Are the new King Charles stamps still called Machins?

At Colnect we are calling the series King Charles III - Jennings Definitives as the design is by Martin Jennings

Presumably the Wilding's were not named such until the Machin's came along and there was a need to differentiate!
Therefore, I would have thought that until KCIII has a second set of definitives then there is no need to name them - they are just current GB definitives!

Interestingly, Royal Mail didn't call them Machins either. Referring to them as Queen's Head stamps, see here

Thanks Ryan  -  I'm inclined to agree  that this Downey portrait fails perhaps because of the 'threequarter' head design - it doesn't somehow  seem to look right, although 'Landseer's Lion and the wreath' are very British.     Prior to these W. & D. Downey efforts, the Ed. VII examples were typical of side portraits,  and later pix of George V reverted to the side portrait and look easier on the eye  -  a  few  attached. 

paul1 I also collect Machins.

When you use the term Wildings and Machins in the plural form ,there is no need to place an apostrophe.

thanks anglobob - in this instance we aren't speaking in the sense of the plural (lots of stamps, for example) - rather we are talking about designs created by specific artists - Dorothy Wilding, Arnold Machin and Mr. Jennings, to whom these designs belong, and this possessive sense is indicated by an apostrophe before the s. I agree with you that adding an s (without an apostrophe) often implies the plural, but here we are adding the apostrophe because it's possession rather than a plural that we need to show.

The situation with Jennings is different in that he already has an s at the end, which is why it is acceptable to drop the es and limit the written word to Jennings' - though this isn't compulsory and if you wish to write Jenningses' that's fine - my original point was simply that it's inelegant and a mouthful - but just to repeat again it's not plural that we mean but possessive - the design belongs to Mr.Jennings. Think of Sainsbury's and St. Thomas' Hospital.
However, despite not actively collecting these definitives, we have to refer to them occasionally - maybe we will get used to using Jennings name - how about Charlies?

you may find something of interest in 'Royal Mail Stamps - a survey of British stamp design' by Stuart Rose - a really good read if you're into the design and historic sequence of GB issues. You're right of course in that all new designs had to be taken to the palace and shown to QE II for approval (not quite the 'stamps on approval' wording we use), and she is on record as having dismissed or declined change on various occasions. Commercial artists of the ilk of David Gentleman, Jeffery Matthews (in the book it's printed as 'Matthews's ;-)) and others, submitted designs which usually ended up morphing into something other than their original design.
If you look at Arnold Machin's original bas-relief portrait - in large size - the detail is impressive - but reduced in size and used ad infinitum on every definitive, it becomes commonplace and loses lustre.

Rose interviewed Benn who was one of the best PMGs we ever had and the feeling is that the whole process of design and approval was mired in bureaucracy and a dislike of change.

As a long-time English teacher, I can pretty well guarantee that whatever any of us chooses to call the new Charles III stamps will only work if it's comfortable for people to say. It has to be an easy word to say or most people won't use it.

"Jenningses" is about the most tongue-twisty name I can think of. "Machin" is easy -- although I have to admit I've never been sure how to pronounce it. Is it "Machine"? Is it "Mak-in"? Or is it "May-chin"? Maybe someone can enlighten me. I'm an American, and we talk funny. "Wilding" is effortlessly easy to pronounce, as well, so both of them work just fine. And their plurals are easy -- "Machins" and "Wildings". Easy = usable and popular.

Since "Jennings" already ends with an "s," it's gong to be trouble for a lot of people. Plus there's the fact that most people are relatively clueless about what an apostrophe does. Add the two together -- and boy do you got some problems. I can almost promise you lots of odd spellings along with random apostrophes and various pronunciations for the "Jenningses." Or is it the "Jennings's"? It's a name I can barely say, or punctuate, without thinking my way through it.

At a stamp show, would you say, "May I look at your book of Jenningsesss?" I can barely do it. I'd just give up and say, "May I look at your recent British definitives?" And the U.S. we'd probably say, "Can I see the new King Charles stamps?" No apostrophe, no possessive, no plural, just keeping it simple down in the hood. 

What will their name be then? Mirroring the "Wildings" and the "Machins," these new ones could end up simply as the "Jennings". That way they all sound the same -- which people like. Yes, "Jennings"already ends in an "s," but both in UK and U.S., people say what is most comfortable, not what is exactly correct.

So, I'm betting the new name will gradually become either the (slightly incorrect) "the Jennings" or, as has been mentioned, "the Charlies". And, fortunately, calling them the "Charlesssss" is also out. That would be truly awful. As I said, too many final "s" sounds drives English speakers absolutely nutsssss. Or is it "Nut's"? "Nuts'?" "Nutses?" 

Forget King Charles's first name, how about calling them PAG'S after his other 3 names. That seems easy to say. (Charles, Philip, Arthur, George).   or GAP'S. 

I like calling them Jennings. Keeps the consistence of naming them after the artist.

Well, "rolls off the tongue" for "current British definitive stamps" was meant entirely ironically. But I'd forgotten all those QEII definitives -- the ones knowns as "May-Kins" -- are still circulating out there in Worcestershire, so yes, "May I see your book of current British definitives" would include them. Anything except "May I see your book of Jenningses?" Can you imagine if his last name was already "Jenningses"? Talk about being tongue-tied pluralizing that!

Saying "the Jennings" may win out due simply to ease of pronunciation, even as incorrect as it is. "Can I see your book of Jennings, please?" will work no matter what the Academie Anglais says (ironic since I know there isn't one as in much-more-uptight about language France). Fortunately the English language is extremely flexible and inventinve, confounding all the rules makers again and again.

No more than referring to Queen Victoria as Vickie I suppose.