Canada Albino Stamps

Does anyone know of any other Canada albino (unprinted blank) stamps with gum and perforations other than the following?:

Admiral line perforated 12 (Scott/Unitrade # 104? variety)

Caricature comb perforated 12 x 12.5 (Scott/Unitrade # 593? variety)

Houses of Parliament comb perforated 13 x 13.3 (Scott/Unitrade # 715b variety)

Thanks.

There's also Scott/Unitrade #554a(6Oct1971), the 6¢ Christmas snowflake issue.

Does it not correspond with Scott/Unitrade # 554b as to the other side of it?

Good question! I had to rethink through the process. Ha Ha.

No it would not -- otherwise both stamps would have the same catalog value as well.

When the fold is significant enough to cover an entire stamp, the covered stamp will have no ink on the front nor back (#554a), and the foldover stamp will have no ink on the front but still have ink on the backside (#554b).

I really wish everyone would stop calling these gummed pieces of paper stamps. Stamps are issued by an authorized regulatory agency. They have a face value, they have some sort of art and can be used for postage. I considered buying some at the Ron Brigham auction, a single, a coil and a pair. Price realized $280.CDN Then I whacked my head and said "I don't collect that, I collect stamps." A printing company's wastage i.e garbage paper are not stamps. Printers errors,inverts,miscolors and the like that have value and can be used, are postage. And that is what I collect.

You can always write letters to Unitrade, Scott, Michel, Stanley Gibbons, Yvert, Facit, Linn's, the Cinderella collector organizations, revenue stamp collector organizations... But most collectors consider postage stamps a subset of stamps. You are free to collect as you wish. Everybody should be able to enjoy what they collect.

@khj
When someone, anyone can prove me to me that the blank pieced of gummed paper is a CDN #104, go ahead, collect it. It is not philatelic and please stop calling it as such.

You're barking up the wrong tree. I don't collect these. I didn't even mention #104!?!

I'm sorry that other collectors and the catalogs cannot comply with your definition. I'm also sorry that I cannot comply with your personal definition of what is and what is philatelic. You are entitled to your opinion. But please do not enforce it on the rest of the world that may not share your opinion.

I have no interest in changing your opinion of "what is a stamp". I was simply answering what I thought was a pretty innocent question by jogil. If you feel your opinion is worth further discussion with other members, feel free to start a new thread.

@khj
No offense intended, I was just trying to engage the forum. Your opinion is as important as mine or anyones.
Stu

Same here, Canadian's albinos ... seriously, what's next ? If someone find a peace a paper with a watermark on it they gone call it a an albino non perforated stamp ?????

No offense taken. Like I said, we are all entitled to our opinions. It's a viable discussion area. I have no problem with these discussions.

My only suggestion is that it be taken into another thread, so that this thread get back on track and jogil can get a more comprehensive list of "white wood pulp masquerading as Canadian postage".

By the way, I don't get back on SCF much, so I missed welcoming you to SCF. So a belated welcome!

Now back to our regularly scheduled thread topic...

Stamp collectors can and will collect anything related to stamps. Scott, Linn's, Unitrade, and others can catalog perforated, unattached, gummed pieces of paper and call them stamps.

These pieces of paper would have credibility if they were attached to postage stamps, or if they were true albinos, i.e., uninked printings.

I've said it in another thread ... An unattached albino (unprinted) stamp does absolutely nothing for me. Even if there is a typed note attached that gives some sort of story of its origin, I really don't see how this can ever be proven to be authentic. Just my thoughts.

Hi guys...Whether it s designated as 544a or 104 albino stamps, remember we were NOT there when these pieces of stamp collecting was produced..As far as the #104, maybe they were perforation training stamps or run through to adjust the perforation guides, or a couple of sheet were stuck together to cause a blank sheet as in the #104...Remember, we were NOT there, so as far as I can see, my #104 is/maybe legitimate.

Just my opinion and that of a Admiral stamp expert that I talk to quite a bit..

Robert

There are those where the whole pane has not been printed on such as the ones that were mentioned in the original post like 715b which came from a discovery pane of 100. Then the 544a is from a paper fold over in which some stamps but not all did not get printed because of the paper fold over. Also, there is 979b in which a piece of paper got caught in between the paper and the printing plate resulting in some stamps not getting printed.

If a stamp is not printed it's not a stamp , by the way this is how look a legitimate 104, if you notice it's engraved and green not a white piece of paper with holes