Why Older Stamps Look Better?

My favorite stamps all seem to be from before 1955. What is it that makes these older stamps look better. Is it the paper? Dyes? Combo? Of all my stamps that I can say I truly love, they are all from mid to early 20th ce. They just pop! This is an example of a favorite. What is yours?

Many old stamps was engraved and and artist was making sketch and final drawing. Now they do the stamps from design to production with software. Sometim they just put a photo of an animal . Craftsmanship is lost and new generation will not take over

I agree with area66 that the biggest factor was the engraving, which required that you put that much more work into the design, especially the textures of surfaces.

It was also the style, at that time, for a stamp to have a proper vignette, without which every stamp strikes me as, well, insufficiently officious.

The advent of multiple inks was a mixed bag; for some stamps, that second color was complementary; for other stamps, it just let the designer get lazy.

Given your taste, JayR101, I suggest adding Bermuda ... see the 1936 Landscapes, for example.

Cheers,

/s/ ikeyPikey

Jay -- you'll find a LOT of us here that agree with your assessment.

If you haven't already, you'll want to peruse my personal favorite thread on SCF, the "Collecting by Engraver" thread

https://goscf.com/t/9106&whichpage=2

It's currently up to 163 pages, so there are tons of beautiful stamps to see!

Kirk

Engraved stamps are generally more attractive, although I have to confess to finding those acres of purple or brown US stamps rather dull. The French and Czechoslovakian issues are probably my favourites - and most can be picked up cheaply. And typographed stamps can also be highly attractive - whilst a lot of Victorian GB surface-printed issues aren't pretty, the ground-breaking, two-coloured Jubilee issue of 1887 is beautiful (from where I sit, at least!).

Thanks all. I have new areas to check out. Kirk, I will check that thread. Thanks

JayR, that's one of my US favorites as well. Really like the use of orange paper as part of the design color scheme.

I like the old single color flat plate intaglio engraved stamps.

I like the purples one, not the French one , but certainly love the CZ, Typo is also acceptable, but for sure not the litho. UK, not really but the 2 colours engraved of many of their colonies are very attractive.

I am also a collector who finds engraved stamps the most attractive to the eye, especially those of Czeslaw Slania.

The OP asks "look better" though, and I think there is more involved in an answer to that question. At the risk of sounding cliché, there is definitely a generational factor at play here.

In general, I find US stamps from roughly 1920-1960 to be dull, drab and boring. Yes the engraving is often exquisite, and I do have small specialized collections of the WW2 and Michigania issues. I like how elegant the Presidential series looks on an album page; same for the Overrun Nations issue. The bi-color and colored paper issues (like the OP's Nassau Hall) are also attractive but many of the subjects hold no personal connection for me. I did not see the stamps on the daily mail, nor buy them at the Post Office. They commemorate aspects of an American lifestyle I simply do not connect with - Rotary, Turners, NY Worlds Fair, etc. - much in the same way that today's "Pop Culture" themes leave many collectors disappointed.

I look at the issues from about 1968-76 with this nostalgic appeal. I bought the stamps, soaked them from the mail, made my own FDCs and actively traded and collected them. Space issues for a kid glued to the TV as Armstrong took his "small step." Revolutionary War issues as I learned about my own ancestors who fought and died - for both sides. Cable cars, whaling ships and places I had seen in person (or would soon).

This one is probably my favorite. I had just turned 14 and Peter Max art was on a stamp!

"Expo74 Stamp" by USPS & Smithsonian Institution. Licensed under Public Domain.

Yup, I sure do agree with the OP. And may I add..............

I find the stamps of say......"pre 1950s" to be more meaningful and relevant in their subject matter. Stamps of the countries leaders and accomplishments and timely events told a story and give us an insight into the country at that time.

Many of later stamps tend to have lost their meaning and relationship to the issuing country. Finding stamps of Elvis and Marilyn and exotic animals and flowers on the stamps of countries that have nothing to do with the subjects is just not right (to me of course). Yes, I know they were issued to provide a source of revenue (from collectors)and to "pretty up" their usual stamp images, but I find it sad.

My worldwide collection goes through 1960 - but in hindsight, I should have stopped at 1950.

The more careful and classical approach to stamp design, the greater relevance to the country's history, and the "real" history of the times that the stamp reflects, all make collecting the classical era satisfying and rewarding.

KirkS, just went through the engravers forum. You were so right. Going to collect a special album of engraved stamps from the groups. Thanks for your input, I had not thought of looking at this before.

If you have the equipment try scanning at high resolution, a perfect copy of almost any mint engraved stamp and then printing it in colour at A4 (or the US equivalent) size. The results can be stunning.

AQ

Czeslaw Slania (1921-2005) was the best of the best for engravings of postage stamps and banknotes. For more information: http://slaniastamps-heindorffhus.com

Climber steve. There are some nice stamps in there. Thanks