doug534
Member 
A new enthusiast leaning to pre-1957 Aden, New Zealand, Switzerland, great designers & engravers
Posts: 173
|
Post by doug534 on Jul 8, 2024 22:22:26 GMT
|
|
doug534
Member
A new enthusiast leaning to pre-1957 Aden, New Zealand, Switzerland, great designers & engravers
Posts: 173
|
Post by doug534 on Jul 9, 2024 17:11:32 GMT
Reading through the "Colombia: Stamps" thread was educational, particularly the references to varieties missing in Scott and other non-speciality catalogues. Using the Scott online catalogue I think I have the following issues of 50-centavos stamps: the 1888 Scott #135 A45 brown on buff paper, the 1892 Sc. #155 A45 violet on violet paper and the 1899 Sc. #156 A53a red violet on violet paper (a redrawn A45). But the two #155s (upper right) certainly look different in ink color, and possibly paper color. Have I incorrectly identified the stamps?  |
|
doug534
Member
A new enthusiast leaning to pre-1957 Aden, New Zealand, Switzerland, great designers & engravers
Posts: 173
|
Post by doug534 on Jul 9, 2024 18:26:25 GMT
A close-up of the what I thought were representatives of the two Colombia 50-centavos stamps issued 1892-1899, the violet on violet paper Scott #155 A45 and #156 A53a, red violet on violet paper. According to Scott, "Type A53a is a redrawing of type A45. The letters of the inscriptions are slightly larger and the numerals "50" slightly smaller than in type A45." I considered the top two stamps #155 and the lower one #156. But notice that the upper right and lower stamp each have the condor holding a looped chain/cord with the wing clearly visible inside the loop. The condor in the upper left stamp seems to have a solid chain, or if it is a loop, at least the wing is not visible inside it. The upper left stamp also appears to have darker (black?) ink. So is this stamp a variety? A forgery? Mis-identified?  |
|
rod222
Member
Posts: 11,114 
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps, Ephemera and Catalogues
|
Post by rod222 on Jul 10, 2024 3:05:58 GMT
A close-up of the what I thought were representatives of the two Colombia 50-centavos stamps issued 1892-1899, the violet on violet paper Scott #155 A45 and #156 A53a, red violet on violet paper. According to Scott, "Type A53a is a redrawing of type A45. The letters of the inscriptions are slightly larger and the numerals "50" slightly smaller than in type A45." I considered the top two stamps #155 and the lower one #156. But notice that the upper right and lower stamp each have the condor holding a looped chain/cord with the wing clearly visible inside the loop. The condor in the upper left stamp seems to have a solid chain, or if it is a loop, at least the wing is not visible inside it. The upper left stamp also appears to have darker (black?) ink. So is this stamp a variety? A forgery? Mis-identified? Non specialist Opinion Top right hand stamp is dodgy The other two 1886 and 1892 rated "not so common" Two types "50 centavos" different Klasebour RED FLAG ALERT : Variety : 1886 1887 20c Inscribed "REPULICA" (General Narino) |
|
doug534
Member
A new enthusiast leaning to pre-1957 Aden, New Zealand, Switzerland, great designers & engravers
Posts: 173
|
Post by doug534 on Jul 10, 2024 17:08:14 GMT
Thanks, rod222. I was concerned the top left stamp might be a forgery. To be clear, you did mean the "top right hand stamp is dodgy" in your opinion?
|
|
Beryllium Guy
Moderator 
Posts: 5,917
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps 1840-1930
|
Post by Beryllium Guy on Jul 10, 2024 17:57:20 GMT
Thanks for your posts, doug534In looking closely at the three stamps, it appears to me that the two on the right share the most common printing characteristics, looking especially at the numerals (50) and the rest of the lettering. It is the one on the top left that is dissimilar to the other two. If that is your point, I agree with you. On the other hand, I can see what rod222 is talking about with the top right stamp. The printing seems much less distinct (over-inked, perhaps?) compared to the other two. Still, I would lean toward your suspicion that the outlier amongst these three is the top left, based on the numerals and lettering. Just my opinion, of course, and others are welcome to theirs.  |
|
doug534
Member
A new enthusiast leaning to pre-1957 Aden, New Zealand, Switzerland, great designers & engravers
Posts: 173
|
Post by doug534 on Jul 10, 2024 17:59:02 GMT
Today's philatelic mystery: why did the 1957 asking price for this Colombia 5-centavos stamp differ so greatly between the used, perforate version (3 cents) and the unused, imperforate version ($2.50). And what happened to shift the values of these stamps between 1957 and 2023? I judge these stamps to be the 1899 Scott #163 A56 (red brown on salmon paper). Scott's 1956 catalogue lists four versions: perforate, (163a) horizontal pair, imperf. between; (163b) Imperf, vertically; and (163c) Vertical pair, imperf between. The listed values are (unused/used) 8c/6c, $2/$2, and $4/$4 for 163, 163a, and 163b, respectively. There is no separate value for 163c. So presumably there were sheets with only horizonal perfs, sheets with only vertical perfs, and given the imperforate stamp below, sheets with no perfs. The 2023 Scott online catalogue has a single listing: 163 A56 5c red brown on salmon paper 70 cents / 35 cents. Note the cancellation mark: it has the day of the month typeset inserted into the stamp upside down. 25 February 190_??  |
|
rod222
Member
Posts: 11,114
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps, Ephemera and Catalogues
|
Post by rod222 on Jul 10, 2024 22:45:22 GMT
Thanks, rod222. I was concerned the top left stamp might be a forgery. To be clear, you did mean the "top right hand stamp is dodgy" in your opinion? Hi Doug, Yes I did, but as mentioned , I do not specialise here. I was mainly going by colours. The grey just didn't look right. Remember the 50c lettering differs between the genuine 1886 and the genuine 1892 I'll re tackle the observations again later this afternoon busy this morning with coffee and muffins with the guys. |
|
rod222
