copier will either a) refuse b) introduce an obvious error
or c) notify the Feds (or d) any two out of three
I can't see anything on Snopes. Is this documented / debunked anywhere?
Action Not Supported
This application does not support the unauthorised
processing of banknote images.
And suggests that I visit http://www.rulesforuse.org
Does this apply to US Dollars only, or do they have a general specification
of what resembles a Banknote?
Wonder what make of scanner that is. I have a fairly recent model Canon
LED scanner, and it scans merkin banknotes.

Lon "purely for the purposes of resolution testing" Stowell
Nick Spalding
2009-09-18 07:03:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Williams
Post by John Dean
The story has been around for a while that if you try to photocopy a
banknote your copier will either a) refuse b) introduce an obvious error or
c) notify the Feds (or d) any two out of three
I can't see anything on Snopes. Is this documented / debunked anywhere?
Action Not Supported
This application does not support the unauthorised
processing of banknote images.
And suggests that I visit http://www.rulesforuse.org
No problem with mine, HP4370 about four years old, with a EUR 10 note.
--
Nick Spalding
John Dean
2009-09-18 12:22:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Williams
Post by John Dean
The story has been around for a while that if you try to photocopy a
banknote your copier will either a) refuse b) introduce an obvious
error or c) notify the Feds (or d) any two out of three
I can't see anything on Snopes. Is this documented / debunked
anywhere?
Action Not Supported
This application does not support the unauthorised
processing of banknote images.
And suggests that I visit http://www.rulesforuse.org
Which leads, for the US dollar, to
http://www.treas.gov/usss/money_illustrations.shtml
"The Counterfeit Detection Act of 1992, Public Law 102-550, in Section 411
of Title 31 of the Code of Federal Regulations, permits color illustrations
of U.S. currency provided:
The illustration is of a size less than three-fourths or more than one and
one-half, in linear dimension, of each part of the item illustrated
The illustration is one-sided
All negatives, plates, positives, digitized storage medium, graphic files,
magnetic medium, optical storage devices, and any other thing used in the
making of the illustration that contain an image of the illustration or any
part thereof are destroyed and/or deleted or erased after their final use "

Which suggests it's perfectly possible to make such copies, you just have to
play by the rules. Implication - the copier doesn't play by the rules for
you.
--
John Dean
Oxford
Dr H
2009-09-18 21:47:37 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009, Mike Williams vociferated:

}Wasn't it John Dean who wrote:
}> The story has been around for a while that if you try to photocopy a
}> banknote your copier will either a) refuse b) introduce an obvious error or
}> c) notify the Feds (or d) any two out of three
}> I can't see anything on Snopes. Is this documented / debunked anywhere?
}
}It certainly happens with my scanner. An error pops up:
}
} Action Not Supported
}
} This application does not support the unauthorised
} processing of banknote images.
}
}And suggests that I visit http://www.rulesforuse.org


Well hell, you just do the scan on the 12-year old scanner
attached to my 17-year old computer running under MS-DOS 6.2.

Just goes to show that newer isn't always better.


Dr "not my only computer" H
Derek Lyons
2009-09-21 22:27:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dr H
}> The story has been around for a while that if you try to photocopy a
}> banknote your copier will either a) refuse b) introduce an obvious error or
}> c) notify the Feds (or d) any two out of three
}> I can't see anything on Snopes. Is this documented / debunked anywhere?
}
}
} Action Not Supported
}
} This application does not support the unauthorised
} processing of banknote images.
}
}And suggests that I visit http://www.rulesforuse.org
Well hell, you just do the scan on the 12-year old scanner
attached to my 17-year old computer running under MS-DOS 6.2.
Just goes to show that newer isn't always better.
So long as you avoid defining better as 'higher resolution and color
definition' (I.E. what most people would use as quantification of
'better' in this sense), sure.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2009-09-21 22:36:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Derek Lyons
Post by Dr H
}> The story has been around for a while that if you try to
photocopy a }> banknote your copier will either a) refuse b)
introduce an obvious error or }> c) notify the Feds (or d) any
two out of three }> I can't see anything on Snopes. Is this
documented / debunked anywhere? }
}
} Action Not Supported
}
} This application does not support the unauthorised
} processing of banknote images.
}
}And suggests that I visit http://www.rulesforuse.org
Well hell, you just do the scan on the 12-year old scanner
attached to my 17-year old computer running under MS-DOS 6.2.
Just goes to show that newer isn't always better.
So long as you avoid defining better as 'higher resolution and
color definition' (I.E. what most people would use as
quantification of 'better' in this sense), sure.
Very few people will classify "won't do what I want" as better than
"will do what I want." You can't pick a turd up by the clean end.
--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Derek Lyons
2009-09-22 06:07:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Derek Lyons
Post by Dr H
}> The story has been around for a while that if you try to
photocopy a }> banknote your copier will either a) refuse b)
introduce an obvious error or }> c) notify the Feds (or d) any
two out of three }> I can't see anything on Snopes. Is this
documented / debunked anywhere? }
}
} Action Not Supported
}
} This application does not support the unauthorised
} processing of banknote images.
}
}And suggests that I visit http://www.rulesforuse.org
Well hell, you just do the scan on the 12-year old scanner
attached to my 17-year old computer running under MS-DOS 6.2.
Just goes to show that newer isn't always better.
So long as you avoid defining better as 'higher resolution and
color definition' (I.E. what most people would use as
quantification of 'better' in this sense), sure.
Very few people will classify "won't do what I want" as better than
"will do what I want." You can't pick a turd up by the clean end.
As the required outcome is "create a copy of a banknate in useable
form", "creating a crappy copy" won't be regarded as useful.

