| Author |
 Replies: 40 / Views: 4,274 |
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
8956 Posts |
|
|
Dynamode, that is correct. It is also why e keep emphasizing that the dimensions in the catalog should not be used as a determining factor in identifying ( rare ) stamp
Peter |
Send note to Staff 
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
Canada
877 Posts |
|
|
If the printed image sizes are different for the two stamps with different perks, then paper shrinkage is the prime suspect.
If the printed images are the same, is it possible that a new plate has been made, requiring a slightly different perf. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Valued Member
439 Posts |
|
|
Thanks peter4522. I cannot clearly see the watermarks on most, even with clean backs. So have put them all to one side until I can put them in water. They are tough to sort correctly. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Rest in Peace
Canada
5701 Posts |
|
|
As for the "shrinking" Canadian stamps, a very simple test would be to take a mint stamp from a block or sheet and soak off the gum and dry it. Then compare it with a mint one from the same sheet. These stamps are worth nothing but face anyway.
I will try it myself if I can find some lying around. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
|
Rest in Peace
7742 Posts |
|
|
Again guys...
IF the top perf is different because of so called shrinkage then the bottom perf should follow the same analysis..But..BUT..When you get a stamp after water removal and the top is a different perf than the bottom..There is more going on than just shrinkage..
Robert
|
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
3859 Posts |
|
|
It could be that one of the rows of pins and holes on the perforating plate was slightly different. These would have to be found on mint copies to check out. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Rest in Peace
Canada
5701 Posts |
|
|
Robert - where in this post have you compared the top and bottom perforations of the SAME soaked stamp? I see a comparison of the mint and soaked stamps only, and two different used stamps. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
| Edited by BeeSee - 05/02/2018 1:34 pm |
|
|
Valued Member
439 Posts |
|
|
wert. I did not realise your stamp has a different guage top and low. Are you sure ?. Is that even possible ?. I will check my 2 used stamps again. Your posts are always very interesting. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Moderator
United States
12330 Posts |
|
|
Robert wrote; Quote:
True Don..But if TOP shrinks, so should the BOTTOM. BeeSee wrote Quote:
Robert - where in this post have you compared the top and bottom perforations of the SAME soaked stamp? I see a comparison of the mint and soaked stamps only, and two different used stamps. Robert's first two stamps comparing the top and bottom perfs of same stamp; they are the same.  Don |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Rest in Peace
Canada
5701 Posts |
|
|
Don so I misunderstood (Robert can confirm). The referral was the top and bottom STAMPS? Not the top and bottom row of perfs?
So Robert, you are wondering why one soaked stamp shrunk and the other didn't? |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
|
Rest in Peace
Canada
5701 Posts |
|
|
This is the confusing part: Quote:
When you get a stamp after water removal and the top is a different perf than the bottom..There is more going on than just shrinkage.. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
|
Moderator
United States
12330 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
439 Posts |
|
|
Quote:
The one thing I know for sure, I am confused. That is a regular occurance for me |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Rest in Peace
Canada
5701 Posts |
|
|
Quote:
That is a regular occurance for me It is something to think about. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
|
Rest in Peace
7742 Posts |
|
|
I really dont know why you guys are so confused..and btw, thanks for the extremely kind words..makes a guy want to post more..hmmm
When you soak off a stamp and IF the stamp shrinks..BOTH top and bottom SHOULD be the same..But it is not.
And out of the 95 I checked, about 7-8 were 13.4..
Robert. |
|
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by wert - 05/02/2018 7:41 pm |
|
|
Replies: 40 / Views: 4,274 |
|
Posted 04/30/2018 2:08 pm
