Q: Why phosphor "bars" ?

A: Because phosphor is expensive, and phosphor
dulls the pins on perforating machinery, rather quickly.

So why stick to "overall" phosphor? Like in Australia? Or Belgium? Etc.

groetjes, Rein

Op Thu, 29 Mar 2007 05:26:15 +0200 schreef Rod :

A: Because phosphor is expensive, and phosphor
dulls the pins on perforating machinery, rather quickly.







--
Gemaakt met Opera's revolutionaire e-mailprogramma:
http://www.opera.com/mail/

Good question,
no answer.
I would hazzard a guess, that improvements
in phosphor application has negated the problem.
The article was circa 1972, and IIRC phosphor bars
were of rather bold application.
One other reason may have to do with "grind perforation"
seen here on Gibraltar 1969
http://cjoint.com/data/dEcz7yQzWT.htm

also used on Malaysia circular
punctures of the same period.
With rotary roll printing and "grind perforation" the problem is solved.



"Rein" wrote in message
newsp.tpx57luz88m2v9@studyroom...
So why stick to "overall" phosphor? Like in Australia? Or Belgium? Etc.

groetjes, Rein

Op Thu, 29 Mar 2007 05:26:15 +0200 schreef Rod
:

A: Because phosphor is expensive, and phosphor
dulls the pins on perforating machinery, rather quickly.







--
Gemaakt met Opera's revolutionaire e-mailprogramma:
http://www.opera.com/mail/

Rod,

how about looking at the reverse of the stamp; doesn't better show the
grinding?
I know it does in the Netherlands and Belgium

BTW is 1969 not a bit early for APS?

What has reel-fed printing to do with it? That was around since the
1930-ies... (occasionallty a bit earlier like the Stickneys for recess or
Goebel for typography)

groetjes, Rein

Op Fri, 30 Mar 2007 02:32:20 +0200 schreef Rod :


Good question,
no answer.
I would hazzard a guess, that improvements
in phosphor application has negated the problem.
The article was circa 1972, and IIRC phosphor bars
were of rather bold application.
One other reason may have to do with "grind perforation"
seen here on Gibraltar 1969
http://cjoint.com/data/dEcz7yQzWT.htm

also used on Malaysia circular
punctures of the same period.
With rotary roll printing and "grind perforation" the problem is solved.



"Rein" wrote in message
newsp.tpx57luz88m2v9@studyroom...
So why stick to "overall" phosphor? Like in Australia? Or Belgium? Etc.

groetjes, Rein

Op Thu, 29 Mar 2007 05:26:15 +0200 schreef Rod
:

A: Because phosphor is expensive, and phosphor
dulls the pins on perforating machinery, rather quickly.







--
Gemaakt met Opera's revolutionaire e-mailprogramma:
http://www.opera.com/mail/





--
Gemaakt met Opera's revolutionaire e-mailprogramma:
http://www.opera.com/mail/

Rein,
I am unaware of the country of origin of the
grind perforator, however IIRC 1969 was the date
of its first appearance.
I havn't studied APS from either side of the stamp as yet
I only learnt of this method recently.
I had always thought the Gibraltar issue was pin perforated
up until then, that's why it was easy to recall.

I would have thought grind perforation to go hand in hand with reel
fed stamps, I couldn't see how one could employ it with sheet fed.

I havn't come across any detailed information anywhere re
perforation history, just snippets gleaned from here and there.

Grind perforation, by it's very nature, has to give just about a
perfect hole every time, unless the pin does not indent the paper
sufficiently, which has happened, and produced a blind perf.

I guess therefore, the back of MNH stamp would/could show
a partial dent around the hole as seen from the rear.
I have mainly used stamps, which would probably lose
this ID during soaking.




"Rein" wrote in message
news
Rod,

how about looking at the reverse of the stamp; doesn't better show the
grinding?
I know it does in the Netherlands and Belgium

BTW is 1969 not a bit early for APS?

What has reel-fed printing to do with it? That was around since the
1930-ies... (occasionallty a bit earlier like the Stickneys for recess or
Goebel for typography)

groetjes, Rein

Op Fri, 30 Mar 2007 02:32:20 +0200 schreef Rod
:


Good question,
no answer.
I would hazzard a guess, that improvements
in phosphor application has negated the problem.
The article was circa 1972, and IIRC phosphor bars
were of rather bold application.
One other reason may have to do with "grind perforation"
seen here on Gibraltar 1969
http://cjoint.com/data/dEcz7yQzWT.htm

also used on Malaysia circular
punctures of the same period.
With rotary roll printing and "grind perforation" the problem is solved.



"Rein" wrote in message
newsp.tpx57luz88m2v9@studyroom...
So why stick to "overall" phosphor? Like in Australia? Or Belgium? Etc.

groetjes, Rein

Op Thu, 29 Mar 2007 05:26:15 +0200 schreef Rod
:

A: Because phosphor is expensive, and phosphor
dulls the pins on perforating machinery, rather quickly.







--
Gemaakt met Opera's revolutionaire e-mailprogramma:
http://www.opera.com/mail/





--
Gemaakt met Opera's revolutionaire e-mailprogramma:
http://www.opera.com/mail/

Rod,

have a look at some bad [!] grinding:

http://www.xs4all.nl/~dziewon/fila/d...d/ni03_301.jpg

groetjes, Rein

Op Fri, 30 Mar 2007 12:41:58 +0200 schreef Rod :


Rein,
I am unaware of the country of origin of the
grind perforator, however IIRC 1969 was the date
of its first appearance.
I havn't studied APS from either side of the stamp as yet
I only learnt of this method recently.
I had always thought the Gibraltar issue was pin perforated
up until then, that's why it was easy to recall.