Duh.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2009-09-22 17:41:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Derek Lyons
Post by Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
Post by Derek Lyons
Post by Dr H
}> The story has been around for a while that if you try to
photocopy a }> banknote your copier will either a) refuse b)
introduce an obvious error or }> c) notify the Feds (or d) any
two out of three }> I can't see anything on Snopes. Is this
documented / debunked anywhere? }
}
} Action Not Supported
}
} This application does not support the unauthorised
} processing of banknote images.
}
}And suggests that I visit http://www.rulesforuse.org
Well hell, you just do the scan on the 12-year old scanner
attached to my 17-year old computer running under MS-DOS 6.2.
Just goes to show that newer isn't always better.
So long as you avoid defining better as 'higher resolution and
color definition' (I.E. what most people would use as
quantification of 'better' in this sense), sure.
Very few people will classify "won't do what I want" as better
than "will do what I want." You can't pick a turd up by the
clean end.
As the required outcome is "create a copy of a banknate in
useable form", "creating a crappy copy" won't be regarded as
useful.
I had a scanner that old. While is was not, in fact, as good as a
nwe scanner in such technical ways as are mentioned, it was still
quite sufficient to scan money at a higher resolution than any
printer I have access to *today* is capable of printing, at a
greater color depth than the human eye can perceive, so it is
exactly as "crappy" a copy as a scanner today would create, were it
to scan money at all. And it wasn't an expensive scanner, either.
Post by Derek Lyons
Duh.
Your favorite word, I expect.
--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Dr H
2009-09-24 21:33:31 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Derek Lyons vociferated:

}Dr H <***@efn.org> wrote:
}
}>
}>On Fri, 18 Sep 2009, Mike Williams vociferated:
}>
}>}Wasn't it John Dean who wrote:
}>}> The story has been around for a while that if you try to photocopy a
}>}> banknote your copier will either a) refuse b) introduce an obvious error or
}>}> c) notify the Feds (or d) any two out of three
}>}> I can't see anything on Snopes. Is this documented / debunked anywhere?
}>}
}>}It certainly happens with my scanner. An error pops up:
}>}
}>} Action Not Supported
}>}
}>} This application does not support the unauthorised
}>} processing of banknote images.
}>}
}>}And suggests that I visit http://www.rulesforuse.org
}>
}>
}> Well hell, you just do the scan on the 12-year old scanner
}> attached to my 17-year old computer running under MS-DOS 6.2.
}>
}> Just goes to show that newer isn't always better.
}
}So long as you avoid defining better as 'higher resolution and color
}definition' (I.E. what most people would use as quantification of
}'better' in this sense), sure.

'Better', in this context, would mean 'usable'.

Dr H
Richard Casady
2011-08-07 18:52:17 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 14:33:31 -0700, Dr H <***@efn.org> wrote:

I am top posting just this once in order to warn you not to scroll
down unless you want to read Dr H's last post. Good riddance.

