Spain - Unidentified Variety On 1932 Issue

You're absolutely right KGB.

They were originally printed in 1932 perf 11 1/2
and imperforate as per my 2014 Scott

Another print in 1938 was printed with perforation 10

But they were all printed engraved.

So where does Blaamand's photogravure copy fit in here?

How you can see that on a small pics like this ?, I'm trying to study the Machins, and I need a my binocular at 20x to see the dot around the denomination for know if it's photogravure

In the last pic Blaamand posted even though it is
blurry and not the best scan I admit, it just
doesn't appear to be printed via recess engraving, typography
nor offset/litho so which leads me to believe as I have stated
on my first post on this thread that it was printed by
way of photogravure.

I'm just familiar with Engraved, but why use photogravure for a monochrome stamp ? Why it's not litho, it's not an argument, I just try to understand, as I said I'm a engraved type of guy.

Thank you gentlemen - lots of constructive inputs!



Apologise, I am struggling to get the details from the scan onto this forum. Does this image help to identify printing? 1200 dpi.


All my stamps of this issue seems similar in print, except for the amount of ink (or pressure?) applied.


Seems the conclusion is - as KGB - it's a mysterious stamp. Quite interesting with the obvious odd perfs on KGB's cover with 3-stripe.

KGB - Very interesting censored cover!

My Spanish Edifil catalog also states one printing in 1932 (perf 11 1/4) and one in 1938 (perf 10), but that's it. I see no mention of other perf varieties. Basically, the only difference in the 2 are the perfs.

@area66

Spain as did many other countries started using
photogravure printing for some stamps in the 1930's.
But it really took off after WWII partly because
stamps printed gravure looked as if a real photo,
much more so than any printed via typography or lithography
or engraved.

Plus on long print runs like definitives it was
the cheapest way to print.
Now ofcourse its offset/litho or photo/litho
which is very similar to photogravure.
Just look at some of the Canadian stamps printed by
Lowe-Martin. Do they have the appearance of lithography
or photogravure?

Getting back to Spain.
Look at the Franco definitives from 1939-53.Scott 678 - 705b
All lithography. Is that a real life like portrait
of Franco?
Now compare them with the 1954- 75 Franco definitives
this time printed via photogravure.
It is a real photo of the dictator and that's what
the Spanish Post wanted the people to see.
The lithography printing presses at that time were not
capable of the quality of photogravure printing.
Now of course that's different.
Very few countries still issue photogravure stamps
and if they do it's usually long print runs for definitives.
India is one example, Brazil also until a few years ago.

Spain - thanks for that info

lithograving - a good lesson, thanks!

Blaamand, what can I say.
The 3 stamps on the delcampe cover shown by KGB appear
to be recess engraved, whether 1932 or 1938 issue.

Yours.....?

I would have to see the stamp "in person"
before I would be 100% certain.

May I ask what kind of scanner you use?

Move tongs or nail over design, if engraved, it won't be flat. If litho, it will.

Re engraved or not... I've shared this advice on my blog time and again.

1. Take a piece of kitchen (aluminium) foil
2. Place it on top of the stamps face
3. Gently rub the foil with (hard) eraser till you see the stamps perfs shaping up
4. Lift the foil and look on the back - if you see impression of the stamps design on the foil, the stamp was engraved. If not, then it was printed in some other method.

Guaranteed to work 100% and leaves no room for debate.

And yes, these stamps should be engraved.

-k

Was it reprinted or they just changed the perforation?

In any case, 1938 in Madrid, were they were printed, was a very difficult place to be, in the middle of a civil war.

Not that it's relevant here, but this stamp is also available with a Tangier ("Tanger") overprint.

lithograving - you are very welcome to come and visit, I am offshore in the South atlantic ocean outside Brazil - coming this afternoon?
And I have company with a HP officejet Pro 8610. It is probably not the best scanner - tough the poor image may be caused by me don't understanding how to get the high-res image properly displayed on this site. How do you manage any better when file size limit is so low? The best I can do is a cropped out part of the 1200 dpi image, just below the limited size.



I have done the tests for engraved/litho - but I cannot say it is conclusive in any way or the other...

Again I like to say a big thank you for all the good people interested in and trying to solve this puzzle
Jon

Jon was kind enough to send me a high res image of this, and I gave it a whirl on the digital (browser-based) tool that I'm developing, and with his permission I'm sharing the results/email I sent to him....

The right and left side seem like a clear 10 3/4 (10.71 and 10.67) The top and bottom perf measure approx. 10.6 (so give or take 10½-10 3/4 on manual gauge depending on how you look/place the stamp).



But I recommend you take the above (and attached) results with a pinch of salt because, here comes the 'wacko' part.

One of the features of my tool is that it allows you to measure the distance between individuals perfs and as such 'predict' the upcoming perf one tooth at a time. And now the mystery unravels a bit (and this is what I noted first place by looking at original images):

On the stamp, the 'perforation' between two tooth's can vary between
- 9.3 - 12.6 units on top:
- 9.7 - 11.9 units on left
- 11.3- 12.4 units on bottom (but because this side is what it is, mistakes on the figures are possible)
- 10.2 - 11.8 units on right

On regular stamps You might see differences of 0.5 - 1, sometimes even 1.5 units (fraction of millimeter in marker location makes up easily a difference of 1 unit). But NEVER 2 or 3 units and NEVER in such way (extremely wide and narrow perf holes in random order)

Some other (vision based) observations... The perf holes are in general 'wider' and 'deeper' than with the two other examples shown.

I've got no doubts on the authenticity of the stamp (not a forgery based on the scan), put it definitely had a different set of (very bizarre) perforation pins used than the other two examples. So possibly a private perforation (even sowing machine).Considering the conditions of Spanish Civil War nothing would surprise me.

Lots of speculation (from fellow worldwide collector who knows nothing in great detail buts lots of small details). But maybe somebody will come up with an answer based on these details.

-k-