| Author |
Replies: 11 / Views: 1,648 |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
729 Posts |
|
|
Quick question, my SG does not specify Victoria postage due stamps with inverted wmks  . I have SG #D35a (Scott #26) with inverted watermark. Is there any premium for it? Thank you.
|
|
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
Canada
1394 Posts |
|
|
Unless the USA issued Queen Victoria stamps, what country are you referring to? |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Bedrock Of The Community
Australia
38679 Posts |
|
|
You'll need Brusden and White I think. My semi specialised Gibbons does not list inverted Wmks, outside its scope.
I'll dig out my ancient 1977 ACSC and see if they list them there. Oops...being Victoria, not listed in Commonwealth. I make yours July-sept 1899 1d
BJ: the forum thread is Aussie stamps.
|
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by rod222 - 11/13/2018 10:25 pm |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
729 Posts |
|
|
Rod
Not quite. It's 1905-1909 issue (according to SG or Scott) with A below Crown watermark. |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
Australia
975 Posts |
|
|
Danko,
The method of printing was that each sheet of 240 watermark impressions was inserted into the printing machine and 120 frames were printed, then the sheet was turned and reinserted for the second impression of 120 frames.
This resulted in a 50/50 ratio of inverted to upright watermarks.
While I am a completist and seek each variation, there is no philatelic significance in the watermark position.
Note: this was not the case for Australian postage due stamps.
John |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Bedrock Of The Community
Australia
38679 Posts |
|
|
Danko, you said... Quote: I have SG #D35a Then said....... Quote: Not quite. It's 1905-1909 issue The 2 do not match  I still remain at 1899 July.............. That's why "a picture paints a thousand words" (or scan)  |
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by rod222 - 11/14/2018 06:40 am |
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
156 Posts |
|
|
rod222
D35a was issued in 1906 so how do you find a mismatch?
The best way to sort out what it is would of course be with a scan of the watermark as there was a change of watermark for the 1905 series. SG refers to this in its Australia catalogue.
danko clearly describes the watermark as A below Crown which is of course the watermark used in the 1905 series. Earlier issues in Victoria used V over Crown.
Regards Frank |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
United States
729 Posts |
|
|
Rod Sorry for delay, here are the pictures. I know its more fun that way for everybody. It looks like your version of catalog have lot more numbers then mine. John Thank you very much. That is what I was looking for.    |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Bedrock Of The Community
Australia
38679 Posts |
|
|
Quote: It looks like your version of catalog have lot more numbers then mine.
Thanks Danko, I was discombobulated there for a while............. Looks like SG has reorganised their Catalogue numbers. I'll place a strike through my catalogue and pencil in the alteration. (I very rarely use SG, it's an 1993 edition) |
Send note to Staff
|
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
Australia
975 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock Of The Community
Australia
38679 Posts |
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
Australia
975 Posts |
|
|
The 2014 edition of the Australian Commonwealth Specalists' Catalogue, Part 10: The Postage Dues includes listings for New South Wales and Victoria and these are more comprehansive than anything seen previously.
I would guess that the stamp pictured is the aniline rosine and pale green one (subject to the limitations of scans, of course).
Interestingly, the 4d of this series is shown as £18 mint and £11 used in the extract above. It is a stamp completely under rated, I have seen just a handful of dated used copies in 40 years of collecting these things.
|
Send note to Staff
|
| Edited by 64idgaf - 11/16/2018 11:55 pm |
|
| |
Replies: 11 / Views: 1,648 |
|