Question: When Does A Variety Really Become A Variety..?

I have been looking for varieties for years...

My question is what makes a variety according to Catalogues/Dealers/Collectors...Below is a Newfoundland stamp..Scott 56+57+58 that I started working on around 2016..Finally found the Scott 57 which is the hardest to find...It is now recognized as what I nick names "Dog Scratch" stamp...(BTW -Try to find another Scott 57 Dog Scratch stamp.) See picture below.



Now I have another single cue stamp Scott 262..I have one and a SCF friend sent me a scan of a Scott 262 stamp (in a sheet)...Now I have two different stamp with the same variety which I nick named "Rock on ice"...See picture below.



Now the BIG QUESTION...How many stamps does one need to be accepted as a variety...2...3...10..20, etc.

Robert

I think it's a variety at 2, but will take a few more to be officially recognized. Depending on the lobby effort.

Robert, going back to your discussion on postal stationery wrappers and bands, I was hoping you would comment on my remarks. Was I missing something?

Robert,

you should know what a variety is by now! Only non-philatelists need to have some confirmation from a meager catalogue or handbook!

I do not trust any of them in my fields of specialization and so far I turned out to be right ;)

Rein

Galeoptix..I am a flyspecker..I know what makes a variety..But neither Unitrade or N.S.S.C. catalouges agree with my findings..Guess I will have to have 3 or 4 or 10 to make my point...If any one has the same Harp Seal variety, I would appreciate help and maybe a scan for me.

Robert

Are the editors of Unitrade/NSSC able to tell you how many examples you (or someone else) should provide to make a variety "official" so that they list it in their respective catalogues? If so, then you'd have a target to shoot for...

Wert, You may be misunderstanding Unitrade. They may indeed agree that many of your various submissions are "varieties", but they have an editorial threshold for what deserves to be a "listable" variety. Duplicate examples won't necessarily push a variety into the catalog.

The 1898 map stamp is a perfect example. Unitrade lists very few individual varieties and footnotes the reader to Bradley's book for the detailed information on the retouches, re-entries, and varieties. Unitrade could have listed many dozens of map stamp varieties.

This is where the specialty societies, journals, and monographs provide the next level of information. Both Unitrade's Canada and Scott's US "specialized" catalogs are really only semi-specialized, as you know. They will never be "complete" to the detail level of the specialist or flyspecker.

John..I have to agree with you buddy...A not so specialist stamp collector like me gets maybe a bit frustrated....I don't have the massive collection like some individuals have, so the only claim to fame I have is being and extreme flyspecker...

Being able to see what is there that should not be and what is not there that should be.

Maybe I should curve my excitement about maybe finding something that others have not found and just enjoy the hobby and except what will be..Will by.

Robert

P.S. - John, I like the way you think.

..Good to know even moderators have a sense of humour..

Robert

Now that is extremly funny! Got to love it.

Part of it is how easy the flaw is to see. Finding the plate position contributes. And then its about marketplace dynamics.

The rock on ice flaws youve shown appear to be in 2 different states with the second stamp perhaps a more worn die. The different shades also suggest 2 different printings.

Remember as people take snap shots on their scanner and transfer to their monitor, there are always colour differences.




Just about any stamp run does show ware, over inking, under inking, etc.

PLATE POSITION : 31

Robert

wert - 262 is a blue $1.00 stamp, but your two scans are both red,

Sorry BlackJag, I was talking about Newfoundland stamps as the one above it...You were looking at the Canada Scott 262...Sorry about not defining it as Newfoundland..Me bad.

Robert