Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2023 20:48:49 GMT
Yesterday I owned no Pitcairn Islands stamps. Today I own no fewer than eighteen of them, including this attractive but unremarkable pictorial, for which I paid one of my favourite online dealers £0.25. But notice that there's no trace of a pale blue colour on the bird's beak. So is this not such an unremarkable stamp after all, but the rare SG 42a "Pale blue (beak) omitted"? The only pictures I can find on the Internet are of a stamp that was sold as a variety and the stamp that I bought. So perhaps one of you lovely experts can help me.
|
|
Beryllium Guy
Moderator 
Posts: 5,659 
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps 1840-1930
|
Post by Beryllium Guy on May 26, 2023 21:43:20 GMT
Thanks for your post, Peter (@peadarruadh). It's an interesting question! I have no particular expertise in the area of color-omitted stamps, but the one thing I can recall having read about them is that in order for a stamp to qualify as a color-omitted variety, it cannot have even a microscopic trace of the omitted color. If it has so much as one discernible pixel of the missing color, then it is not a color-omitted variety. Have you checked yours under magnification? Just out of curiosity, I found the listing for a Pitcairn SG42a color-omitted variety here: www.purvesphilatelics.co.uk/pitcairn-islands-sg42a-FU-set-1/121967/The dealer indicates that the stamp apparently sold as the rare variety, and I must admit that it looks much like yours. I also noticed that your copy and the one in the dealer's closed listing both have first-day cancels on them. What does that mean? Well, to me, it implies that if the dealer's ID of this stamp as the SG42a is correct, and it came off an FDC, then I think yours may have a chance to qualify, too. Other opinions are welcome, of course. Nice find... congrats!  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2023 23:15:33 GMT
Beryllium Guy: Yes, I saw the Purves Philatelics scan and wondered what their selling price was! The price in my 2010 SG catalogue is £475 (mint, probably less for used). Alas, the cancellation on mine is slightly blurred, but the surface is undamaged and the perforations are good.
I've examined the stamp in bright daylight and scanned it at 2400 dpi. I can't see even a speck of "pale blue" on the booby's beak. But what I really want is a "normal" stamp to compare it with. Has anybody here got one?
Here's part of my 2400 dpi scan. No part of the beak looks pale blue to me.
|
|
hdm1950
Member 
Posts: 1,612
What I collect: I collect world wide up to 1965 with several specialty albums added due to volume of material I have acquired. At this point I am focused on Canada and British America. I am always on the lookout for stamps and covers with postmarks from communities in Queens County, Nova Scotia. I do list various goods including stamps occasionally on eBay as hdm50
|
Post by hdm1950 on May 27, 2023 0:24:58 GMT
Here is a scan of my mint never hinged example with the pale grey on the beak. Scott calls the colour grey and numbers the variety SC 45a. I have the complete set MNH. It is a pretty set.  |
|
hdm1950
Member
Posts: 1,612
What I collect: I collect world wide up to 1965 with several specialty albums added due to volume of material I have acquired. At this point I am focused on Canada and British America. I am always on the lookout for stamps and covers with postmarks from communities in Queens County, Nova Scotia. I do list various goods including stamps occasionally on eBay as hdm50
|
Post by hdm1950 on May 27, 2023 0:42:28 GMT
Beryllium Guy: Yes, I saw the Purves Philatelics scan and wondered what their selling price was! The price in my 2010 SG catalogue is £475 (mint, probably less for used). Alas, the cancellation on mine is slightly blurred, but the surface is undamaged and the perforations are good.
I've examined the stamp in bright daylight and scanned it at 2400 dpi. I can't see even a speck of "pale blue" on the booby's beak. But what I really want is a "normal" stamp to compare it with. Has anybody here got one?
Here's part of my 2400 dpi scan. No part of the beak looks pale blue to me.
When I look at your scan close up I am afraid the pale grey is there. I am not sure why SG calls it blue. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2023 19:36:06 GMT
I still can't make my mind up, Beryllium Guy and hdm1950. Sometimes I think I can see a faint hint of pale grey, sometimes it just looks white. And if this is the normal stamp, how did the error come to be detected? And why was a cylinder added to the printing press to print a colour that would be invisible to the naked eye? And why is such a subtle error listed in a non-specialist catalogue?
