Notice Any Perforation Change Here?

If one compares the perforations between Canada's Cameo regular definitive stamp # 401 and # 400 commemorative just before it which is not a Cameo stamp, do you notice a slight difference in perforation 12 or not? Do the perforation holes look different too? Which perforations look better? What do you think happened here? Using a Kiusalas gauge may help since it's for the 12-66 measurement. Do you get a perfect fit for both stamps or only for one stamp?

Not sure, but I seem to remember reading (maybe in the Corgi Times newsletter for QE2 study group) that the perforations did change slightly with #400. Compound perf (not the same on all sides)? If I find the article, I will reference it.
Are all the sides the same? Does the perf change partway?

All the sides are the same so it does not appear to be a compound perforation. From the Cameo Issue, Canada # 405 (October 3, 1962) appears to be closer in date of issue to Canada # 400 (August 31, 1962) whereas Canada # 401 (February 4, 1963) is closest in catalogue number. See perforation differences for Kiusalas 12-66 pictures below. Should the catalogue mention this or not as being different for perforation 12?

It looks like the Cameo regular sheet stamps (401-405) do not perfectly fit the Kiusalas Canadian specialist gauge 12-66 measurement. Why not?

Using the Kuisalas gauge is not ideal for Canadian stamps as it was based on the assumption that Canadian stamps are perforated on the Imperial system (inches), but they are not (especially the more modern ones).
There are variations on perf 12 (12.1, 11.9) in the early stamps. I don't think anyone has done a detailed study on modern stamps RE: perforations close to 12.

I do believe that the time period in question though, was when Canada Post switched to a different perforating machine (different maker). That is likely the reason for the slight difference (The Cameos may have been printed on the old machine, or vice versa).

You should check the perforations on stamps after #400 as well to see if they are the same.

It appears that the Kiusalas gauge deals with mostly older line perforated stamps up until 1965. However, it appears that the above was from 1962 and is line perforated as well, but not included within up to 1965 by Kiusalas. It would be more like 12-66.5 rather than 12-66 since some in the U.S. have come up with 11-72.5 as a new Kiusalas measurement on the Sonic Imagery Labs U.S. multigauge. This 11-72.5 fits good for Canadian BABNC line perforated stamps from 1968-1978. Why not 12-66.5 for these CBNC stamps too? Also, 12-65.5 rather than 12-66 is also a better fit for some Large and Small Queens as well. Thus, a revision and updating of the Kiusalas gauge is in order for line perforated stamps, both old and new. The last Canadian CBNC line perforated stamp was in 1974 (629-632) and the last line perforated BABNC stamp was in 1978 (601 plate 2). Comb perforated stamps were introduced in Canada in 1968 by BABNC.

If you email me or post 2 separate scans at 300 dpi on black background I will run it thru Ezperf & post results for everyone
pretty sure Ezperf will detect the difference

Marios

Here they are Canada 400 and 401.

Hi,

here are the results ( see jpg files attached )





the cameo came in at 11.80 & the transcan came in at 11.90 .
Your images appear to have been jpg. I prefer BMP as there is NO loss in quality of the image.
I will locate some of my copies & see if I get the same

Marios

Yes, there is a difference of around a tenth of a perforation as can be seen. This is interesting to note since it points to some kind of perforation change. (I think that a bmp file is too large to post on here but I will try to see what I can do.)

Hi JG,

received your 2 scans ( bmp's )
the trans canada came in as follows:

Top: 11.89
Btm: 11.86
Left: 11.90
Right: 11.88

The cameo came in at 11.80 on all 4 sides.

there seems to be a 0.10 diff in perfs.
To be certain, one would have to do at 5-10 copies of each to make
sure this is not just an anomaly of your 2 stamps

regards
Marios

I only have plate blocks of these issues and not any more singles. Is it better to use singles or blocks since plate blocks will have two sides with corner selvages which would not allow the program to measure them? It is interesting that the new perforation (# 401) has a more consistent perforation of the same reading all around on all sides which would seem to indicate an improvement in consistency and quality of the perforations that are more better than the old perforation (# 400) readings all around which differ slightly on the different sides. Perhaps some of the collectors reading this here have mint singles they could scan and/or measure of these stamps to further verify your readings.

Is this difference an interesting variety or is it a kind of flyspeck?

Hi, at this point, it's hard to tell as the sampling is small.
I would need to get at least 10 different copies of the stamp from different sheets and
see if the results are consistent.

regards
Marios

Marios: Can I send you the following stamps that cover a wide range? Also, the two pictures separate the point of measurement difference.


(1960-1962 years)


(1962-1964 years)

sure,

send these to me at 300 dpi

Will process & let you know

MArios