Casady
Post by Dr H
}
}>
}>
}>}> The story has been around for a while that if you try to photocopy a
}>}> banknote your copier will either a) refuse b) introduce an obvious error or
}>}> c) notify the Feds (or d) any two out of three
}>}> I can't see anything on Snopes. Is this documented / debunked anywhere?
}>}
}>}
}>} Action Not Supported
}>}
}>} This application does not support the unauthorised
}>} processing of banknote images.
}>}
}>}And suggests that I visit http://www.rulesforuse.org
}>
}>
}> Well hell, you just do the scan on the 12-year old scanner
}> attached to my 17-year old computer running under MS-DOS 6.2.
}>
}> Just goes to show that newer isn't always better.
}
}So long as you avoid defining better as 'higher resolution and color
}definition' (I.E. what most people would use as quantification of
}'better' in this sense), sure.
'Better', in this context, would mean 'usable'.
Dr H
Don Freeman
2011-08-08 17:08:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Casady
I am top posting just this once in order to warn you not to scroll
down unless you want to read Dr H's last post. Good riddance.
I, for one (and maybe the only one), was not all that annoyed by Dr. H's
posts. Even though he tried so hard.
--
__
(oO) www.cosmoslair.com
/||\ Cthulhu Saves!!! (In case he needs a midnight snack)
Nick Spalding
2011-08-08 17:27:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Freeman
Post by Richard Casady
I am top posting just this once in order to warn you not to scroll
down unless you want to read Dr H's last post. Good riddance.
I, for one (and maybe the only one), was not all that annoyed by Dr. H's
posts. Even though he tried so hard.
Nor me. He liked his beer so he can't have been all bad.
--
Nick Spalding
Don Freeman
2011-08-08 17:43:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nick Spalding
Post by Don Freeman
Post by Richard Casady
I am top posting just this once in order to warn you not to scroll
down unless you want to read Dr H's last post. Good riddance.
I, for one (and maybe the only one), was not all that annoyed by Dr. H's
posts. Even though he tried so hard.
Nor me. He liked his beer so he can't have been all bad.
I'll drink to that.
--
__
(oO) www.cosmoslair.com
/||\ Cthulhu Saves!!! (In case he needs a midnight snack)
Richard Casady
2011-08-08 17:57:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nick Spalding
Post by Don Freeman
Post by Richard Casady
I am top posting just this once in order to warn you not to scroll
down unless you want to read Dr H's last post. Good riddance.
I, for one (and maybe the only one), was not all that annoyed by Dr. H's
posts. Even though he tried so hard.
Nor me. He liked his beer so he can't have been all bad.
There is a NG for beer although alt drunken bastards is comatose. As
for loving beer football hooligans would hardly be the same without
it. Nor would the prisons. I will admit he was far from the worst of
the pests.

Casady
John Francis
2011-08-08 19:05:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Casady
Post by Nick Spalding
Post by Don Freeman
I, for one (and maybe the only one), was not all that annoyed by Dr. H's
posts. Even though he tried so hard.
Nor me. He liked his beer so he can't have been all bad.
There is a NG for beer although alt drunken bastards is comatose. As
for loving beer football hooligans would hardly be the same without
it. Nor would the prisons. I will admit he was far from the worst of
the pests.
I wasn't annoyed by him, mainly because I relegated his posts to the
bit-bucket unread; if he ever did post anything worth reading it was
sure to be quoted by somebody else.

The main problem was that he knew better, and knew that his silly
little affectation caused more people than just me to kill-file him,
but still insisted on metaphorically sticking his fingers in his ears
and going "Nyah! Nyah! Nyah! I'm not listening! Can't make me behave!".
It was tiresome on the playground - it's just tedious on Usenet.
Drew Lawson
2011-08-08 20:58:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Francis
I wasn't annoyed by him, mainly because I relegated his posts to the
bit-bucket unread; if he ever did post anything worth reading it was
sure to be quoted by somebody else.
Yep. He's still in mine, along with a few others who won't be named
for fear of the Beetlejuice effect.
--
Drew Lawson | Pass the tea and sympathy
| for he good old days are dead
| Let's raise a toast to those
| who best survived the life they led
Lee Ayrton
2011-08-11 17:49:39 UTC
Permalink
Just for old times sake, I just tried photocopying $20 notes.

Equipment:

HP Photosmart C5280 All-In-One PSC.
2 $20 US notes, series 2004, in circulated condition.
Ordinary white copy paper.

Method:

The two notes are placed on the scanner bed, one face up one face down to
test reproduction of both faces. No attempt is made to align the notes
to each other or the scanner bed.

Results:

Images are full-size and, apart from fine details are well detailed,
without microprinted void warnings such as one sees in checks. The
metalized ink used on the shield and lower right "20" reproduce in green
and red. The color gradation in the paper is reproduced to an acceptable
degree. As no effort was made to use uncirculated bills or to flatten
them, there are shadows from folds and wrinkles, revealing that these are
indeed photocopies.

Conclusions:

Given the proper paper a counterfeit bill could easily be produced that
would pass a very quick visual exam -- hence the now automatic use of
"anti-counterfeit" markers in retail establishments.



Lee "I prefer to make my money the old fashioned way." Ayrton
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
2011-08-11 18:09:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lee Ayrton
Given the proper paper a counterfeit bill could easily be
produced that would pass a very quick visual exam -- hence the
now automatic use of "anti-counterfeit" markers in retail
establishments.
Heh. Yeah. Anti-counterfeit markers. Heh.
--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Drew Lawson
2011-08-11 19:05:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lee Ayrton
Given the proper paper a counterfeit bill could easily be produced that
would pass a very quick visual exam -- hence the now automatic use of
"anti-counterfeit" markers in retail establishments.
I was in a fast food place (McDonald's I think) a few weeks back,
and noticed that next to the register was a bill scanner of some
sort. It looked about the same as the point-of-sale check scanners,
but was clearly labeled for cash.

I'm guessing it looks for the mylar band, but I have nothing to
base that on.


Drew "you deserve a fake bill today" Lawson
--
| Stories of tortures used by debauchers
Drew Lawson | lurid, licentious and vile
| make me smile
James
2011-08-11 19:25:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Drew Lawson
Post by Lee Ayrton
Given the proper paper a counterfeit bill could easily be produced that
would pass a very quick visual exam -- hence the now automatic use of
"anti-counterfeit" markers in retail establishments.
I was in a fast food place (McDonald's I think) a few weeks back,
and noticed that next to the register was a bill scanner of some
sort.  It looked about the same as the point-of-sale check scanners,
but was clearly labeled for cash.
I'm guessing it looks for the mylar band, but I have nothing to
base that on.
We have had those scanners for decades in Canada, despite all of the
anti-counterfeiting measures we have. I think they preceeded the
special strips.

I don't know any photocopiers that can handle what the Canadian mint
calls holographic strips.

But despite that, they are looking at moving from paper to plastic
money: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/canadas-new-plastic-banknotes-will-be-nearly-impossible-to-fake/article2068559/

The good news is that if you wallet goes through the wash your money
will survive soap and bleach.

James"wallet is empty" Linn
Warren Oates
2011-08-12 10:55:56 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by James
We have had those scanners for decades in Canada, despite all of the
anti-counterfeiting measures we have. I think they preceeded the
special strips.
The Giant Tiger here used to scan notes all the time, including the
5-dollar bills [note: no 1s or 2s in Canada anymore] but they seem to
have stopped doing that recently.
--
Why do we say Chicken of the Sea but not Tuna of the Farm?
-- Thomas Pynchon
Richard Casady
2011-08-14 13:54:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by James
The good news is that if you wallet goes through the wash your money
will survive soap and bleach.
I have put lots of US currency through the wash, with no effect on it.

Casady
Thomas Prufer
2011-08-15 08:16:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Casady
I have put lots of US currency through the wash, with no effect on it.
You laundered money?


Thomas "literally" Prufer
cbusylol
2018-10-08 00:27:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Drew Lawson
Post by Lee Ayrton
Given the proper paper a counterfeit bill could easily be produced that
would pass a very quick visual exam -- hence the now automatic use of
"anti-counterfeit" markers in retail establishments.
I was in a fast food place (McDonald's I think) a few weeks back,
and noticed that next to the register was a bill scanner of some
sort. It looked about the same as the point-of-sale check scanners,
but was clearly labeled for cash.
I'm guessing it looks for the mylar band, but I have nothing to
base that on.
Drew "you deserve a fake bill today" Lawson
--
| Stories of tortures used by debauchers
Drew Lawson | lurid, licentious and vile
| make me smile
worked in hospitality at a hotel and it was a critical priority to 'pen' 20s and 100s. it was a pain in the ass since it generally upset the guest you're sitting there marking the 20 100s they handed to you for a room for a week, and it added like 10 minutes to the check in process
J Lunis
2009-09-18 12:58:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Dean
The story has been around for a while that if you try to photocopy a
banknote your copier will either a) refuse b) introduce an obvious error or
c) notify the Feds (or d) any two out of three
I can't see anything on Snopes. Is this documented / debunked anywhere?
Mine copies with no problem. Printer is 1 yr old.
Loading...