Why Do Some People Deface Album Pages?

This is an utterly useless rant; it won't accomplish much but if even one collector is moved to rethink their practices it may be worthwhile. An ebay seller is unloading a pile of Palo premium country album pages, they look to all be from the same source.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Poland-Pal...273729063860

The previous owner wrote catalog #s on the spaces. Nothing wrong with that but this fellow looks to have placed them under the illustration in a way that they will stick out under the stamp and mount. The link provided may not be the best example, these can be erased with time and patience. There are others in the same batch that look like he used felt tip black pens. Ugly.

The prior owner had a perfect right to do what he wanted, they were his property. It just seems like vandalism. If you use a premium album like this and want to put catalog #s on the pages, do it in a non obtrusive way. You destroy a lot of resale value otherwise. Rant over.

Not in this case, but often, dealers will write down their calculated catalog values of stamps on a page, on a per-page basis. Additionally, they will sometimes note particular more-valuable stamps on a page.

Often this is done in pencil, which is erasable, but other times, it can detract from the resale value of the album itself.

Another unrelated case - I once bought a very nice Australia collection where the prior owner had taken a colored hand-stamp of his name and some other personal information, and stamped it boldly on every page in the album. That was a mess. Nice collection though.

I heartily second your rant. That's one of my pet peeves, especially on what were once nice quality pages. Yuck.

this is still common today. imo its ok to mark lightly or note next to a scarce or valuable item, but it is a turn off for most people. an owners mark in an obscure location in an album or stockbook for id purpose is ok.

Stamp collectors just can't leave well alone. Printed page, designed with boxes? I'll stick more stamps in the margins. Details in the boxes? I'll cover them with black mounts. Actually, what this often shows is that the best album is the one you construct yourself, using blank leaves.

In this case, no need for him to have written numbers, given that there were illustrations. And much better to have spent his money on stamps instead of Palo's tarted-up Steiner pages.

It is a personal preference thing.

For example, my Scott National and Plate Block albums have the Scott numbers inside the frame for each stamp/plate block, but they are covered by the stamp/plate block when it is mounted. Now if Scott album pages were printed with the stamps in numerical order by Scott number, that would not be a big deal. But they aren't.

So, for identification and inventory or appraisal purposes, I have elected to add the Scott numbers below each frame, using clear labels printed on my inkjet printer.

I also want to note which stamps are certified, hence the red "certified" labels.



Do-it-yourself pages, like those made using AlbumEasy software, have even greater flexibility in that the collector can arrange the stamps in whatever order or manner desired and place whatever text is wanted above and/or below each space.

Palo uses the Steiner system based on Scott. The stamps are provided for in catalog order. Why go through and write in the numbers? I can see doing that on stamp series like the US Washington Franklins where there is a lot of similarity that you'd want to keep track of. Otherwise it just seems anal.

Many collectors seem never to consider their album pages may have some resale value when the time comes.

I purchased a collection where the previous owner had a few rubber stamps of his initials made. He stamped his initials on each page of the album and used a much smaller rubber stamp to place his initials on the reverse side of each stamp. Still can't figure his logic for doing this.

While it is unfortunate that the owner added the Scott numbers in an unsightly manner, the main point is that they are his album pages to do with as he wishes. One of the things I like best about about stamp collecting is that you can collect what you want, how you want. If I wish to draw caricatures of Charlie Brown and Snoopy in the corners of my album pages, I can (not that I would). I collect because I enjoy it and could care less about the value of my collection, either now or in the future, so I'm not going to worry about whether or not something I do, either purposely or inadvertently, is going to affect its value. If markings on album pages bother you that bad, don't buy them...there are many more albums out there to purchase.

For albums, I prefer to make my own pages and layouts. I frequently make pencil notes (tiny writing in HB lead) under a stamp if there is a reason to do so. How else would a person keep track of all the important details?

While it is obvious that the 'next owner' might not want such markings, is not the mantra in our hobby to 'collect the way you want'? Would it be better to expect that everyone configure their album pages exactly the same and no one personalize their albums? When we buy albums, is not the condition of the page clearly identifiable? Is everyone to adhere to some predefined method of collecting? Or is everyone to only collect in a way that will appease the 'next owner'?

I do not understand this perspective. What is the corrective action here? That no one ever dare make a mark an album page?
Don

My take:
I personally do not like writing things on my own pages, although I have done it in the past. I prefer to redesign a page and incorporate information in the design, if I so choose. However, I do not let writing on pages stop me from buying collections and such as I am really only buying them for the stamps.

Now, if I was buying a collection with the thought of reusing the album I am sure I would want as clean of an album as possible, to start with.

Most of the time, when I buy a collection on pages I usually just toss the pages after I save the stamps. In fact, some of my best purchases of stamps have come on the messiest and most untidy of pages. I've even tossed out entire albums.

My thought is that if we keep rehashing, reusing, and recycling old albums, then won't that cause album manufacturers to go out of business?

I also have Palo albums which do not show Scott numbers. I have been tempted to write them in also for future reference, but I have decided to take the opportunity to do without and try to learn as much about each stamp as possible in order to be able to identify them with the help of the Palo page descriptions, but without the help of the Scott numbers. I use the Scott catalogue, another album which has the Scott numbers and my watermark/measuring tools to verify where each stamp goes when they are first placed.

This approach preserves the original appearance of the albums, which presumably helps their value on resale, but that's not the reason why I choose to keep them "pristine". If some folks do this because they are concerned with value, than that's cool. If others write all over their albums in order to enhance their enjoyment of their hobby during their lifestimes, then all the power to them also.

We're enjoying a hobby as we each see fit. Whatever works for each of us is OK.

I believe this falls into the category "to each his own". I have albums I purchased and ones I made from printing my own pages. I will write what I feel is important...cat #, plate #, color if it is a variant, etc. I don't collect to satisfy someone else in the future, this is for me...and I love it.

Collectors who rubber stamp their names on album pages (or even on the back of stamps) are trying to protect themselves in case of theft. It's a lot easier to get stolen goods returned to you if they are labeled. That this might ruin the pages or stamps for later collectors may not seem likely since, I'd guess, they must think they'll never sell them.

As for adding catalogue numbers, I don't really see the problem. Many collectors like to know the catalogue numbers of missing stamps. Adding them to every stamp box makes this easy to see. In any case, it's their album so they can do whatever they want with it. It seems a little strange to expect every collector to do with their collection what some other collector wants them to do. It's their hobby and their album.

Ideally the stamps and mounts will cover up the catalogue numbers. My pet peeve about this is how sloppy some people's handwriting is -- plus their inability to write small enough so the catalogue numbers remain in the boxes underneath the stamps. Oops! There I go. Now I'm telling other collectors what they should be doing. My mistake.

I can on one hand understand the OP's "frustration" if one want's to purchase an album which they plan to keep intact as part of their collection, and they don't want someone else's notes, or any markings at all, on the pages.

On the other hand, anyone who assembles a collection and builds an album gets to manage that as they see fit, and my stamps have Scott #'s penciled in underneath.

I am uncertain as to if this really reduces resale value. Though I'm still very much the novice my impression is that most collectors who purchase an album mounted collection do so for the stamps, which they most likely will incorporate into their existing collection – the value is in the stamps, and one can always get new pages if they want to also use the binder.

My personal perspective is that if I were considering two identical collections: One on fancy album pages (either pre-printed or custom designed) and the other on plain paper with a catalog # penciled in underneath … the later would represent more value to me (given that the real value is in the stamps) because it would be useful.