Scott Sweden # 24 (1872) to soak or not to soak?

This stamp still has part of the enveloped paper on the back plus a
couple of hinge remnants. Is if safe to soak it or should it be left as
is?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...n/LS/SW-24.jpg

On 10 Dec 2006 13:50:57 -0800, "Treacan" wrote:

This stamp still has part of the enveloped paper on the back plus a
couple of hinge remnants. Is if safe to soak it or should it be left as
is?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...n/LS/SW-24.jpg

It doesn't look to be in "great" shape, so I'd say soak the sucker. A
bunch of perf issues I see... The cancel won't be ruin by removing
the paper, unless that section is hiding a thin.

I'd be a bit careful and soak it by itself, so you won't be distracted
by the other stamps in the bowl. Also, take your time. A little TLC
goes a long ways.

Took a chance with water. Turned out pretty good, se new scan below.
Some perf. missing on the bottom but the left bottom corner perfs were
just buried in the paper. There were more envelope paper and old white
hinges than stamp by weight, I'm sure.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4.../LS/SW-24b.jpg



Sir F. A. Rien wrote:
On 10 Dec 2006 13:50:57 -0800, "Treacan" found these
unused words floating about:

This stamp still has part of the enveloped paper on the back plus a
couple of hinge remnants. Is if safe to soak it or should it be left as
is?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...n/LS/SW-24.jpg

StampLift ... don't soak !

On 11 Dec 2006 12:47:18 -0800, "Treacan" wrote:

Took a chance with water. Turned out pretty good, se new scan below.
Some perf. missing on the bottom but the left bottom corner perfs were
just buried in the paper. There were more envelope paper and old white
hinges than stamp by weight, I'm sure.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4.../LS/SW-24b.jpg

Looks a lot healthier than before. The only issue I was thinking of
was that the paper was glued on. That, and maybe it was hiding a
thin. A few small perf issues are naught compared to what it could
have been.

Sir F. A. Rien wrote:
On 10 Dec 2006 13:50:57 -0800, "Treacan" found these
unused words floating about:

This stamp still has part of the enveloped paper on the back plus a
couple of hinge remnants. Is if safe to soak it or should it be left as
is?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...n/LS/SW-24.jpg

StampLift ... don't soak !

Question, I have seen reference to "missing perfs" often,
is there such a thing?
Auction parlance generally quotes "pulled perfs" or "nibbed perfs"
(I have also seen "Nibbled perfs")

Took a chance with water. Turned out pretty good, se new scan below.
Some perf. missing on the bottom but the left bottom corner perfs were
just buried in the paper. There were more envelope paper and old white
hinges than stamp by weight, I'm sure.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4.../LS/SW-24b.jpg

On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 09:37:21 +0800, "Rod"
wrote:

Question, I have seen reference to "missing perfs" often,
is there such a thing?
Auction parlance generally quotes "pulled perfs" or "nibbed perfs"
(I have also seen "Nibbled perfs")

I actually have a US 1938 Prexy series Lincoln 16c with some missing
perfs. It's usually pulled or short perfs.

Took a chance with water. Turned out pretty good, se new scan below.
Some perf. missing on the bottom but the left bottom corner perfs were
just buried in the paper. There were more envelope paper and old white
hinges than stamp by weight, I'm sure.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4.../LS/SW-24b.jpg

Treacan wrote:
Took a chance with water. Turned out pretty good, se new scan below.
Some perf. missing on the bottom but the left bottom corner perfs were
just buried in the paper. There were more envelope paper and old white
hinges than stamp by weight, I'm sure.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4.../LS/SW-24b.jpg


Not bad at all. I hope that I'm in as good condition,
when I am 130 years old.

Blair

Let me know the day and we'll see. LOL
Blair (TC) wrote:
Treacan wrote:
Took a chance with water. Turned out pretty good, se new scan below.
Some perf. missing on the bottom but the left bottom corner perfs were
just buried in the paper. There were more envelope paper and old white
hinges than stamp by weight, I'm sure.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4.../LS/SW-24b.jpg


Not bad at all. I hope that I'm in as good condition,
when I am 130 years old.

Blair

I actually have a US 1938 Prexy series Lincoln 16c with some missing
perfs. It's usually pulled or short perfs.

So what is a "missing perf" ?
if the hole has not been clearly severed and merely
unsuccessfully punched, isn't that a "blind perf" ?
can you offer a scan?

On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 07:52:00 +0800, "Rod"
wrote:

I actually have a US 1938 Prexy series Lincoln 16c with some missing
perfs. It's usually pulled or short perfs.

So what is a "missing perf" ?
if the hole has not been clearly severed and merely
unsuccessfully punched, isn't that a "blind perf" ?

I didn't know perfs had seeing eye dogs. We're playing semantics
here. If there's supposed to be a perf, and it's not there, then it's
missing, yes?

can you offer a scan?

No, because it's buried somewhere. But! I'll point you to someplace
that can explain it...

http://www.philatelicfoundation.org/...zing_terms.htm

Look for "unpunched".