Opinions On Sherlock Watermark Detector

Jack, please be aware that these UV lamps work best hen using fresh batteries. Batteries do not stay good very long in these UV lamps, if possible use an AC adapter or better results

Peter

Reviews on Amazon are quite mixed- the product doesn't seem robust.

Peter,

I notice that there is a DC plug outlet on the device. I will be assessing its usefulness today. Shermae, the unit is very light but I would not say it is flimsy.

(PS: I forgot to say that I will be assessing the unit's effectiveness sometime today.)

Jack Kelley

Well, the results are in. I am afraid the Tri test Counterfeit banknote checker does not work. Not for me, at least. I first tried the phospher light on my UK phospher banded stamps. Nothing. Tried again in a dark room. Again, nothing. Disappointed.

I next tried the watermark lights on my "Two Cent" Washington perf 12 stamps (double watermark). I did this dry and then again with Rosonal. Nothing. Disappointed.

Buddahboy, I would really like for you to chime in to point out the error of my ways. I may be doing wrong.

Jack Kelley

Reference above. I'm going to my stamp club tomorrow and will see if they can do anything with the Tri-Test detector.

Jack Kelley

Thanks very much Jack,
I have been hanging off buying awaiting your results.

The type of watermark detectors that capture the stamp between glass plates and project a strong light are fine for just about every country except the United States.

American wood-pulp paper is largely opaque. So, if you are looking for watermarks on Washington-Franklin's and there about, watermark fluid is the best solution.

Another exception are the very thick paper printings from the Crown Agents, c. 1960s -1980s. Even with the foils, these watermarks are sometimes impossible to see. That said, with experience sorting these stamps one can sometimes infer the watermark based on the paper characteristics.

Hi Jack I don't know about US stamps but it works fine on Australian stamps as you can see.
The Zoological issues can be a pain to see watermarks but are very clear in the pic. I haven't used the UV side of it because I have a desk UV lamp.

This is in my office with the light on right stamp no Watermark

That's encouraging, Buddaboy. I'm sure I'm doing something wrong. Of course, I brought tweezers, stamps, and Ronsonol to the stamp club for help. I realized that O forgot the detector only after I got there! Now I have two more weeks to wait for the next meeting. Thanks for the update and let us know how you make out with the UV.

Jack Kelley

The penalties of getting older. This week, I met a couple of my mates for our Full English Breakfast Club. Got back to the underground station to realise that, for the second time in a row, I'd failed to hand over two heavy music books that I'd dragged all the way there in my backpack. At least you remembered to go!

I tried the backlit method and I am not seeing anything.

here an example of both single and double line "P" in the Signoscope T1, using a foil beneath the stamp and very low light. It's difficult to make a photo because it's so dark, but still you might see the watermarks. Just as an example. The single line is even a difficult one because of the other darker area in the middle of the stamp.

If I have many stamps to watermark, I use fluid, but if I have a stamp with difficult watermark and more time, then Signoscope is working very well. It depends on the watermark: sometimes it's better in fluid, sometimes it's better in Signoscope.

It shows the watermarks I can see without chemicals. Other than that... Big disappointment. It is cumbersome, likely designed 60 years ago. Lighter fluid works much better and has the added advantage of making it easy to set fire to the stamp when disappointed with the findings.