Pelure Paper On Banknotes

I think that this is a fascinating discussion about the paper in use way back when the stamps were being produced and how they were developed. The knowledge being shared on the forum is wonderful. Thank you all.

Essayk thank you for the recommendation. Hope their's no hard feelings.
I wrote the word "Sample" and placed it underneath the 1st and second "pelure paper" examples (pictures 1-4), and again under an otherwise average "shade variety" with large margins (pictures 5-6).





------------------------------------------------------+-----------------------



My camera is very sensitive to light, and even though all pictures were taken in the same position it took quite a few shots to get a similar brightness on the last two photos.. I believe this is because the ink and paper is shinier on the "pelure paper", making the lens react differently.

Stephen-P,
As a new hobbyist, you have been learning a lot in the last year. Paper (like ink color) is a very challenging area often takes years of 'hands on' (as opposed to book learning) experience to become proficient.
Have you sent any of your findings in for certification so that experienced philatelists can verify your conclusions? If not, do you plan on doing this?
Don

Thanks Don! It's an absolutely exhilarating hobby, and easy to get lost in.
I have around 20+ pieces that I would love to submit, but the PF does not make it easy for outsiders like myself to do. I don't really know why that is, but it seems I'll have to wait until I visit the States later in the year before I can make a submission.

Understood.

I think it important that we try to bring 'closure' to threads with 'stamp in hand' examinations by experts/certifying organizations. The debating is great, but online images and opinions are not a substitute for a vetted conclusion where the existing philatelic knowledgebase can then be expanded.
Don

51, with all due respect, that sends entirely the wrong message. It implies that collectors are incapable of reaching the mountaintop on their own. It also suggests that online analysis such as this is a complete waste of time because "only the experts up on high will ever have the answers." It's also insulting to the actual experts who have contributed to this thread.

Now that Stephen-P has done the translucency test, seems to me that it's time to compare notes with the examples EssayK posted and compare them.

"With all due respect"... One of the things that is concerning about the internet is the amount of unvetted, incorrect information that has been published. And our hobby is not immune to this issue and neither is this community. We have endless numbers of threads, often where the owner of a stamp has a vested interest in 'proving' that an item is a new discovery or 'rare', that open debates on its legitimacy. Others weigh in on both sides of the debate and this is typically a healthy situation since it fosters learning.

But do these threads actually expand the philatelic knowledgebase? I think that those that come 'full circle' and eventually include a certification by a recognized expertization organization certainly do. But we have significant numbers of threads that never reach this level of verification. We are left with unresolved threads that contain a lot of opinions and images that support one side of the debate or the other. But images are not proof, we have no idea if they have been manipulated or if the poster had to generate 100 images to get one or two that supports their opinion. I think that most people here would agree that having an item in hand is critical when trying to create or revise the existing philatelic knowledgebase.

Given this, I think that we should encourage bringing these kinds of threads 'full circle' whenever we can. Leaving these kinds of threads without any expert verification opens the door for misinformation to proliferate for years to come.
Don

Comparing different 'examples' using images from different sources? Seriously?

Just as Stephen-P mentioned in his post, he ended taking a lot of images before getting the ones he wanted. Is the process to take pictures until you get the ones that support your position? Did he back light the images? (essayk used a CARD as backing to prevent any backlighting). But we are to move on to translucency analysis?

No one here ever bothers to post how they generated the images they post. We do not know how it was generated, the ambient lighting, and what filters or other image processing software has been applied to the image. But we are supposed to believe that we can make definitive, perhaps knowledge-changing, conclusions?

These threads do have value. They help people learn things like how to do discovery properly. They certainly can help a person make a decision to invest in a 'stamp-in-hand' opinion as opposed to anonymous opinions using questionable images.
Don

But you can't have one without the other. So what's the point of this forum?

EssayK's analysis and suggestion of a translucency test is absolutely expert. There aren't many people on the planet who could give someone a complete rundown of what pelure paper is and provide three different examples of it for comparison.

Apparently you missed/ignored this part of my post...



Additionally, note that I said 'these kinds of threads'. I moderate all the threads in this community and this kind of thread is only one kind. Perhaps once you get more experience with online forums you will explore and appreciate the entire community.
Don

You assume that I have no experience with online forums, but it can be measured in decades. And I doubt that anyone here appreciates "the whole community" because there are just too many subjects that a person wouldn't be interested in. We all gravitate to threads where we feel we can contribute, or to those subjects about which we want to learn more.

Your statement about threads having value was too general for me to draw a conclusion about the value you see in this thread. Rather than see it wind down, I'd like to hear what EssayK has to say about the photos. I think it's really interesting that some of the stamps appear to be more translucent than one might expect. That's not to suggest that the photos, regardless of how they were made or cherry-picked, is proof of anything. But I think there's value in discussing in the images nonetheless. Who knows, the determination might be nothing more than a considered opinion that "some stamp paper is more translucent than one might expect," or something entirely different.

To sum this up, I'm not looking to pick a fight. I'm simply saying that in my opinion, and given my interest, the show's not over yet.

My thanks to Don and essay-proof for reminding me of an important detail I neglected to mention. My images were made on a Canon Lide 210 scanner at 600 DPI, and for the Bowlsby I made two images to position the background so it was symmetric.

Perhaps Stephen could send us a scan as well (less room for tinkering).

essay_proof,
Given your forum experience, how did you handle the majority of these kinds of threads were people posted potentially knowledge-changing opinions but things were never vetted and proven? For example and as Moderator, did you not occasionally post about the importance of 'in-hand' verification and not relying only upon digital imaging?

I agree with you that the thread is not over (if I thought the thread was over, had become useless, or was full of BS then I would have locked it and not had more time wasted on it). I simply wanted to add context, especially in light of the number of threads that have been orphaned and now sit without definitive resolution, of the importance of 'in person' vetting. This is especially true in many, many of the threads (not this one) where someone pops up and makes an extraordinary claim without any extraordinary evidence.
Don

Hi Don,

I've mostly been involved in digital music technology forums where people inquired about software operation, sound engineering techniques, best practices. A particularly annoying and rampant type of thread started out with "when I have X-kind of sound, I always engineer it such-and-such a way." Countering that kind of non-creative, boilerplate thinking which didn't actually involve listening (!!) was draining. But such threads were never shut down just because the approach espoused by the OP was so off-the-wall bad. We did what we could to suggest good practices and dispel misinformation, but at some point we had to allow people the 'right' to be wrong.

Right now I wish pelure paper had never been invented!
(just kidding)

Stephen-P wrote:


Curious to know, what is the difficulty? Is it that they only accept US-based submissions?