I think I'll have to buy some more examples of "SG 42" in order to make comparisons.
|
|
|
|
Post by paul1 on May 27, 2023 21:15:40 GMT
seems it's not just the 8d. (SG 42) that's fallen foul of 'missing blue'. According to SG, the 1/2d. value from this set, the 'Pitcairn Is. Long Boat' (SG 36) is also offered with 'blue omitted' (36a), and in the 2020 edition of the SG 'Commonwealth & British Empire Stamps 1840 - 1970' catalogue, they list this at £800 mint, with the 8d. listed at £600 - neither being offered 'used' it seems. All the 8d. stamps shown in this thread are examples with a pale grey beak - there is a noticeable fine white line either side of the grey, so no doubt about the beak being grey, but agree certainly not a speck of blue to be seen. As for the 1/2d. value with blue omitted, I wasn't entirely sure at first as to what part of the image SG were referring to, since confusingly there actually are two shades of blue on this value, albeit in small quantity - these appear on the clothing of the passengers in the boat. However, in view of SGs comments about the missing blue on the 8d. being a reference to the colour of the beak (which is grey), then it's probably likely that the boys in the Strand are referring to the colour of the hull of the boat on the 1/2d. value - which again is the colour grey - at least on my examples it is - pix attached, regret I don't have an example of the 8d. I don't have a specialised catalogue, neither have I seen a booby with a blue beak, so can't comment as to missing colours. As to the 8d. example that was offered with missing blue - this sounds a conundrum - anyone with this stamp that showed a standard grey beak would qualify as a missing blue ?? Anyway, I wouldn't pay hundreds - I'd sell one for hundreds though - I might venture up to the strand and show them my 1/2d. value with grey hull and say "wanna buy a missing blue" lads?   |
|
Beryllium Guy
Moderator
Posts: 5,659
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps 1840-1930
|
Post by Beryllium Guy on May 28, 2023 14:49:46 GMT
This has been a fun one, Peter (@peadarruadh), thanks for starting it. Thanks to all who have contributed to this discussion: hdm1950 and paul1To Paul's point, it does indeed look like there is a very light gray color on the beak. It seems a stretch to call it blue, even faint, but who knows? The dealer listing from Purves that both Peter and I have checked out looks very much the same as Peter's stamp. Looking at it again, I do think I can see the pale gray there, too, that Paul has pointed out. And neither of those two copies looks all that much different from Hugh's. Hmmmm..... Well, Peter, I think your idea of getting other copies of this stamp is the best way to go. Side-by-side comparison would seem to be the only sure way to determine what's going on. If the color-omitted variety is such a rarity that it commands a CV of several hundred GBP, there has to be some way to identify it. If you can acquire a few, and they all look the same, then that in itself would seem to indicate that it can't be the color-omitted variety. I don't know much about how they operate, but would you also be able to contact a UK expertizing organization like the RPSL or BPA and ask them if they can show you an image of a certified example? The APS (American Philatelic Society) has an online database accessible to members, so I will check there later today to see if they have a certified example available. If they do, I will post what I can find here. Stay color-omitted stampy, all! |
|
|
|
Post by michael on May 29, 2023 8:37:36 GMT
Interesting thread, I like stamps with a story and this clearly has one. The 1/2d missing blue are the passengers in the boat.
 The red-footed booby does have a blue beak.
Here's an image from Ebay of a stamp showing the cylinder colours. Well to me the 4th colour is more pale-blue than grey (my wife agrees) so technically S.G. have got it right, the pale-blue colour intended for the beak is omitted.
However, the photogravure printing process has clearly made the beak look grey rather than the intended pale-blue as the designer of the stamp would have wanted. The difference can be seen from this pair of boobies  that is for sale at Zebroose.
|
|
|
|
Post by paul1 on May 29, 2023 9:11:56 GMT
your input very useful and interesting michael - thanks for posting. Aside from the'missing colours' errors on these issues, Pitcairn always has the additional 'Bligh/Bounty' interest.
Now that you've explained the missing blue for the ha'penny - the clothing rather than the hull - all is now clear, and this is an easy to understand variety. On the 20c. value the blue of the beak is noticeable, but it's far less blue looking on the 8D beak, despite the traffic light indicators on the selvedge.
