|
|
Post by decentguy on Apr 18, 2023 15:10:30 GMT
Hi All,
I am referring here to a Rotary Press, Perforation 11 apart from the one we all know about KANSAS CITY MO.) Do another pre-can for different States exist?
Regards
Roni
|
|
khj
Member 
Posts: 1,467 
|
Post by khj on Apr 18, 2023 17:45:04 GMT
There are 2 rotary press perf 11 Franklins: #594, #596
As far as I know, no Bureau precancels exists for #594.
The only Bureau precancel for #596 is the Kansas City precancel. There are 10 known #596 with that precancel and an additional 5 unprecanceled stamps for which I've seen pics.
|
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Apr 18, 2023 22:34:54 GMT
Hey Kim, How are you doin mate?
Are you one hundred percent sure there aren't any other #596 pre-canceled apart from Kansas City?
Roni
|
|
banknoteguy
Member
Posts: 287
What I collect: 19th Century US, High denomination US (> $1), 19th century covers US, Indian Feudatory States and most recently I acquired a BigBlue [with about 5,000 stamps] and pristine pages.
|
Post by banknoteguy on Apr 18, 2023 23:33:50 GMT
100% certain. And no precancels at all for #594.
|
|
khj
Member
Posts: 1,467
|
Post by khj on Apr 19, 2023 1:01:09 GMT
Hey Kim, How are you doin mate? Are you one hundred percent sure there aren't any other #596 pre-canceled apart from Kansas City? Plodding along, thank you for asking, Roni! Hope all has been going well for you and your family. Jack already replied to your follow-up question. |
|
Admin
Administrator 
Posts: 2,645
|
Post by Admin on Apr 19, 2023 13:54:33 GMT
decentguy , this discussion might be more productive if you would post an image of the stamp you are asking about.
|
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Apr 23, 2023 18:47:11 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Apr 26, 2023 4:24:09 GMT
wow ....
NO TAKERS AYE?? Wow
I was told to do what exactly I was meant to do and post pics in the public thread and not private for education purposes ... By now it has taken way too long to be educated but I hope I had demonstrated a thing or two with my posts helping others to educate themselves...
Much Love and Respect to you All.
Roni
|
|
khj
Member
Posts: 1,467
|
Post by khj on Apr 26, 2023 21:36:41 GMT
I didn't reply earlier because: -- I wanted to see if anybody else wanted to provide input -- my reply is essentially the same as to your previous pics of the 1c Franklin in other threads and in PMs. All 5 of the stamps in your post are the common Scott US #632(10Jun1927). This stamp is what the catalogs will list as perf 11x10½, even if they don't actually measure exactly perf 11.0x10.5, as the catalogs are simply rounding in a way to point out the horizontal perforation gauge is noticeably different from the vertical perforation gauge. You don't need a perforation gauge to ID a US #632. (This is the educational statement) Rather than repeat all the details previously given in other threads and in my PMs to you, I will summarize and rephrase as follows: 1. Clear off your table, take all those stamps, and put them on your desk. 2. Gather all your perforation gauges together, take them into another room and leave them there. 3. Go back to your desk, realize that all those stamps have the same horizontal perforation gauge. 4. Orient all your stamps upright, take one of those stamps, rotate it 90º, and take turns lining up with the other stamps. 5. You will see that horizontal perforation of that stamp, do not come close to lining up with the vertical perforations of the other stamps. In fact, you will find they go off by roughly 1/2 hole every 11 holes. Point #5 means that the horizontal/vertical perforations are not the same, off by very roughly ~0.5. There is only one variety of the 1¢ Franklin in which the horizontal/vertical perforations are not the same and off by ~0.5, and that is #632 (perf 11x10½). The only other possibility if horizontal/vertical perforations are not the same, is #578 (perf 11x10), but Point #5 notes the difference is ~0.5, not ~1 hole. All the other varieties have the same horizontal/vertical perforations (whether perf 11 or perf 10), or coil, or imperforate. Therefore all 5 of your stamps are definitely #632. No perforation gauge is needed to make this ID. If you ever post a stamp that I think has a decent shot at being a #594 or #596, I'm sure someone will let you know. Otherwise, assume the stamp you are posting isn't, and members are too busy reading other threads to reply.  k |
|
renden
Member
Posts: 8,723
What I collect: World W collector with ++ interests in BNA (Canada etc) and USA
|
Post by renden on Apr 26, 2023 22:11:27 GMT
Well, thanks to both of you for the analysis/multiple posts and a conclusion (for me) The nice thing about this Forum is that we can share info but for a US newbie (me) it is better to congratulate than participate  Just checked inventory and I have a MNH-VF of that copy Bravo for the discussions ! René |
|
renden
Member
Posts: 8,723
What I collect: World W collector with ++ interests in BNA (Canada etc) and USA
|
Post by renden on Apr 26, 2023 22:26:59 GMT
Well, thanks to both of you for the analysis/multiple posts and a conclusion (for me) The nice thing about this Forum is that we can share info but for a US newbie (me) it is better to congratulate than participate Just checked inventory and I have a MNH-VF of that copy Bravo for the discussions ! René I have realized (through WW collecting and a few specialized interests).....that there is no "insecurity" in stamps....just knowledge and expertise ! Presently I am doing Newfoundland with 3 catalogs (which differ, evidently) and have 200 stamps in my collection (and waiting for 14 re: Discovery of N.F.L.D. + my winning # 59 pair with top inscription and I am not over yet(searching for others)- When I search in Unitrade Canada Specialized......I am a bit happy to see the listings; when in Scott, it is another World.....not very good; and I finish with the bible of Newfoundland (Province of Canada)- WALSH N.S.S.C. 2024..... and my "ego" comes down a notch - I heard from a friend stamper he was using SG....I shall not go there. Appreciate your comments "K" !! René |
