Thailand 2 Atts Overprints -Need Conformations

Can someone or more than one person I.D. each of these 8 overprint stamps to the Scott catalog numbers ,want to check my work .

Hi floortrader;

I got the Following: All the 2's look flat bottomed too me.3 narrow A's.
So I came up with this ?
48,48,41,53
53,53,48,41

All I know is that I suck with these overprints. After studying all the information I could find, I was so confident that I have a mint copy of Scott #64 that I sent it for a cert. Well, now I have a certified copy of #49

If anybody building a reference library of these, here is an image of certified #49.

I would of though it was a 64 ,if you go by the picture in the Scott catalog . The "10" in the overprint looks like the larger #64 not the small 10 of the #49 . Guess you need a specialized Thailand catalog and know the size of the various overprints .

So I have a few of these and boy are they difficult. The overall length, spacing between the "2" and the "A", shape and size of the "2", width of the "A" all come into play. That said here are my attempts: 68, 53, 68, 60, heavily inked 53, 53 or 60??, 48, 69.

I used this information

http://www.japhila.cz/hof/0181/index0181a.htm

in my attempts to catalog those.

I just scanned and uploaded the the 1892 to 1899 surcharges section from my book, "The Postage Stamps of Siam to 1940", that was published in 1980 as a pdf file here:
https://www.rfrajola.com/2k20/Siamto1940.pdf

It may be of use. The last two pages have my 1980 prices but also the then current Scott catalog numbers. I have no idea what Scott numbers are now. The information is from the Walter Pears collection that I purchased as part of the Fred Gloeckner collection in 1979. The traced illustrations of the surcharges are from Pears album pages as done before about 1925.

Hello Floortrader, Looks like we are getting more tools to aid in identification, but perhaps no more attempts to identify your stamps. For those of us that gave it a try, let us know what you thought they were. We can then discuss the stamps where opinions differ

Wildwood -big difference ,I will look at them again . But I came up with
48 48 41 60
53 60 48 41 which are two different than perf 12 .

I will use Richard F. posting as a better guide line when look at them again .

My thing is spend time to get it right without becoming a specialize in any one area . I spend 6 months and lots of dollars to get the Brazilian watermarks done ,than spend almost a year on the 6 different Tibet forgeries of the first issue . Now plan to spend the spring on the Swiss Cantonal issues but that is going to cost a lot of money to have a decent showing .Looking to achieve that decent worldwide collection with all the items written up and detailed to what is what with watermarks ,perforations and color shades .

So I am in NYC today with the grandkids. I will go over my notes when I get home and let you know my thoughts. I am certainly not at the level of either you or perf12, but off the top of my head I thought the last stamp was a 69 based on the width of the overprint, the spacing of the letters in Atts, and the shape of the "2"

So as I mentioned in my first post, I use the overall width of the overprint as one element when attempting an identification. The overprint on the first stamp is significantly longer than on the second. My measurement gives me approx. 15mm which is much too long for Scott 48 (which Frajola seems to indicate should be either 10mm or 11.75mm). The wide spacing of the Roman letters in the "Atts" points to a Scott 68 for me.
The width of stamp 2 indicates either Scott 48 if the letters are Roman or Scott 53 if they are antque, I cannot tell.
The 3rd stamp looks to be a Scott 68 for the same reasons stated for stamp 1.
We agree on stamps 4 and 5.
The Roman letters on stamp 6 points to Scott 60
We agree on stamp 7
The differences between Scott 41 and 69 seem slight and I am basing my identification of the stamp as Scott 69 based on the width of the overprint

A couple of more for those that are interested. Sorry for the photo rather than a scan, but I did not want to remove them from my album.
I do not believe either of these are in floortraders set.



ps. I am still interested in knowing if the width of the overprint is significant in identifying these stamps

Willwood42: It looks like you have Scott 44(k) (Looks like a curved foot ?,the cancel is confusing identification) & Scott 46(m)(very small '2')….

Thanks perf12. The stamp on the right is almost definitely a 46, but the shallow curves on the bottom of the "t"'a gave me a little pause. The stamp on the left is either a 44 or 45. The shape of the back half of the bottom of the "2" might suggest a 45, but the cat value of the two stamps points to a 44 :)