The Stamps Of Turkey / Turkiye: On Steiner Pages.

Agree with Billsey, but, still first time I have seen a partial set-off or offset, other than the catalogue.

Pricing is arbitrary I was quoting Aussie dollars, I should refrain from doing it really.
I use it personally as a kind of guide as to scarcity, in relation to other stamps in its set etc.
Remember my Catalogue is 2016, and the Turkish lira is in free fall at the moment.
ebay sales are the better guide.

Good. I get more up-to-date price information from you than from my Michel 2012. that is my most recent catalogue of Turkey.

But as you saw in the New Zealand thread, on my standard that is really quite up-to-date for me. I have catalogues and hand books that are in active use from every decade starting from the beginning of the last century. That makes the span to be almost 120 years. I would use the prices you may quote in very conservative way, mainly indicating the relative scarcity.

Rod,

Thank you for all your help. That has been highly appreciated and great help for me. I believe this stamp is of interest to you. Feel free to use the image of it. Perf is 12½ x 13.




Merry Christmas.

Hi kuikka,
that was a nice surprise
Thank you,
wishing you the best for the season as well.

Yes a fairly clumsy forgery, but always nice to see examples,
I have not met many in my collecting.
Shall save in my forgeries folder.

The "2" of the 20 paras came in a vast range of shapes

You are most welcome. Happy that you liked it.


Here are some more where I would like to get your opinion.

Scott 14, Michel I, Non issued stamp

All are Perf 12½



Sc 14 Mi I A:



Sc 14 Mi I B:



Sc 14 Mi I C:



Sc 14 Mi I D:

Opinion
Commensurate with standard of image offered (Avg to poor)
I would reject all (Unknown perforation pin diameters)

Dulos 10 paras green 1867
Scott 14 Isfila 35
Line Perf 12½

This issue came with line perforate, sheet punctured in one direction
(several rows) then sheet shifted transverse to complete the perforations the other way.

Irretrievably damaged in 1870
reverted to sewing machine

1873-1875 comb perforate.

Look for 1 Piastre error in this issue, then corrected
(this shows the stroke of the "1" in the centre of the value tablet)

This is the standard of image expected for decent opinions.

Here is a new try with this batch of scans.

Thank you for the feed back.

Are these better?


SC 14 Mi I A:



SC 14 Mi I B:



SC 14 Mi I C:



SC 14 Mi I D:



In your opinion are these genuine?

Also,

Do you have an image of corrected error in value?

Now we are talking !
They look genuine, I am just concerned with some perforations,
maybe tampered with.
Or re perfed, I have not read anything yet to support that.

Give me some time, in middle of mounting Germany.
Shall post in the morning.

Thank you. I used different scanner this time. (1200 dpi instead of 600 dpi.) However I am not always able to use it and for that reason will use also the scans with the old 600 dpi scanner.

All my scans are 600 dpi,
I have no trouble withy those.

Opinion.
Your 4 10 paras stamps are genuine.
Notwithstanding the curious perforation holes.

Caveat: I am having trouble translating Birken
He used "Mount" and "Field" I have yet to work out
I think he means plate and row.

Your stamps and mine show common plate flaw Plate 2? (Mount 2)
There are small white dots, just left of centre, under the crescent.

Note: Your 3rd stamp has a stronger bend in the top script, than the rest.
Not aware how they made up the Surcharge formes, but noted.

Also stamp C, top left corner outer frame, does not meet
personally noted.

I see no other plate flaws in our images.

Plate 1, the 1 piastre error, and it's correction.
Andreas Birken
Teil 1: Osmanisches Reich
Die Briefmarken
2. Die Duloz-Marken (sic)
ex Platinga

Thank you very much for these images. They tell more than thousand words, as the saying goes.

Here are Scott 15 Michel II unissued stamps:
Any opinion on them?

Perf 12½

Sc 15 Mi II A:




Sc 15 Mi II B:

Opinion: Undecided.