Question About Scott #499

Can a Scott U.S. #499 W/F measure 19mm x 22.5mm?

499 3/23/1917 3/27/1917 type I 11 x 11 none flat plate 18.5-19 x 22
colours: very pale to deep rose, carmine, carmine rose, pale to rose red, lake
--------------------------------------------------------------------
499e 3/31/1917 7/19/1917 booklet (6) 11 x 11 none flat plate 18.5-19 x 22
colours:very pale to deep rose, carmine, carmine rose, pale to rose red, lake
-------------------------------------------------------------------
499f ~8/1/1917 8/7/1917 booklet 11 x 11 none flat plate 18.5-19 x 22 AEF pane of 30;
colours:carmine

Armstrong in his book on the Washington-Franklins says about the AEF variety that "individual stamps are not really identifiable".

However experts today recognize that due to paper grain, #499 booklet stamps are shorter and wider than the normal press sheet #499. Anyone who wants to verify this can simply compare known #499 sheet stamps and common #499 booklet stamps.

Anyway, Al, once you know that your stamp is genuinely perf 11 and an intaglio print, I think you've identified it, no matter the size. A check to verify no watermark should offer even more assurance. But today's experts are willing to certify short, wide copies as AEF stamps, even if they are perfed on all four sides. Also, as Armstrong didn't mention, AEF booklet examples from certain positions can also be identified as long as the perfs are genuine.

Please show a scan of front and back - we can all toss in an opinion!

Duncan, Chasa, It is a #499. It perfs. at 11x11, all sides--no straight edges(measured on the Sonic Imagery Multi-Gauge), It is not watermarked, and it is a Type-1, Carmine. Its is a flate plate printing, not rotary. Stamp is used with a 1922 year date partial cancel showing on the stamp. It is not wider or shorter--its 1/2mm. (22.5mm)taller (longer) that what references state (22.0mm). I was courious to know if there can be taller printings of the stamps of the W/Fs. I also posted this on the VSC chat board and there is some dialogue there between Ken Lawerence and myself where he explains that there are variations that can occur in plate production, printing, and other conditions after printing and after postal use that can effect the demensional measurement of any give stamp. You can access it and read his comments if you wish. www.virtualstampclub.com >message board. Scroll down to the "Stamp Collecting Form Messages Area" and click on it. Then find the "Expert Opinions" on the left and look for US #499 in the topics, and click on it. As I understand what he is saying, the long and the short of it is yes as an answer to my question. I was going through a bunch of #499 and found a couple that were measuring 22.5 and wondered why they would be taller.

Wow this is a bit mind boggling. If, a flat plat plate stamp image can be 1/2mm larger, it seems to open the door for a whole lot of questions.

Yea buddy! I think Ken is basically saying that the measurement for a stamp size sometimes isn't necessarily a reliable indication for what stamp one has. I suppose its a combination of all factors being considered, and others may out-weight measurement?

If its possible for a #499 to be 1/2mm. taller, then can it be assumed that its possible for a #498 to be 1/2mm. taller? At first blush, that might make one think he/she may have a #544 vs. a #498 just looking at the measurement. Most flat plate stamps (#498) will show some ink spots on the reverse whereas rotary stamps (#544) won't--thats one of those "other" considerations. There are probably some other indicators for a #544 that the experts know and may keep to themselves (to keep forgers at bay?).

If you read his comments in VSC, it was interesting about his #409 (flat plate) reference copy that is the same size as #459 (rotate plate). Same in priciple as "Tall" #498 vs. #544.

Seems like the more I learn, the more I find I don't know. But it sure keeps this hobby interesting.

Al, these W/F issues really are beyond my capabilities. I admire folks with the patience and skills to tackle them correctly.

They are not really beyond your capabilities. Its like everything else we've done for the first time. You learn as you go--small victory after small victory until down the road, when you reflect upon it, you realize how much you've really learned and how proficient you are. Its just taking that first step. AND, the learing keeps going on and on. Just jump into it--there are plenty of folks that will share what they know.

Thanks Al!