I would have thought grind perforation to go hand in hand with reel
fed stamps, I couldn't see how one could employ it with sheet fed.

I havn't come across any detailed information anywhere re
perforation history, just snippets gleaned from here and there.

Grind perforation, by it's very nature, has to give just about a
perfect hole every time, unless the pin does not indent the paper
sufficiently, which has happened, and produced a blind perf.

I guess therefore, the back of MNH stamp would/could show
a partial dent around the hole as seen from the rear.
I have mainly used stamps, which would probably lose
this ID during soaking.




"Rein" wrote in message
news
Rod,

how about looking at the reverse of the stamp; doesn't better show the
grinding?
I know it does in the Netherlands and Belgium

BTW is 1969 not a bit early for APS?

What has reel-fed printing to do with it? That was around since the
1930-ies... (occasionallty a bit earlier like the Stickneys for recess
or
Goebel for typography)

groetjes, Rein

Op Fri, 30 Mar 2007 02:32:20 +0200 schreef Rod
:


Good question,
no answer.
I would hazzard a guess, that improvements
in phosphor application has negated the problem.
The article was circa 1972, and IIRC phosphor bars
were of rather bold application.
One other reason may have to do with "grind perforation"
seen here on Gibraltar 1969
http://cjoint.com/data/dEcz7yQzWT.htm

also used on Malaysia circular
punctures of the same period.
With rotary roll printing and "grind perforation" the problem is
solved.



"Rein" wrote in message
newsp.tpx57luz88m2v9@studyroom...
So why stick to "overall" phosphor? Like in Australia? Or Belgium?
Etc.

groetjes, Rein

Op Thu, 29 Mar 2007 05:26:15 +0200 schreef Rod
:

A: Because phosphor is expensive, and phosphor
dulls the pins on perforating machinery, rather quickly.







--
Gemaakt met Opera's revolutionaire e-mailprogramma:
http://www.opera.com/mail/





--
Gemaakt met Opera's revolutionaire e-mailprogramma:
http://www.opera.com/mail/





--
Gemaakt met Opera's revolutionaire e-mailprogramma:
http://www.opera.com/mail/

Very interesting, thanks Rein,
(you still need to adjust your image viewer)
I "adjusted" your image with one click in ACDSee
and reduced your image from 4Mb to 386 KB
without any loss of detail.

Looking at the image, I'm not sure if that is a grind error
or pin error, the ground indents look fairly rough, and the
tolerance is too wide for the grind head, ...needs to be wound
in a few thousands of an inch.

One could imagine all hell breaking loose if the paper
caught the grind head.


"Rein" wrote in message
news
Rod,

have a look at some bad [!] grinding:

http://www.xs4all.nl/~dziewon/fila/d...d/ni03_301.jpg

groetjes, Rein

Op Fri, 30 Mar 2007 12:41:58 +0200 schreef Rod
:


Rein,
I am unaware of the country of origin of the
grind perforator, however IIRC 1969 was the date
of its first appearance.
I havn't studied APS from either side of the stamp as yet
I only learnt of this method recently.
I had always thought the Gibraltar issue was pin perforated
up until then, that's why it was easy to recall.

I would have thought grind perforation to go hand in hand with reel
fed stamps, I couldn't see how one could employ it with sheet fed.

I havn't come across any detailed information anywhere re
perforation history, just snippets gleaned from here and there.

Grind perforation, by it's very nature, has to give just about a
perfect hole every time, unless the pin does not indent the paper
sufficiently, which has happened, and produced a blind perf.

I guess therefore, the back of MNH stamp would/could show
a partial dent around the hole as seen from the rear.
I have mainly used stamps, which would probably lose
this ID during soaking.




"Rein" wrote in message
news
Rod,

how about looking at the reverse of the stamp; doesn't better show the
grinding?
I know it does in the Netherlands and Belgium

BTW is 1969 not a bit early for APS?

What has reel-fed printing to do with it? That was around since the
1930-ies... (occasionallty a bit earlier like the Stickneys for recess
or
Goebel for typography)

groetjes, Rein

Op Fri, 30 Mar 2007 02:32:20 +0200 schreef Rod
:


Good question,
no answer.
I would hazzard a guess, that improvements
in phosphor application has negated the problem.
The article was circa 1972, and IIRC phosphor bars
were of rather bold application.
One other reason may have to do with "grind perforation"
seen here on Gibraltar 1969
http://cjoint.com/data/dEcz7yQzWT.htm

also used on Malaysia circular
punctures of the same period.
With rotary roll printing and "grind perforation" the problem is
solved.



"Rein" wrote in message
newsp.tpx57luz88m2v9@studyroom...
So why stick to "overall" phosphor? Like in Australia? Or Belgium?
Etc.

groetjes, Rein

Op Thu, 29 Mar 2007 05:26:15 +0200 schreef Rod
:

A: Because phosphor is expensive, and phosphor
dulls the pins on perforating machinery, rather quickly.







--
Gemaakt met Opera's revolutionaire e-mailprogramma:
http://www.opera.com/mail/





--
Gemaakt met Opera's revolutionaire e-mailprogramma:
http://www.opera.com/mail/





--
Gemaakt met Opera's revolutionaire e-mailprogramma:
http://www.opera.com/mail/

Ummmmmmmmm ...
Because the pattern of the bars could denote the -=class=- of postage used
!
Automated sorting being in operation as well.

Yes, that's a good one,
O.K. take five and a half points.

however, it does come to mind what happens when
the lazy sender places incorrect postage on a cover
due to the unavailability of the correct postage on hand.

Probably wouldn't happen now so much with rounded values
but earlier on with odd std rates, it would occur frequently.