Canada Scott/Unitrade # 98 Wet/Dry Printings

Stamperix, see the following:

Reference: http://www.bnaps.org/ore/VanSomeren...Printing.htm


Reference: http://www.bnaps.org/ore/VanSomeren...ps-Paper.htm

Yes, this is exactly what I meant - when both directions are larger, so 18mm x 21.5mm, or in your case, 34mm x 22.5mm, it's a dry printing, even without looking at the wove direction? I ask, as this would be an easy task to do if you once have made a template to check many stamps at one time.

Yes, I do use a large dry printed reference template stamp to make comparisons with.

I find it interesting that for the Admiral stamps which are very definitely known to exist as wet and dry printed the difference between their stamp design widths is only around 0.5 mm due to wet paper shrinkage.

For the 2 cent Edward VII and 2 cent Quebec Tercentenary stamps, this difference between wet and dry printings can be from 0.5 mm to 1 mm and these stamps are usually questioned more because they are earlier stamps.

There have been occurrences of similar differences affecting both the widths and heights of the Canada Queen Victoria Leaf and Numeral Issues, but these have been due to the paper shrinkage differences between wet printed stamps with vertical and horizontal wove papers.

Yes, if you think about when (much later!) the first US stamps were made with dry printing, it's clear that 1905 is quite early, as well as the Quebec commemorative stamps. If the 90xii was experimental and did not cause the printers to print all stamps in dry printing, it's perhaps not very likely to find other stamps (Unitrade numbers) from that era in dry printing, at least from the Edward VII issue.

Concerning your topic (Quebec stamps), if the printing quality is fine, the embossing of the design is on the gum side and the size is obvious, I don't see where there is much place for doubts? Is there maybe, like in US stamps, also a difference of paper thickness, which could help to objectify?

(concerning the US stamps about which I asked above, I looked at many stamps now, from Bank Note stamps over 1894, 1902, Washington-Franklin, and indeed I can now see the wove pattern, thanks to the detour to Canadian stamps, never thought about that for US stamps. For some W-F stamps they are quite cloudy, so perhaps any dry printing experiment was not discovered yet because of that, in US stamps)