|
khj
Member
Posts: 1,467
|
Post by khj on Apr 26, 2023 22:49:13 GMT
René, You are far far far ahead of me when it comes to Canada and Provinces. I had a bad (as in frustrating) experience with Scott when I worked on my Newfoundland nearly 2 decades ago, so that's been put back into one of the "bins". I did start working on my Canada once I started getting the Unitrade catalogs in the early 2010s -- it was a real eye opener in terms of depth and quality of the listing arrangements. And each year, the catalog gets better and better. Walsh is on my list of goodies to get in the future. But, it's a long list! Unfortunately, I had to put Canada and most other stamps on hold after the hand injury last year. Still hoping I'll be able to quit re-aggravating that injury so I can get back to picking up small stamps again. When that time comes, I will no doubt be pestering you and the other Canada/Provinces specialists for help. So thanks in advance! Ha Ha! k I miss WERT.  |
|
vikingeck
Member
Posts: 3,269
What I collect: Samoa, Tobacco theme, Mail in Wartime, anything odd and unusual!
|
Post by vikingeck on Apr 29, 2023 11:05:19 GMT
I have not collected US in decades so have no expertise . My immediate reaction to decentguy ‘s post was to wonder what his point was ? With khj ’s excellent and patient input my instincts were confirmed. I thought immediately “these are all Scott 632, not the elusive 594 /6” However I don’t have the degree of experience of Kim to put it into words so clearly . Since these are scarce it is unlikely 3 or 4 are going to turn up in a hopeful collection with unconfirmed Precancels. Since the 632 is a very common stamp and several images show thins perhaps it would be kind to dump the damaged ones. Incidentally when using one of these perf gauges I line up on the teeth not the holes in the perf. I find that more accurate. |
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Apr 29, 2023 12:24:47 GMT
I didn't reply earlier because: -- I wanted to see if anybody else wanted to provide input -- my reply is essentially the same as to your previous pics of the 1c Franklin in other threads and in PMs. All 5 of the stamps in your post are the common Scott US #632(10Jun1927). This stamp is what the catalogs will list as perf 11x10½, even if they don't actually measure exactly perf 11.0x10.5, as the catalogs are simply rounding in a way to point out the horizontal perforation gauge is noticeably different from the vertical perforation gauge. You don't need a perforation gauge to ID a US #632. (This is the educational statement) Rather than repeat all the details previously given in other threads and in my PMs to you, I will summarize and rephrase as follows: 1. Clear off your table, take all those stamps, and put them on your desk. 2. Gather all your perforation gauges together, take them into another room and leave them there. 3. Go back to your desk, realize that all those stamps have the same horizontal perforation gauge. 4. Orient all your stamps upright, take one of those stamps, rotate it 90º, and take turns lining up with the other stamps. 5. You will see that horizontal perforation of that stamp, do not come close to lining up with the vertical perforations of the other stamps. In fact, you will find they go off by roughly 1/2 hole every 11 holes. Point #5 means that the horizontal/vertical perforations are not the same, off by very roughly ~0.5. There is only one variety of the 1¢ Franklin in which the horizontal/vertical perforations are not the same and off by ~0.5, and that is #632 (perf 11x10½). The only other possibility if horizontal/vertical perforations are not the same, is #578 (perf 11x10), but Point #5 notes the difference is ~0.5, not ~1 hole. All the other varieties have the same horizontal/vertical perforations (whether perf 11 or perf 10), or coil, or imperforate. Therefore all 5 of your stamps are definitely #632. No perforation gauge is needed to make this ID. If you ever post a stamp that I think has a decent shot at being a #594 or #596, I'm sure someone will let you know. Otherwise, assume the stamp you are posting isn't, and members are too busy reading other threads to reply. k Thank You, Kim- much appreciated ... You are a good man... I agree ok maybe half agree with you as far as the pre-can stamps ... I had lots of doubts about them from the start ... and as far as the rest of my stamps goes ... due all respect pls lets just agree to disagree... Of course, I am not saying you are wrong Old mate .... No way I wouldn't dare even think that. ..... I think its probably wise to put this whole topic aside for now to be continued .... Can I show you the discovery of the Century??? and I know this time I am 100% right .... |
|
khj
Member
Posts: 1,467
|
Post by khj on Apr 29, 2023 17:10:43 GMT
Incidentally when using one of these perf gauges I line up on the teeth not the holes in the perf. I find that more accurate. I'm in the same camp, although I realize some collectors have a different preference. Even with the fixed black dot perf gauges, I line up the teeth to see how well they cover up the black dots, rather than trying to see how well the holes match the black dots. I just find it easier to notice uncovered black than to notice uncovered white. But again, to each his/her own... |
|
k
