Scott 1204 - Does This Perforation Exist..??

Hi
I was finally starting to look through some or lots of American stamps.
Scott Catalouge shows perforation as 11.0 x 11.0
I measured my 2 blocks and a few singles and all had perforations of...
11.0 x 10.8

Wrong or right..???

Robert

How else would you round 10.8 to the nearest half?

wert: In the file that I sent you on U.S. line perforators, look at the line perforation chart for the McAdams L-perforator. You're right.

Thanks Jogil...I thought I was loosing it.

Robert

I have sooooo many more American stamps that have been rounded off and not accurate in the Scott Catalouge...BUT, I will not bother our American friend.

Robert, read the intro to the Scott. It talks about the rounding off of the perforations


Peter

Wow..Did not see that Peter..

Robert

You are both correct. Specifically,
Scott's rounded value of 11 is correct for their rounding rules, and your measured value to 1 decimal place is correct.

However, you misquote the Scott U.S. Specialized catalog then claim it is in error.
The catalog lists this stamp as "Perf. 11", not 11.0
There is a technical difference between 11 and 11.0 and 11.00
As you know, Scott rounds to the nearest half for stamps in this era.
You are trying to create a third "significant digit" of accuracy, which is commendable, but which the Scott catalog does not do.
You have encountered the same situation with the Unitrade catalog.

In my admittedly muddled (pain killers) mind, the question is if the majority of hobbyists would like to see catalogs and albums explode in size and scope.

Our hobby is fighting for every new hobbyist it can get, is adding thousands of additional new catalog numbers and varieties going to help entice new hobbyists? It certainly would help the catalog and album publishers.

This community gets new threads and posts every week from inexperienced hobbyists struggling with the amount of information they have to process. The cost of entry into our hobby is also a factor; the references and supplies just to get started can be intimidating.

Of course there is nothing wrong with advanced hobbyists digging into specialized and detailed information; this certainly has its place in the hobby. But in my opinion we should be wary of driving more and more catalog numbers and varieties into general catalogs and albums.
Don

Don, I don't see how stating the rate more accurately as "11.0 x 10.8" would create any problems or overwhelm collectors or publishers. Shouldn't we strive for accuracy?

Where is the line drawn? Cannot the 'strive for accuracy' argument be extended beyond this clarification? We already have trouble with new hobbyists and the rounded off gauging that has been in place for decades. (Hell, we sometimes cannot even get some new hobbyists to even use a perf gauge.)

Being who I am, I want technology to change this situation. But rather than folks here trying to overlay sketchy perf gauges with graphic layers, a free 'killer perf app' might help standardize this situation. Of course, if the app existed and a standard was developed how many catalog publishers would be willing to revise their catalogs and adhere to a new standard?
Don

Don, I think more info would be accepted.



To me more info more excitement.



I agree John...It is just adding a ""X 10.8"" behind the ""11"" that already exists.

I guess I am buried in the rabbit hole of perforation accuracy..I am working on 2 projects at once...Newfoundland and Canada perforation accuracy projects...Ya, I am a geek.

Robert

10.94 x 10.86 from John McAdams (Norwalk, CT) L-Perforator for perforating Giori Press printed stamps.

That is more accurate perforation than I or other collectors would be able to realize..Time to tell the world Jogil how they may put their perforation accuracy measurements into reality.

I am and always have been with you about perforation accuracy

Robert

How many decimal places? Hmm?

Scott's current "Perf 11" implies the H/V rates are identical in both directions. This is clearly false.

Rounding to 1 decimal place also gets 10.9 x 10.9, which is equally misleading.

In this case, 2 decimal places are desirable to clearly document different H/V rates even though it is beyond most collectors desire/ability to measure at this level. I have never been tempted to gauge the perforations on a mid-century commemorative. It is not necessary.

John..The only reason I brought up the perforation on my American blocks was to ask why Scott Catalouge was not accurate {and or rounded off}

My interest in perforations may seem weird to some collectors..Below is ONE Newfoundland stamp perforations found..Great detail and in my eyes worth collecting

Robert

Robert,

Out of curiosity, why did you gauge a US Scott 1204 in the first place?

Your interest is waaaay beyond the level of the vast majority of collectors.

I would suspect that most catalog editors will continue to be resistive except in a few cases where differentiation of two varieties can be made by the perforation difference, which seems much more prevalent with early Canada than in the U.S.