How Do You Like The New Canada Post Details

By now all you Canadian stamp collectors should have
had a chance to look through your Jan - Feb 2014 Details
magazine.
Jim Phillips, Director, Stamp Services states
in the intro that this new digest format is easier to hold
and read.

Well, I had no problem holding or reading the old version.

Easier to read? The font size of this new and improved Details
looks smaller and I need a magnifying glass to read the specs on the bottom.

He says it now has a fresh,clean layout.
Really ? To me it looks like some crappy little advert
brochure I get with the rest of the junk mail.
Actually after I pulled it out of my community mail
box slot with the rest of the junk I almost threw it in
the recycling box.

There was nothing wrong with the layout of the old version.

Now for the details in this new and improved Details.

The old version of Details had nice,neat,easily read boxes
which listed all the specifications regarding the new issues.

In vain I looked for Gum type, it's gone and so is
Perforations.
I guess the people who designed this new improved version
figured who cares about gum type and perfs.

Another thing missing are the Product Numbers for all the different items.

So, how do YOU like this new Details?

I haven't seen it -- now I'm worried I might have recycled it.

I like the old format simply because I was using it to teach myself French. I could read the French and see if I translated it properly by reading the English right after...now I have the English only version.

Still waiting for mine (the first for me), but it may have been confiscated at the border as a cheap knock-off of the original.

I agree Litho - I liked the old one. Post offices have stacks of them so should be no problem getting a copy. Anyone looking for missed back copies can contact me.

I haven't seen mine yet either, although right off the bat removing the product numbers seems like a bad move. I call my gal at the local PO and often ask her to order stuff for me via product number.

My copy *has* product numbers for everything (as part of the image captions). Are there other items that don't have a number?

Now that the new "Details" has all the coin offerings, "Collections" will probably cease to exist, which is probably why the former will go to 8 issues a year.

studystamps is absolutely right.

I didn't see the product numbers included with the specifications
in the new as it was in the the old spec boxes and I didn't
notice that they were shown with the pics.

Sorry about that. I guess since I don't like this
format at all I looked for faults that weren't there.


Specifications box from the old Details



The new improved Details



Also notice that the Tagging and the Paper type is no longer
shown nor as mentioned before is the Gum type or
the Perforations.

By the way, I am not a fan of the new Details either.

Doesn't seem like there is nearly the same amount of write-up as the previous version. Perhaps we need to wait and see the next one.

*puts away pitchfork and torch*

I actually like the new format, all the information is there for the most part, just in a different place. As for information on the perforations, paper type and taging it is on page 4 of the current issue under the notice. It states:

Stamp printing specifications:

• Perforations are 13+ or simulated perforation


• Tagging is on four sides, unless otherwise indicated


• Paper is Tullis Russell, unless otherwise indicated

My main hope is that the details for the invidual issues remain consistent. I try to use this information to come up with my own album pages and the old format would leave out certain details that were present with other issues.

So now one has to go and hunt for bits of information scattered
all over this waste of paper ? Still can't find the Gum type





What details were left out in the old Details?

Has anyone sent feedback to the publisher?
Perhaps if enough people complain they will make changes.

I have written (emailed) a few times in the past to Mr Phillips
regarding different matters and usually I got a standard,
generic response from one of his assistants which basically
didn't answer my questions at all ?

I wish these people would finally start to realize
where the money comes from to pay their salaries.

Many many years ago when I would write letters
to the Philatelic Section in Ottawa regarding
stamp designs, printing features or for instance why
(at that time ) didn't Canada Post issue semi-postals
or when if ever will we get multicolour stamps,
everytime time I would get a precise, proper answer.

Why not now?

No the Information is printed once so by default all stamps are perforated 13+ on Tullis Russell paper tagged on 4 sides.

The image below demonstrates this:
.

The asterix tells us that the tagging is on 3 sides instead of the regular 4.

As for the gum type, I would venture that by default we know that stamps issued in booklets now a days are self adhesive and that souvenir sheets, sheets etc... are the good old lick and stick.




Some issues didn't have the dimensions of the stamps. As I use this for creating album pages I found this inconsistency annoying.