Which Canada Stamp Is The Holy Grail Of Canadian Philately And Why?

There are no dumb questions. It is because these are perforation errors, imperforate between.

Ah! They actually made it through the perforator without getting hit? That's interesting. Thanks for the response.

Possibly accidental. Canadian experts will know, but I think that there was some murky business going on with imperf etc Canadian stamps, meaning that they reached the philatelic market from printers or archives without touching a post office counter.

Moyock13: For sheet-fed intaglio printed stamps, two different rotary wheel perforators were used. One was for the horizontal perforations and the other was for the vertical perforations. For these stamps, they were only perforated by one perforator in one direction vertically.

Canada150: With regards to Canada 164 which was Stickney rotary press printed, it is slightly longer in its length and slightly narrower in its width than Canada 164as which was flat plate press printed.

Since you insist on Unitrade having the last word, see the Unitrade Canada specialized catalogue on page 25 which says:

Certain values of the "Arch" or "Leaf" issue (1930) and the "Medallion" issue (1932) were produced using two different types of printing press. "Flat Press" printings were produced on a press which momentarily holds the paper motionless while impressing the image onto the paper using an inked, flat plate. The resulting sheet of stamps will measure the same as the original engraving in both directions.

When the same engraving is used to produce plates for a rotary press, the situation changes. Plates on a rotary press must be curved to fit around one-half of the rotating drum, or cylinder, used by these presses. As the plates are bent into their final semi-circular form the design is stretched in the direction of the bend. The press transfers the image from the rotating cylinder onto the moving paper. "Rotary Press" copies are slightly taller than those printed by Flat press method.

I have to tell you all that I'm impressed by the knowledge. Is it due to a working knowledge or just a lot of research and study?

"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

Many of the early stamps starting at the King Edward VII era were issued in small quantities as Imperf, and a bit later, also as Imperf between. Quantities were generally around 200 stamps. The Bluenose and Parliament come from these special sheets.

There are a few other Canadian stamps that sell for high prices. Mint copies of Scott 1, 2, 5, 10 and 13 are very pricey. Mint copies of Scott 7 and 9 are up there, too.

Hello jogil,
I believe that you are stating that your unique # 164 with K-72 perfs is from Rotary sheet stamp waste? To me that does make sense!
Could some Rotary coil waste from # 180 have also ended up with the same K-72 perfs on all four sides? Could coil waste from any of the other Arch/Leaf coils have ended up with the Flat press perforations? Keep in mind that the BEP went through the same scenario in 1922-23.
P.S. I had a much longer version for this post, but somehow I accidently erased it!

DeEll: Yes, you are correct. Since the Stickney press was from the USBEP, it is important to look for similar varieties in Canadian stamps. Besides sheet waste, there may also be coil waste but coils were made later. However, the biggest problems appears to have occurred most with the first Canadian Stickney sheet stamp # 164 and the 164ais booklet stamp. The # 164ai Stickney rotary press booklet pane was replaced by the # 164 flat plate booklet pane and all other booklet panes were flat plate. Besides K-72 x K-72 which is the scarcest for 164 (sheet waste) [or 164ai (booklet waste)], there is also K-72 x K-72 x K-70 x K-72 and K-70 x K-72 x K-72 x K-72 which suggests that booklet waste may have also been used. (The U.S. does not have booklet waste because the first Stickney booklet was in 1926 after such measures were discontinued.)

Jogil: So I guess I will have to check the perfs on all 4 sides on my # 164's!
According to the information that I have, the # 180 coils came out about 3 weeks after the sheet stamps. I was thinking that the BABN may have decided to perf. their coil waste simply as a cost savings measure through the normal course of events with accumulated coil waste, rather than because of a major printing upset from the onset.
Finally, since the sheet stamp # 164 and the booklet stamp # 164ais where both Rotary Press printed, is there a difference in the design size as there is with the American 1922 Series rotary sheet stamps and coils?
Thank you my friend.

DeEll: The Canadian Stickney coil stamp design frame width is wider and frame length is shorter than those of the sheet and booklet stamps.

Where can I pick up the Canadian version of the Kiusalas perforation gauge?

Here is a link to a dealer listing on ebay for the Canadian Kiusalas gauge:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canada-SPEC...AOxyTjNSdIeA

You can also get it from the Saskatoon Stamp Centre.