Member
Posts: 11,114
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps, Ephemera and Catalogues
|
Post by rod222 on Jul 11, 2024 11:14:18 GMT
doug534 Hi Doug, I confirm my original opinion. (Non specialist opinion only) Your bottom stamp is Sc#155 1892 Your top right, at best is dodgy or a forgery Your Top left is Scott # 156 1899 (Redrawn) Identification: Simple : Bottom left hand spear head is missing Others All lettering in redrawn is larger and thicker the numerals are smaller the flag of "5" is thinner all exterior ornaments are altered. Should be Perf 12, or perf 13½ x 12 either dull violet / lilac or Mauve / lilac Just a "by the by" when I buy Colombia from my dealer, I just buy blind, and trust him from 12 years or so of purchases The when I get them, it takes a while to best try and get the genuine from the dodgy I am no where near a specialist, but good fun, none the less 2889 50 Brown on yellow design  
|
|
rod222
Member
Posts: 11,114
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps, Ephemera and Catalogues
|
Post by rod222 on Jul 11, 2024 11:45:59 GMT
Today's philatelic mystery: why did the 1957 asking price for this Colombia 5-centavos stamp differ so greatly between the used, perforate version (3 cents) and the unused, imperforate version ($2.50). And what happened to shift the values of these stamps between 1957 and 2023? I judge these stamps to be the 1899 Scott #163 A56 (red brown on salmon paper). Scott's 1956 catalogue lists four versions: perforate, (163a) horizontal pair, imperf. between; (163b) Imperf, vertically; and (163c) Vertical pair, imperf between. The listed values are (unused/used) 8c/6c, $2/$2, and $4/$4 for 163, 163a, and 163b, respectively. There is no separate value for 163c. So presumably there were sheets with only horizonal perfs, sheets with only vertical perfs, and given the imperforate stamp below, sheets with no perfs. The 2023 Scott online catalogue has a single listing: 163 A56 5c red brown on salmon paper 70 cents / 35 cents. No postage stamp has a concrete value, except those at point of sale from a post office. All used stamps have a floating value, only fixed at the point of sale, where a seller accepts an offer on an item. There has to be an offer and an acceptance to dictate a value, and only then to that article. It may influence other items of similar characteristics, but that is all. Philately becomes a lot more relaxed when one has sufficient experience, to judge roughly what is on offer, its approximate value and make bids within that judgement. currrent ebay $25 + shipping  |
|
Hugh
Member
Posts: 770
What I collect: Worldwide Occupation Stamps and Postal History; and, anything that looks interesting.
|
Post by Hugh on Jul 11, 2024 12:37:30 GMT
No postage stamp has a concrete value, except those at point of sale from a post office. All used stamps have a floating value, only fixed at the point of sale, where a seller accepts an offer on an item. There has to be an offer and an acceptance to dictate a value, and only then to that article. It may influence other items of similar characteristics, but that is all. Philately becomes a lot more relaxed when one has sufficient experience, to judge roughly what is on offer, its approximate value and make bids within that judgement. Couldn't agree more ... I'm a big fan of rational behaviour. We should probably also take into account the findings of behavioural economics. That being, people aren't always rational. (Duh!) The financial (and other) value of stamps and covers are subject to emotion and impulsivity. Don't we all know that? It works both ways too. Sometimes we may covet something and pay more, and sometimes we lose interest and pay less or not buy at all. The market is endlessly fascinating. With all the stamps entering the market as collectors age out of the game, and with changing tastes and interests, I have been amazed to see the stuff you can buy for cheap — at least at club bourses. Disclaimer: I only buy, I've never sold any stamps or covers. So, I'm perhaps a bit biased (smile) |
|
rod222
Member
Posts: 11,114
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps, Ephemera and Catalogues
|
Post by rod222 on Jul 11, 2024 20:24:32 GMT
Hi Hugh, That being, people aren't always rational. (Duh!) Myself included  Yes, I got caught out, as I specialised in Turkiye, I came across this souvenir sheet I had seen a similar copy sold for $162.95 US the month before, I could not find out any info on it, at the time. Rather than "miss out" I bid and won it at $80 US + ship Only to find later, it was "phantasy" cinderella , apparently worthless to other people I learned my lesson.   |
|
Hugh
Member
Posts: 770
What I collect: Worldwide Occupation Stamps and Postal History; and, anything that looks interesting.
|
Post by Hugh on Jul 11, 2024 21:44:58 GMT
Hi Hugh, That being, people aren't always rational. (Duh!) Myself included I learned my lesson. We've all done it. I'd like to think I've learned my lesson too. I'm embarrassed to say that I once bought 25 pages from an amateur dealer in the US of what was advertised as 'unique, one-of-a-kind, special, WW2 commemorative souvenir sheets'. My only defence was that I was assembling material for a presentation on world-wide remembrance of the war and I was in a rush. Anyway, here are four samples of the 25 pages I got in the mail. Beleive it or not, they're the 'best' onces.  10 out of 10, I suppose, for patriotic enthusiasm. But ... the stamps are glued every which way to some very ugly cardboard. The art design? ... well, judge for yourself. I don't know how they got someone to give them 25 courtesy cancels, but they did. Definitely not what I was expecting for what I paid. They're sitting at the bottom of box I rarely look at. I don't know what to do with them. If anyone wants them, let me know. I do a LOT more research now ... especially when I buy something from someone I don't know. Of course, I say that, but I know that when I get to the BNAPS dealer tables next month, my emotional brain is going to keep pounding away at my rational brain. It's gotta win sometimes.  |
|
