| Author |
 Replies: 51 / Views: 6,443 |
|
|
|
Valued Member
Netherlands
92 Posts |
|
|
In that case identifying would be enough. I probably have 100 more posts like this one and I don't want to take them out the album. |
Send note to Staff 
|
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
415 Posts |
|
|
Paul,
they cannot be identified without seeing both sides. A ggod scan of the front will verify if the stamp is unused or used fiscally and cleaned and a scan of the reverse to correctly identify the watermark if clear enough.
You can always rehinge it back in it's original position in the album,
Pagoda. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Valued Member
Netherlands
92 Posts |
|
|
I understand. Well these will have to come out anyway and moved over to the cuban pages (curious if I'll find the spanish version over there haha) so yes I'll make the scan tomorrow. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
8956 Posts |
|
|
Paul, whatever you do please be careful. If your grandfather used good hinges they should come off the page without any trouble. But don't try to force it off the page. If it gives just a bit of trouble coming off you may damage the stamp, and you would not want to do that! Also, I guess you know not to handle stamps with bare hands? Use tweezers instead! Good luck!
Peter |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Valued Member
Netherlands
92 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
415 Posts |
|
|
Paul,
It looks like Edifil # 8, 1857 no watermark, white paper, 1r. Green.
They list is at Euro 4.70 unused and Euro 1.10 used.
It looks like no gum with a horizontal crease, value would be about 50c. if a buyer could be found,
Pagoda |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Valued Member
Netherlands
92 Posts |
|
|
You're wrong because the watermark is obvious when you look with the light:  |
|
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by Paul32 - 02/11/2016 03:22 am |
|
|
Valued Member
Netherlands
92 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
415 Posts |
|
|
That makes a difference, would have helped if you had shown that before.
That makes it Edifil # 2 which catalogues at 65 Euros unused and 3 Euros used.
With the crease it would be worth $ 5.00 at the most,
Pagoda |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Valued Member
Netherlands
92 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
415 Posts |
|
|
Paul,
about 2/3rds. of the way down,
Also has the stamp any gum,
Pagoda |
|
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by pagoda - 02/11/2016 04:25 am |
|
|
Valued Member
Netherlands
92 Posts |
|
|
Yes that's the hinge, that doesn't matter for a 1855 stamp.
Also the centering is graded very fine for a 1855 stamp according to Scott and Scott values at the grade very fine.
In my opinion it's worth full catalogue value, except perhaps for the lack of gum but I can't tell myself and is only valued "somewhat less" if there were none. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by Paul32 - 02/11/2016 04:10 am |
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
415 Posts |
|
|
The crease is near the base of the stamp, not near the hinge.
Centering on imperf. stamps do not count if the stamps are imperforate, it is cut very close on the right hand side.
Gum does count, no gum almost equates to used value not mint.
I stick to my $ 5.00 estimate,
Pagoda |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
415 Posts |
|
|
Paul,
I give up, you don't want to listen, I have been collecting almost 50 years, it looks like you started yesterday.
I won't be replying to any of your posts,
Pagoda
|
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Valued Member
Netherlands
92 Posts |
|
|
Please read what Scott has to say about grading pre-1900 stamps. The gum hardly counts and the centering is still very fine like this for a pre-1900 stamp. Post 1900 you are absolutely right but not with an 1855 stamp. That's not a crease but I understand the misconception. I really appreciated your help though, thanks.  |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Replies: 51 / Views: 6,443 |
|
Posted 02/10/2016 6:53 pm
