Canada 1996 High Technology Unitrade Mistake

Martin,

No, but this doesn't make it reliable!

Take the "P"'s and compare them among themselves! The Peterborough paper used for recess printing is certainly NOT the same paper as used for offset-litho!

It will take me some more time - and material! - to come up with practical kriteria for the various providers!

Rein

Is this the booklet pane from which these stamps come from? One can see the "C" for Coated Papers on the bottom.

If you look at your Unitrade catalogue on page 313 'Jogil', you will see that the picture of the booklet pane clearly shows the "C" paper indicator as well.

The mistake in the listing was the 'ol "copy/paste/forget-to-change" syndrome, way back in 2006 when this was noted.

I am always surprised when this kind of mistake is noticed so many years later.

Robin

UnitradeEditor: Sometimes I am hesitant to ask since it might appear redundant given that my latest Unitrade catalogue is from 2016, but I was wondering if the 1534ii and 1535ii are still listed under Peterborough Paper instead of Coated Papers or was this already corrected since then?

>>I am always surprised when this kind of mistake is noticed so many years later.<<

......And in the Netherlands !

Peter

Jogil:

I had not noticed that 1534ii was on Coated Papers until you mentioned it here. I have added this to the footnote for the 2020 Unitrade.

Robin

It may help to get someone to go through the different marginal inscriptions of such past new issue stamps to record the different paper types.

Jogil,

I have already started to sort out the paper types acccording to Unitrade and then to compare that to what I can see in my used copies [not having marginal inscriptions!]. This method brought me here!

Sorting out paper types let me make a scheme for the Belgian Stamp Dealers catalogue [in cooperation with my good friend, the late Eric Mesdagh]. And I had already made a survey of stamp papers used for Dutch stamps.

It learned me to be careful just depending on mint, gummed stamps. For years the Harrison&Sons stamp paper was delivered with H&S pre-gumming it, but in 1980 the Dutch printers Joh. Enschedé took over the gumming.

So the paper still kept coming from England!

In establishing differences in stamp paper we should - at first - forget about OBA's and gum! Find and describe other characteristics that will make it possible to tell for instance that this stamp was printed on Clark paper just having a single used stamp!

Rein

Who knows what type of paper Molly Brant is supposed to have?



I'd rather say Rolland instead of Harrison&Sons?!

Yes, Molly Brandt is on Rolland paper for sure.

Does an "H" appear on the margins???

How do we get this Harrison&Sons idea????

Here is an interesting paper type links:

https://adminware.ca/checklist/chk_paper.htm

http://brcstamps.com/abbrev.htm

Jogil,

this "back of stamp has horizontal "lines" when viewed against a darker background (looks textured, almost like ribbed paper)" is of no importance as ALL stamp papers have a sieve structure where "horizontal" lines play a role. And when are lines horizontal???

When we haven't even established the direction of paper???

We need a more precise description of this paper!

Not counting that under the name of Harrison&Sons come various types of paper! Even within the same stamp issue!

Rein

Jogil,

your second link seems to be more helpful, but ...

"C: Coated Papers Ltd began to supply paper for Canadian stamps in 1988, and continues to do so. It is recognized by its opaque qualities and smooth green tinted gum."

NO, NO!

The main characteristics of CPL/TR are the superfluous rough grooves on both sides of the paper where these grooves have NO relation to fibers in the paper pulp - at least till the introduction of self-adhesives.

Rein

Rein, you are right. The Molly Brant Scott 1091 was printed
on Rolland Paper not Harrison as stated in Unitrade.

This was the info in Canada Post Bulletin 1986-04-14