If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Question regarding paper
Malcolm,
so far I had been studying the more modern stamps and their papers, but this last year I jumped into Argentina to find out that there was a lot to be done still and that the UV-lamp would not be much helpful. You have to analyze the papers for the Argentinean collectors, to explain to them what to look at and for! With or without coating; direction of paper mesh [something New Zealand collectors appear to be most familiar with !?]; the imprint of the wire of the paper machine in the paper itself; etc.... Basic notions really or at least they should have been basic Also we should realize that the stamp paper industry has been globalized a long time ago and that we can find Italian paper manufacturers delivering paper for Argentinean stamps around 1912 but probably for a lot of other countries as well. The same goes for Dutch, French, German and English suppliers.. Harrison and Sons were the main suppliers - globally - since 1970 til 1995 for stamp production and after that Tullis Russel (Coated Paper Ltd] took over..... An inventory of such paper supppliers is obligatory! groetjes, Rein Op Mon, 10 May 2010 16:03:13 +0200 schreef malcolm : Rein I do agree. However as long as catalogues insist on using the term " Chalky " I think we have to get to grips with this even if we do not agree with the term. The biggest and original usage, historically, appears to be the King George V era of British Empire- as used in Stanley Gibbons catalogues - and perhaps the term should be used for this particular case only. I would agree with you that the use of the term appears to have become somewhat abused as papers used today have no resemblance whatsoever with those of that era. I have not used the silver test personally on anything - as I would only use it on the margins of a marginal copy - and never on the stamp itself !! Do believe me when I tell you that no UV test I have ever used can differentiate between KG5 papers - and I am willing to believe that the "silver" test is the only one which would work (scientifically). I think that the only test which stands examination is to find a stamp of a series which only appears on one paper ( preferably one stamp for each of the different papers) for use as a control then examine ( by eye ) each copy you receive against these. There are sometimes nuances of shade which differentiate these even when unlisted and sometimes the general appearance of the paper is different. However on used or dirty stamps this is not always helpful. Dated copies can assist but caution should be used with dates just after the issue date of the new version ( or any copies from remote or very rural post offices with projected low usage ). The catalogues appear to be very reluctant to discuss flourescence not related to postal mechanisation, but sometimes the term "chalky" is used to describe this ( presumably someone somewhere used the silver test). A good example of this is the South Africa 1961 definitives - third series ( original design with wmk RSA in triangle dating from 1963 or thereabouts ).This is described in SG as chalky but compare this paper with the 2 earlier series ( Arms wmk and no wmk) under the lamp and the flourescence is very evident. When dealing with a large quantity of these stamps I use the lamp before I even look for a watermark ! Even where these are mentioned exact ( or earliest known) dates are seldom discussed. We have already discussed Rein Netherlands "Queen" definitives issued on on ordinary, flourescent and phosphorescent papers - the phosphorescent is easily dealt with but more precise dating information would be useful for used uncoated/ flourescent examples. I have managed to sort 90% of these , but there are still a few "borderline" cases. On modern stamps another problem is when you have an "all-over" phosphorescent tagging superimposed on stamps which may or may not have been printed on flourescent (or other) coated paper in the first place. I have no real evidence for this but my theory is that the difference in intensity of phosphorescent reaction on modern Italian definitives for example may be as a result of different underlying papers - and I think that even the lw and sw bands on philatelic lamps are too broad to examine this. What you need are lamps which emit ONLY the wavelength which will excite a specific reaction ( and this will be different for every stamp - or at least every chemical used in stamp production). We know I think thanks to you and others much more about modern papers ( and much more technical information is the public domain ), but I fear that due to loss of records ( and lack of scientific records being kept in the first place), and deterioration of papers through time - much about earlier stamps may never be known - especially those of historically "unpopular" countries.Compare the information on Argentinian stamps for example ( how sycophantic am I ?) with that of other South American countries. A lot more scientific basis needs to be used in identifying papers - personally I think that papers is the most difficult of all the areas of philately to get to grips with - it is also the area which the philatelic press seems to be the most reluctant to discuss - perhaps because it is so "difficult". Malcolm -- Gemaakt met Opera's revolutionaire e-mailprogramma: http://www.opera.com/mail/ |
Ads |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Question About Belgian Parcel Post - Paper Undulé | [email protected] | General Discussion | 14 | February 26th 08 05:33 PM |
Paper Money Grading Services Question | Willy P | Coins | 4 | June 10th 05 03:06 AM |
Pre and post wwII paper currency question | Wolfie | Paper Money | 2 | April 10th 05 09:04 AM |
paper-money from 1943, a question | Dr. Richard L. Hall | Paper Money | 7 | January 8th 05 04:04 AM |
Paper money question on Jeopardy | TomDeLorey | Coins | 4 | March 3rd 04 04:00 PM |