Gradually Larger Sized "Dies" In Recess Prinitng?!?!?!

Galeoptix - Rein, I do not normally go into such details but I remember a similar event that happened in 1947 when Michel 468 / Scott 296 had parts of the master plate retouched creating Type II. See:
http://www.filateliepenkava.cz/deta...1945-1947/1/
1945 è. 421
Portréty - M.R.Štefánik
(I. typ)
elliptical zero in 2,40

1945 è. 421
Portréty - M.R.Štefánik
(II. typ)
curved zero in 2,40

Unless the master die is duplicated by electrotypy (as used to be the case in Austria or Russia), it has to be hardened and copied (and even re-copied so as to produce secondary dies for the engraver to intervene upon in preparing other values of the same design) by means of a transfer roll, which, hardened again, is used in producing the printing plates.

The transfer roll, unlike the electrotypic process, can never pick up the wealth of the fine detail of the engraving as it appears on the die proof pulled from the master die or on electrotyped Austrian or Russian stamps. Whenever the transfer roll is used, some of the fine lines can be transferred imperfectly or even disappear.

"Les épreuves d'artistes sont infiniment plus belles que les timbres," said the engraver Pierre Gandon. "C'est sur ces épreuves qu'on peut juger vraiment des qualités d'une gravure." = The artist's proofs are infinitely more beautiful than the stamps. It is on these proofs that you can really judge the qualities of an engraving.

Once the master die is hardened to be copied onto a transfer roll, the engraving on it can no longer be intervened on. Correction of faults and deficiencies of the original engraving discovered during the printing process can, however, be carried out on secondary dies, which are mainly used for intervention by the engraver in order to create other values of the same design.

Secondary dies, derived from the master die, have to be hardened and copied again onto other transfer rolls, which, after another hardening process, are used in making the respective printing plates.

Owing to enormous pressure of hardened steel on soft steel in several progressive steps involved, the design could gradually dilate. Could the P.W.P.W. have used a particular technique not preventing the gradual increase in size of Polish stamps based on secondary dies?

I happen to possess only 3 pairs of mint Polish issues with repeated designs: 1949 Stalin, 1955 Chopin and 1967 Koœciusko. To my surprise, all the 3 of them present the same phenomenon.

Thanks, Rein, for pointing it out on this forum.

True! But that doesn't explain the differences I found!



I can see MANY more differences than just in the "0"!

The 1950 Bierut definitives were first issued with zloty denominations!

When you have a close look the "ZL" seems to be the same!

Galeoptix - Rein, you are right. There are dozens of (if not a hundred) changed lines but still the engraving stems from one and the same master die. The print run of Pofis 421 / Michel 468 / Scott 296 was 254 100 000 and the secondary die derived from the master die had to be retouched and improved in several areas to replace the image on the worn out printing plates.

In fact, I would not mind viewing both Type I and Type II of the Štefánik stamps compared in great detail, not in order to be able to count the lines but to appreciate the amount of work the engraver had to put in so as to improve what had not proven good enough in his original engraving to withstand the enormous print run.

Anyway, I can appreciate your joy in discovering these little secrets.

I wish you good luck in your research.

I can not be sure about the Stefanik stamps, but the Polish 6-year-plan has TOO many changes to believe the master die was just retouched! And also the Peace Congres 40gr versus 45gr demanded the entire "Poczta Polska" to be re-engraved! Not just a re-touch!

The 1950 Bierut definitives were later issued with groszy denominations!

When you have a close look the "Gr" they all seem to be different!

Galeoptix - Rein, the explanation of why the Z³ on the Z³ denominations looks the same while the Gr on the Groszy ones differs from value to value is simple.

The Z³ symbol had been engraved on the master die, which the necessary number of secondary dies had been prepared from for the engraver to intervene on with his burin changing just the value figures.

When it was necessary to change the Z³ symbol into the Gr one as well as the value figures, the engraver decided to re-engrave both the figures and the symbol on each of the secondary dies rather than prepare a tertiary die with the Gr symbol and then re-engrave just the figures of the values, risking thus a deterioration of the portrait with a tertiary die requiring another transfer process.

Florian

From the master die with "zl" 8 secondary dies were prepared on which the value figures were added! OK, but on which die was the "Zl" removed??

The Czechoslawak stamps are worth studying in this respect as well!

Take the 1.50 and 11.00 Jan Komensky engraved by Jindra Schmidt! The 11.00 is larger!

Galeoptix - Rein, it is up to you to discover which secondary die the "Z³" was removed from.

I would be grateful if you would post the passage in Polish where Tadeusz Nowy explains the process that makes the Polish engraved stamps get larger and larger.

I checked the 1952 Komenský issue of my country in both mint and used condition and found the sizes just the same without measuring them with your precision, of course. Still, I have a surprise in store for you. Wait for my e-mail with simple scans (no blow-ups).

Florian,

the shrinkage of paper may be of influence though the direction of paper is the same for all couples! Whether Stickney or WIFAG!

07.04.1948:

07.04.1948:

12.01.1952:

24.09.1954:

18.12.1954: