Confusion Concerning Early Bosnia Herzegovina Stamps

These early stamps from Bosnia Herzegovina are described in Scott as being either Typographed or Lithographed and they describe how to differentiate them. For the life of me I cannot wrap my head around their descriptions. For example when they say to the right of the escutcheon, do they mean my right as I look at it? Or to the right as it is on the stamp? Does anyone know of a website or a pdf that explains the differences with arrows and pictures. I have been trying to understand this for years now. Thanks!

As far is I know it is as follows. If the lions eye is freestanding it is a Lithography(steindruck). If the lions eye is connected to the line of the head it is typographed(buchdruck). I am talking about the lion on the shield in the middle. Certain values have certain differences between the printing methods. Your yellow 2 kreuzer is typography the 2 has a flat foot. The other stamps I cant tell.

Can you not also distinguish litho from typo in this issue by "examining" the stamp for whether it was printed from a flat surface (smooth) or typed surface (raised impressions)? Typical examination is by running finger over surface or rubbing thin aluminum foil over stamp gently with an eraser and examining to see if impressions are left on foil.

Caveat: I am only a student of these.
I find the differences marked, if you scan at a reasonable 600dpi
There is far more detail in the Lithography (as I see it)

I have no idea about "reprints" if they exist.

Here is a Toggle, with my estimation.
1. The top stroke of the "5" is markedly different
2. John's "eye" of the lion is correct...it moves
3. in the bottom feathers there are 2 lines in the typo and 3 in litho.

see what you think.

Sorry, SCF will not accept my GIF.

here are the images, toggle them with your mouse.



Re John's reference to the numeral "2" shape.

hI/Here is an example of Haiti 2c Sc.33 engraved. Foil rubbed with
earaser gives a perfect imprint.Never fails!

Hi jol34,

The listings in the standard Scott and Michel catalogues are very simplified for these issues (at least they are in my old 1998 Michel and Scott 2009 editions).

There is a lot more detail in the Michel Austria specialised catalogue and there may well be much more in the Scott Classic catalogue.

SG Parts 2 (Austria & Hungary) and 3 (Balkans) both list these sets with their different perforations and main shades resulting in a lot more catalogue numbers.

As a result Scott #1-10 (litho) correspond to SG 1-105 and Scott #1a-10a & 6b (typo) correspond to SG 106-147a.

I like to compare the listings in different catalogues to get different perspectives.

The aluminum foil rubbing test works well for engraved vs litho.

I suppose you could try for Typo- I would be interested if it works.

Look for pigment to be squeezed out of the frame, especially around the corners, for typo, compared to litho.

These Bosnian issues are complex. There are multiple various perforations, shades, and types. I strongly recommend purchasing a Michel Austria Specialized (Österreich Spezial) catalog; it lists many varieties, and explanations are illustrated. Old used catalog would do nicely, because listings are the same, while approximate catalog value of varieties can be calculated proportionally. Relying on Scott in this case is futile, IMO.

Thank you all very much for the responses. The differences in the numerals is not mentioned in my Scott. The pictures of the 5n and 2n makes it obvious. Are there other clear differences in other numerals? One of the problems I have is that the postmark covers the lion's head and the tail feathers! That is probably why I ended up with them!
I have no trouble telling engraved stamps from litho and typo, but distinguishing between litho and typo can be difficult. In some countries like Argentina and East Germany the differences are pretty obvious. In others, not so.
I just replaced all my Scott catalogues since mine were falling to pieces, maybe I can think of getting more specialized catalogues when my tax refund shows up!
Thanks again.

After years of trial and error,
I find the difference between Litho. and typo. fairly easy,

With Argentina, I still have to really look closely to see the difference between Litho.
and Photo. I am apt to still make mistakes.
I use the premise Photo=Flyscreen effect

Based on what I've read here and elsewhere, I've tried to identify my Bosnia 1-10 (Scott) stamps as litho (type I) or typo (type II). Found the "lion's eye" difference and shape of 2 & 5 most useful. I would love input on whether my beginner's effort is correct, and opinions on the type of the 15 value. Thanks!