Variety Of Washington 2c

Thanks everyone for chipping in with ideas, I will be looking at the backs! I am interested in the stamps and the id process too...

Hey Don,
Was your ID matrix created from the basis of the one that I created (that's on Bill Weiss' website still)?
If so, I have expanded it quite a lot (to include the Schermack's John mentioned). I'm ok to provide it for use on Stamp Smarter. I find that the Excel file has a lot of speed and reduced frustration points that the website identifier suffers (its much faster, particularly to "reset" as well). I could even change this to put an "interface" on the front of it, where you just answers the steps you need, as John is suggesting. I'd be willing to work on that.

Hi Scott,
Always looking for improvements. I try to avoid using proprietary file formats for a number of reasons; keeping things browser-based eliminates a lot of support headaches. But I am always happy to publish new/improved content, thank you for the offer.
Don

Hi Don,
Sure. And I completely understand where your coming from, but the issue I have with the web site is "usability". If you have a massive pile of WFs the web tool is just a bit too clunky. (For instance, with the Excel version I have if you want 2c you just select 2c. With the web site you have to first select "equals" and the 2c but even then you get 12c mixed in with. You have converted "two cents" to 2c, and you get those with it... which just adds to the difficulty and confusion, unless you selected design type A139 first, but that's a whole other matter that just adds to the slowness of ID this way.
(I'm not being critical, I get why it's done this way in the web site. But everyone I've introduced the spreadsheet to has loved it, though I get you have to have Excel to use it...
So everything has a plus and a minus. But in any case, let me do the updates, and then you can apply what you want of it to your site page.
Cheers.

Hi John,




The problem I see with this is, the coils and the Vending & Affixing private perforations are among THE most faked items in philately. And often times one of the easiest ways of detecting that are proving that it can't be authentic because we prove its first not a possibility. The process I use to ID is the following (I utilize an Excel spreadsheet with filters. Everything is present at the start, and it narrows down as you go):

1. Design + Denomination
Now I have a list of stamps that match mine in appaerance.

2. Press Type (or perforation if it's obvious to me, but this is fine as a next step)
Now I've removed anything that isn't in the list, and I still haven't had to perform any real tests.

3. Perf type
This requires high magnification and the use of a specialist gauge if there is a coil involved.

4. Watermark
Usually gets me down to two or 3 types, fewer if this is Step 3 instead.

5. Variety
I use this as a "last step", for 1c and 2c and bluish paper ID only, and the 5c Carmine & Rose Error prints.

6. My newly added "Vending & Affixing" & Imperf Coils
Most people aren't familiar with the private perfs. They just think, "This is different". I like this option because even I forget about the imperf coils from time to time. Particularly if the stamp is a single...

To me, I don't think it can get any simpler than that. You can swap step 3 and 4 if one prefers. I like to keep watermarking to essentially a "last step", because by this point you actually now have the ID. Steps 6 and 7 are just "reminders" that some of these issues live as other varietals. But the ID is there.

I get you're looking for the quick, simple, most likely ID, but that is what leads to people jumping to the "I've got the rare 459 Autovend Type III perf". Where if they had followed the process they would discover that it's a 482 with a fake perf added to look like the AVC Type III.

This kind of simple thing fools lots of people. But if they follow that process, in step 2 they would have identified it as a flat plate coil, not a rotary, and not even gone down that path...

One exception. The majority of new or beginning collectors or the ones asking here for help in identifying can't tell the difference between the printing types. I believe in the KISS (keep is simple silly) principle. I agree with JB's yes / no approach. For the more polished collector the flow charts currently in place work fine. Most seasoned collectors can't tell the difference between legitimate and fake coils so one step at a time.

Reading ClassicPhilatelist's last post reminded me of a project I did about 40 years ago when I had a large accumulation of Washington-Franklin coil covers I wanted to identify. Of course at that time (1979)I had no personal computer so I developed a card search file.



The stack of cards had holes corresponding to every possible characteristic. If the stamp had a particular characteristic the hole for it's specific card would be slotted. A stick was inserted in the appropriate hole, for instance perf 10 as shown below, and all the cards for stamps with perf 10 would drop out. By identifying each characteristic as nearly as possible (tough with the WM)I would eventually get down to a single card, or more likely two or three cards.



It was crude, but worked for me at the time. Now, of course, with programs available such as provided by StampSmarter it has been relegated to the antiques bin

gslaten,
That looks genius. Very cool.
I'm working on a revision to the Excel based identifier that I think will be very useful, and much easier to use than my previous one.
Should be ready later this week.

It's awesome that you came up with that 40 years ago, but it's also awesome that you still have it.

Thanks Classic and Risney...now it is time to put it back in the back of the drawer.