Canada Scott 411

Stamporator, would the use of easyperf software work on these?

stamporator..you are correct and I will prove it later..got to get some supper for the family

Your perforation concerns may have been addressed by the following previous link on here: https://goscf.com/t/32714

Here's what I use - it's very accurate.

Here is a new one..Scott #692-693 stamps..Look at the perf difference below.

I guess I better sort through these 100 Export Trade #411 that I have had sitting around for a couple of years:

A gauge measurement difference should be measurable enough on at least one single stamp since it affects the distance between perforations so that a linear gauge like the Instanta should be able to detect it. Also when using such a gauge one should try centering as many perforations (holes or teeth) as best as possible with the lines on the gauge. Some just center the first and last lines without centering those lines in between which is incorrect as one should try to center as many lines as possible with the perforations (holes or teeth). My preferred professional perforation gauge is the German Philatelic Society Buildings Study Group transparent linear perforation gauge which is very accurate and printed on thermally stable film so that the gauge is not affected by any temperature changes.

jogil...Are you trying to say if I am in the north pole and you are on the equator that we would get 2 different readings.?
I really dont think temperature affects pre cast plastic that has been put through a hardening process as much as you think it does..Just my opinion....

Wert: I am not questioning your measurements at all. I am mentioning some things that I myself have wrongly done in the past when measuring perforations.

Jogil, can you line up two of your 411's horizontally so I can see how the perfs match each other on single stamps. I want to know what to expect when I go through all those used stamps I have.

Thanks!

jogil..I know you were not my friend..Just saying that extreme changes in cold/heat, may no affect an average measuring tool..Thats all..

Happy New Year jogil and to all.

BeeSee: Here's the picture that you requested. It starts on the right side lineup. As mentioned by sak, using a Kiusalas gauge helps to sort them out with K-66 for old perfs and K-67 for new perfs. Wert: I thought that we were all friends on here...LOL
Happy New Year.

Thanks Jogil. I will sort through my batch this weekend. The difference is obvious enough on single stamps.

Got my book in the mail..THE CANADIAN STAMP PERFORATION CHANGE OF 1962...Very interesting reading...Took my Scott 363 plate block and thought it would be the old (normal) 11.94 perforation..But surprisingly it turned out to be the NEW 11.85 perforation as shown below.

Will post more if there is an interest in this perforation change process.

I have so far examined thirty of my used batch of #411. Twenty have the Kiusalas 66 perforation and five have the Kiusalas 67 perforation. I did not measure them with a gauge, I lined them up with each other, as shown in Jogils image.

In order to measure the perforations I decided to use and interesting tool called Screen Calipers. I first heard of it from member 51studebaker in another thread. The basic version is free and you can access it here.

http://www.iconico.com/caliper/

I am quite impressed with this digital tool. One great advantage is it allows you to calibrate the tool based on a known size of the stamp. This is important, as most scanners on the market do not actually scan 100%, and the actual size can vary in different locations on your flatbed!

For the #411 Export stamp, I first measured the width of the red horizontal design area using a 1/64th steel engineering scale. The measurement is exactly 1-5/16 inches (1.313"). I then scanned the stamp at 600dpi. I then took the digital calipers and set them to be that measurement using the "calibrate units" feature.



Next I used the calipers to take a measurement over the centers of 20 holes on the known Kiusalas 66 stamp. That dimension came out to 1.311 inches.

Doing the math, 1.311" divided by 20 holes gives a measurement of 0.0655", which is the average distance between each individual hole. Kiusala multiplies this by 1000 to give it a gauge number of 65.5. Well, make that 66, since Kiusala seems to omit fractions and round up or down.



I did the same for the Kiusalas 67 stamp and came up with 1.331 over 20 holes, getting a measurement of 0.0666. Multiplied by 1000, this becomes 66.6, rounded to 67.



Now to convert to the standard metric gauge, the number of perforations per 2 centimetres, using the actual numbers and the rounded numbers:

Kiusalas 65.5: 20mm / (0.0655in x 25.4) = 12.02

Kiusalas 66: 20mm / (0.0660in x 25.4) = 11.93

Kiusalas 66.6: 20mm / (0.0666in x 25.4) = 11.82

Kiusalas 67: 20mm / (0.0670in x 25.4) = 11.75

These numbers are slightly different to what Jogil has but they are close enough. In my mind it proves that he has made a major find in Canadian philately, something that went unnoticed for over 50 years.