Gibraltar Mystery

Here are 5 Gibraltar stamps that I am trying to catalog. All the stamps measure perf. 14 (give or take a quarter gauge). The stamps in the top row (nos. 1-3) are 38.5 mm wide while the bottom row (nos. 4 & 5) measures 37.5 mm wide. No. 4 is actually a bit shorter too. (As an aside, no. 1 has some uninked areas around the letters of Gibraltar.)



The 2015 Scott Classic Specialized catalog makes no mention of any size differences in this issue.



Are the different sizes for this issue documented in any other catalog; Stanley Gibbons or a specialized Gibraltar catalog perhaps.

I want to create a custom album page for these guys, so I need some more information (affected values, perf. and size measurements, date of issue, etc.). If anybody could post a catalog excerpt for this issue and these varieties, I would very much appreciate it.

Thank you, Robert

Robert, these are older stamps. Is it not just normal for them to change in size just a little bit due to the paper used? By the way, these are beautiful, from an era when they were still printing stamps instead of wallpaper!

Peter

This link might help. (It's a start at least.) SG apparently lists, for example, 112a, 112b, and 112c, so there are varieties or errors.

http://www.stamps-for-sale.com/earl...ar-364-c.asp

Is the resolution high enough to make things out?

From a blog about Deep Blue:

"Interestingly, [Deep Blue] also has a space for the 1931-33 "Rock of Gibraltar" series with the minor number perforation (13 1/2 X 14) variation (Scott 96a-99a). The major number is for the perforation 14 stamp. Even SG only has a minor number for these perforation variations." Note: Emphasis added.

I don't think Robert is asking about the perforation differences. He was wondering about the printed size.

Peter

Here are the Michel numbers, with a bit of detail. No mention of the stamps being a different size, just different perfs.

http://www.sutherlandphilatelics.co...ibraltar.pdf

Thank you for the replies so far.

It seems the major catalogs document the perforation differences only.

I thought that paper shrinkage may be the culprit here, but a 1 mm difference in the horizontal measurement seems a bit excessive to blame on shrinkage.

Another thing I noticed: the stamps in the top row (the wider ones) seem to have a finer, darker image than the stamps in the bottom row. Here is the image at 1200 dpi.

I'm giving this thread a bump.

I recently obtained a narrow example of Gibraltar Scott 99 (S.G. 113). As you can see the difference is quite noticeable (certainly catalogable in my opinion).

Sorry about the blurry photo.

Still searching for info about the size difference.

Happy New Year,

Robert