brixtonchrome
**Member** 
Active now after an eternity!
Posts: 28 
What I collect: British Commonwealth Omnibus
|
Post by brixtonchrome on Dec 17, 2022 2:58:55 GMT
Merry Christmas to All Lovers of Modern Definitive Stamps! This week I decided to tackle a set that I have always found somewhat challenging: the 1988-1992 Mammal and Wildlife issue of Canada. I’ve always liked it, but always found it challenging because Unitrade really doesn’t list much in the way of varieties, other than the perf. Changes and papers, which are all identified. There were really no listings of shades, no plate varieties, no tagging varieties, no paper varieties that are not obvious, no fluorescence varieties and so on. If there is one thing that I have always believed in as a philatelist and that guides my daily work it is this: there is no such thing as a simple stamp issue. Every issue has collectible varieties. If there aren’t any listed in the catalogue it is because they either haven’t been studied carefully enough or the findings have not been published. I’ve never really had the time to devote to properly studying this issue to find the varieties that I am so sure exist, until now. This week I decided to focus on this issue for the action and went all-in. I took everything that I could find that relates to this issue and studied it carefully. I wasn’t disappointed. Far from it. This issue strikes a wonderful balance between being manageable, in terms of scope and having enough complication to maintain your interest level. Most of what is really interesting in this issue will be available at no premium over basic catalogue prices, because very little of it is listed. At the same time there are plenty of rarities in this issue to challenge those of you with deeper pockets. I’ve written and published a detailed blog post of this issue, outlining all my findings. This is not a re-hash of what is listed in Unitrade or Harris. It is my analysis of everything that isn’t listed but should be as well as what I think are better explanations of how to tell the reprints of the $1 and $2 apart. You can read it by clicking on this link: brixtonchrome.com/blogs/canadian-stamps-and-postal-history/the-mammal-and-architecture-issue-of-1988-1992As always, your input on the post is always welcomed.       |
|
|
|
Post by uppercanadian on Jan 30, 2023 16:27:00 GMT
I have recently been working on this definitive issue, studying them and finally getting them into an album. In Robin Harris' book on this set, he notes that, at least for the low-value mammal definitives, there is a course and fine perforation. He states that this is most likely the result of different perforation combs being used. I have so far, only noticed this on the later Coated Paper Company's stamps. I believe this course and fine perforation difference boils down to the size of the perforation holes. I have found and example here on the 2-cent Porcupine on Coated Paper inscribed corner blocks, where the perforation holes are definitely smaller on one of the examples. So far, this is my only find of the "small holed perforations", although I have only been through the 1-Cent and 2-Cent so far.  What I believe are the common perforations are to the left side. The more rare smaller perforation holes, which would relate to Mr.Harris' "Course Perforation" description, is on the right side of the image. |
|
brixtonchrome
**Member**
Active now after an eternity!
Posts: 28
What I collect: British Commonwealth Omnibus
|
Post by brixtonchrome on Jan 31, 2023 11:58:28 GMT
Hi Brad
I have noticed this too - on a number of issues actually going back to the 70's, but it is not something I have ever covered in my blogs. I can't say exactly why, given that I'm all about discussing everything that I see. I guess I thought maybe I was seeing things, since nobody else ever seemed to notice or mention it. But now that you point it out, I realize that I wasn't seeing things and I probably should update my blog posts when I get time to incorporate these new observations. I guess one reason why the catalogues don't discuss this is that it is hard to see on individual stamps, through I'm sure you still can if you know what to look for.
|
|
|
|
Post by uppercanadian on Jan 31, 2023 15:55:37 GMT
Hi Chris,
A new forum for us to communicate on!! LOL
I was a little flummoxed with Robin Harris' description of "course" and "fine" perforations. It seemed almost impossible to discern or to explain. Staring and comparing about 20 Porcupine plate blocks at the same time, it suddenly just jumped out at me. One of the plate blocks just looked a little different. Much easier to see with the naked eye than with a loop. So I took scans and then measured them and sure enough, the perforation holes will slightly smaller and the thickness of each tooth was also slightly larger.
I am assuming that the perforations appear "course" simply because there is ever so slightly more paper to tear through, as the perforation holes are smaller. That seems to be the most logical conclusion as the quality of the perforation holes appear to be similar.
Mr. Harris notes these perforation differences on just the low-value mammals. I will definitely be checking all of the stamps in this definitive series for this though, and will post my findings here.
Cheers!!
Brad
|
|
