Dr. Sun Yat-Sen (A57) Re-Engraved Question

I have several of the Type III stamps from the 1939-43 section as defined in Scott Catalogue. There are also listings for re-engraved versions of the 2c and 8c denominations with details of what is fifferent. However, I have the 3c and 16c denominations that have the same change as the 8c. Why aren't these also considered re-engraved?

I'll add that I have others in the same Type III group without the ornamental change of the re-engraved 8c. Makes no sense that some would be different and not be considered re-engraved.

They seem to be the Chung Hwa Book Co. printings.1939-43 :that includes the 8c.

Thanks perf12, but it seems you are saying that the 8c is not the re-engraved version. Can you explain that for me? From the information I have based on illustrations in the catalogue, both the 2c and 8c are the 1940 re-engraved version.

The lower value box frames of your 2 & 8 are not like the re-engraved type.Also the floriated upper design is very clear like the 1939-41 printing.They are both perf 12½...An added thing; in the 8c, the secret mark characters atre not joined.

Perf12, thanks again for your reply, but I think I wasn't clear on my initial question. There is a section called Type of 1939-41 Re-engraved that is prior to the Dah Tung Book Co. varieties which definitely are perf 14 and have secret marks. In this special section, Scott #368 and #369, it covers the 2c and 8c only. The change for the 8c is the ornament to the right of the sun. This same difference I find on other denominations in the Chung Hwa Book Co. printings, specifically the 3c and 16c I provided above. The original question is why aren't those considered as re-engraved like the 2c and 8c. Other values I have in that same section do not have this change to the ornament.

I understood the question.I don't have these stamps,so I found a re-engraved version in an Interasia auction beloiw. Notice the ornament is different than your stamps.
__________________________________________________________________
North China, 1941 overprint, large type II, on Chung Hwa re-engraved Dr. Sun Yat-sen 8c. Die II (re-engraved)


Some small pics;
https://westnab.com/MaxStamps/viewS...s.php?set=72

Thanks again perf12. I must not be seeing the ornament difference that is the deciding factor. The picture below is the same in every catalogue I have, but it doesn't have any arrows or other description explaining the difference. To me, the difference is the detail, more crisp lines and also the 3rd long line in the center extends all the way to the edge, where in the original, there is a noticeable gap. Do I not understand the critical difference? If it is something else, I'd sure like to know. Thanks again.

For me ,none of your stamps are re-engraved.The tone of the re-engraved stamps are a bit darker.One of the difficult things in identification is when one does not have a specimen in front of one's eyes for a comparison.Thats when we can imagine anything…..