Covers And Partial Covers - What To Do?

I have done kind of a cursory look through and sort of an accumulation I inherited. I have cataloged about 5000 stamps from the Deutsches Reich, BRD and DDR as well as a few territories and German states so far. I have at least that much more left that I haven't looked at. I also have several thousand from US, other European Countries, South America, Japan, China, and Africa as well as few from the middle east, India, and Pakistan.

Cataloged might be a strong term. I tried to sort them by year and series, although I am finding that for some series' years are tricky, esp. when you can't see the watermarks. I have been trying to note obvious errors listed in Michel specialized, but I am still trying to figure out types of glue, paper, and ink. I am also starting to sort based on watermarks. I have found about 250 Pieck Stamps from 1950 - 1953 and a few from 1957 - 1960. I have 400+ Portrait Types of the Russian Occupation. I am pretty sure 150 or so are from 1948 and 100 or so are from 1952/53. The rest are on cover material. I hesitate to say I know anything for sure, especially without looking at the watermarks.

Is it better to leave stamps on their covers? Does anyone know of someone (dealer, etc) in northern California that can help me figure out watermarks without removing or damaging the stamps from the cover material? For instance:



There is a huge difference in value between the 1948 and the 1952 version of the 25pf stamp. Do I need to take this to an expert? I have about 10 of what I think are MiNr 334.



The cancellation is 1953, I believe, but the 5DM stamp must have been printed in 1950, I think. In any case, should these stamps stay on the cover even with the cover being a little thrashed?

Below are a few errors I found as listed in Michel. Do error stamps follow the same catalog/reality rules are regular stamps?




Do blocks of stamps get a premium over the sum of the individual values?




Thanks for all of your insights!

unless you have something were the watermark is going to make it rare there is not much reason to do it and if you think you have something that might be real rare then single it out and ask first. Covers are almost always worth more as covers and sometimes there are other clues (like the postmark) I dont know alot about foreign stamps but others here do. Most stamps from the 40's till now have little value but there are exceptions. Run buy one of those 900 million lotto tickets if you want a shot a being rich lol

Those paper are not cover but just pieces of no value papers. Soak and remove the stamps

Some of those 'corners' have complete postmarks, and soaking/floating the stamps off of those corners will destroy the city/date information therein.

You can always trim the corners a bit to square them, if the rough edges offend you, but I would hate to see the city/date information lost for nothing more than fitting a stamp inside of a box.

If you are using those pricey hingeless mounts, the larger sizes (used for plate blocks etc) will accommodate most of your corners.

Letting the stamps remain on paper also means that you can use <gasp> h-i-n-g-e-s to mount your corners.

And remember to smile & relax! The good thing about authoritative opinions is that there are so many to choose from.

Cheers,

/s/ ikeyPikey

re The good thing about authoritative opinions is that there are so many to choose from.

Sometimes free advice is worth what you pay for it.

Stamps on piece with clear readable CDS I would simply leave without soaking them off. However I would recommend trying to clean the edges up with scissors as closely as possible without cutting into the CDS (and of course the stamp itself).

Regards,
Stampalotapus

As for those on a full cover I recommend leaving as is.

Regards,
Stampalotapus

Thanks for the feedback all!

And we give away what we value most: our own free advice.

lol

Jim Taff in Scramento is a dealer who specializes in Germany, but I have no idea if he knows any magic way of determining a watermark without removing the stamps.

You may remove & reattach the stamps if you wish (or dare)...

Check out Weiss Expertizing's article "How to Lift Stamps From Covers (and Reattach)" - http://www.stampexpertizing.com

I have not attempted such personally (chicken I guess), but if you do opt to do so, please let us know what the outcome was.

Regards,
Stampalotapus

To me, 'remove & replace' is an oxymoron (in the modern usage of that word), as there is no way I would ever get the 'replace' part right.

Howzabout:

- lightly wet(*) some portion of the face of the stamp (?2/3);

- lift that portion up off of the cover/card (I'd reach for an old-style GEM single-edge razor blade, but that's me);

- prop that portion up off of the cover/card (with weighted toothpicks?);

- let it dry (overnight?);

- backlight (from the side?) or backdrop (with black plastic film?) the stamp;

- apply the watermark solution;

- photograph the result (or not);

- let the stamp dry (minutes);

- lightly re-wet(*) the back of the stamp;

- let the stamp rest flat on the cover/card;

- hope for the best, or apply a supplemental adhesive prn (as necessary); and,

- if you did not see the desired watermark/grill, repeat the entire procedure, but lifting from the other end.

(*) wet with water, or Lindner Stamp Remover (thinking kind thoughts of Bill Weiss), or another suitable solvent.

By leaving much (?1/3) of the stamp in place each time, you 'assure' that you will not change the alignment of the stamp.

An alternative would be to ask someone who, like, you know, actually knows how this is done.

However you proceed, must we be reminded to try it a few times on a less valuable specimen?

Cheers,

/s/ ikeyPikey