Plating Canada 17c Cartier

The 17c stamp is perforated. The proofs would be imperforate.

Canada #7 is different that Canada 19. Look ar the design in the oval. 7 has a beaver while 19 has an oval

DUH.... I do not know why I was thinking that they were the same stamp.

I sure do not see many marks to ID that series.

For those interested in plating #17 Charles J. G. Verge gives us plating information in SENATOR JAMES A. CALDER COMPLETE PLATING OF THE CANADA 17c. JACQUES CARTIER FROM THE 1859 ISSUE, 1992, Print Three, Place de Ville, 320 Queen Street, Unit 124, Ottawa, Canada. ISBN 0-9696199-0-1. This is a printing of 100 numbered copies. I have #91. You might want do a search for this excellent reference.

Watewrmark, is this comparable to the Ken Kershaw book?

Yes, Although Kershaw shows actual proof images and has more pages. Kershaw acknowledges Whitworth and Calder who both use drawings instead of actual images. I just like the smaller format of Verge's book. Either book can be used for plating.

Can anyone help in identifying the duplex postmark on this stamp? They are position 93 and 94, and I can see TTAWA on the left stamp. Date looks like AP ?? and year start with a 6? Position is confirmed by the 2 position dots under the 17, (last row on the sheet) and the dot left of Jacques head confirming it is from column 3
The red mark on the right stamp seem to be ink, which is typical of similar stamps received in London, England, buut it could also be from a wound (but less likely....
May be with the use of Wert special software this could be enhanced?

Using Retroveal.com, All I could see on the left
Cartier is: TTAWA
AM
AP
6
I am sure someone more familiar with this software (used to identify my "28" on New Brunswick # 1). I will try another software.
Rene

OTTAWA CW / AM / AP 12 / 67. I have seen that pair somewhere before. I rely on visual judgement rather than using image manipulation software but, by all means, have fun using that.

I am told there exists a complete plating for #19, duplicated in all three perforations, still intact.

Can you show an image....have been trying with .tif (
Retroveal uses that but not this Forum)
Thanks Rene

Now Don, you are going to show me how to put TIF files on this Forum - by personal e-mail, please as I do not want to look "foolish" in front of the Community

But archerg's conclusions are not readily seen, even with Retroveal, don't you agree ????

Hi Renden,
I am not an expert on these cancels, so no opinion from me! (as they say, better to keep your mouth shut and let them think you a fool then to open it and remove all doubt!)
Don

I would understand, Don, but after tweaking in Retroveal.org for some 1-2 hours, the results do not come as clear as archerg posts but he may use a different software (SW) program than Retroveal.....he did not specify and did not include an image to back up his findings and I know Gilles will want this info for sure, being a true "Canuck" ! LOL.....me too !....but I think he is on it as I see everything except the "7" in 67 which is plausible......the eye has to accommodate for awhile and then you see things........

Super thanks !

Rene

Hi again

Peeking in on this thread again... I simply don't have that software or I would have provided, sorry. I do not think much of those imaging programs anyway. If one wants to get good at IDing stamps and cancels, time is better spent self-educating with books and examining stamps - gradually you become a puzzle-solver, able to pull out the answer accurately even on dark shade stamps. If imaging software verifies your solution, that's great, but don't depend on it like a crutch.

I wouldn't post a reply here with a firm date unless I was 99+ % sure. No offense meant to you techies out there either.

Sometimes, as a back-door method, you can pull out the cancel by examining the gumside and checking the embossing effect made by the hammer. It might be possible with that nice #19 pair, as the duplex hammer looks "young".