I think the problem here is that varieties - generally - are usually those rare stamps which possess abnormality or missing something, with the vast majority looking normal. With the 8D booby, it appears all stamps shown here - with one exception - exhibit missing blue, thus making the presence of blue the variety, rather than the stamps with the 'blue missing'.
The 8D 'blue' is perhaps a rather ambiguous 'blue'. thanks again. This is just my opinion of course, others may be far more expert in their knowledge of stamp inconsistencies.
|
|
|
|
Post by michael on May 29, 2023 9:45:34 GMT
My understanding of the variety.
The variety is described by S.G. as "Pale blue (beak) omitted" and presumably occurs when the 4th cylinder (as per colour dots above) is not inked or similar. Whether you call this colour (which only occurs on the beak) pale blue, blue grey or grey makes no difference, the variety is the lack of this colour as per the left Zebroose stamp. The OP's stamp along with all the others in this thread are the normal stamp.
|
|
|
|
Post by paul1 on May 29, 2023 11:56:32 GMT
thanks michael - apologies if my comments sound repetitive or contentious - I'm trying to get my head round this one and it's not easy. From your very useful explanations - and the SG catalogue wording - we are in no doubt that the normal 8D stamp should show the booby with a 'pale blue beak'. I'd suggest herein lies the problem insofar as in the stamps posted on TSF show the colour of the beak as very pale grey, though appreciate none of these is accompanied by the traffic lights - I'd also suggest that this does make a difference in that grey will, if nothing else, make for a very confusing situation for collectors - as it has for us. With the 20c. booby there is no doubting the blue of the beak.
Deviating from stamps briefly .......... I recall as a child the use of a small linen container used in the weekly wash - Reckitt Blue or Robin, possibly?? - apparently adding a very small quantity of blue colourant to white clothing has the effect of making it appear whiter - it doesn't increase whiteness of course but presumably a hint of blue makes it appear so.
|
|
|
|
Post by gstamps on May 29, 2023 15:49:14 GMT
Most catalogs simplify the naming of colors, which creates these confusions. I think that the Michel Color Guide tries to standardize the colors at least for German stamps. I equated the term "pale" with "hell". Pale blue - the name in the SG catalog - should look something like this:  I think that in the SG catalog the color should be "pale gray blue/hellgraublau" which seems closer to the one on the stamp:  or maybe "pale blue gray" very hard to see from my image. Regardless of the name, to be a variety the beak must be white (or the color of paper) |
|
|
|
Post by paul1 on May 29, 2023 18:55:25 GMT
thanks gstamps. Standardizing colours is possibly one of the most thankless tasks, and variables that affect how we see a colour are numerous. Regret I'm ignorant of the Michel Colour Guide, and have only just had a look at my copy of SGs own colour chart which cost five shillings (5/-) - £0.25p) ... in 1969 - SG may well have re-issued this some time in the past half century. As mentioned earlier, SGs catalogue says - with regard to the 8D value - that it's the 'pale blue' that's missing, although pale blue doesn't appear as named colour in their 1969 colour chart - perhaps someone has a later dated chart for comparison. Couple of pix attached showing the blue/green and grey sections of their 1969 guide, out of a total of 100 colour swatches, in which the blues outnumber the greys many times - perhaps 'pale blue' might come closest to No. 44 which in 1969 they called light blue - although IMHO that's not the colour we're seeing on the beaks on the stamps. I think michael's comments about the fault possibly being with the printing process, resulting in the 8D beak appearing more grey than blue is likely the cause of the problem.   |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2023 19:30:48 GMT
This is great fun!
The stamp with cylinder numbers attached, and the two contrasting examples from zeboose, (both posted by michael) are very interesting. It seems that the colour (whether blue or grey) isn't faint enough to be invisible, especially when SG 42 and 42a are seen side by side. It also seems that the beak is the only place where the colour appears.
I'll report back when I've bought more examples, both mint and used. (It's possible that the pale blue/grey ink is fugitive or liable to fading, and this may be the reason why SG doesn't quote a price for used.)
Meanwhile, I wonder what SG 42b ("pale blue (beak) printed double") looks like!
|
|
that is for sale at Zebroose.
