Classic Stamps - Your thoughts

I'm technically one of those who tries to focus on the "classic period", so that would sort of be 1840-1940. Of course, Scott Classic actually includes pre-QEII British Commonwealth. I guess I'm one of those who lets the catalog define what I focus on. Historically, there have been debates on what constitutes the "classic period", with debates over 1840-1870, -1875, -1900, -1920, -1940... Each gives their own reason, ranging from printing, catalogs, traditional album cutoffs, UPU... with many of the reasons meaningful in their own right.

In reality, I'll collect anything that catches my fancy, not limited to pre-QEII. In fact, I probably have more QEII era stamps than pre-QEII. So much for discipline.

Given that, I'm one of those who feels even modern "sticker" stamps are fine. Whatever gets people's attention and attracts potential future collectors. When I started collecting, I really like the US 3¢ commemoratives. There was some criticism in the late 1940s and early 1950s regarding the large increase in quantity of different issues and the "value" of some of the topics commemorated. I didn't come along until well after that, but I found some of those "nonsensical" commemoratives enjoyable to collect.

Effort into print is important, I agree. But in reality, some of the earliest postage issues were nothing more than handstamps, or perforated handstamps. Some of them fetch some pretty outrageous sums. I enjoy a well-engraved mono-color stamp. But I will also admit that I'm really piqued by innovative printing/material of some modern stamps -- glow-in-the-dark, heat-sensitive, scratch-n-sniff, holographic, raised surfaces/ink...

I guess, it goes back to what I've mentioned in the past -- collect what you want, the way you want, because it's your collection and your enjoyment.

Interesting thread topic!

Many collectors collect to "the album" or according to <insert name of catalog here>.
This is an easy approach.

The first definition of "Classics" I've seen referenced is the "Age of Innocence" from 1840-1870. Before postal authorities started to produce stamps for collectors.
Since then the classic period have been extended several times. This is very much driven by producers of catalogs. Today, most consider the cut-off to be 1940. 

I'm curious what people think of the different cut-offs: 1870, 1900 or 1940. Do you base your decision on what your favourite catalog says?

I focus on mainly on 1900-1980 so definitely in the modern area.

Thanks for starting this thread, Nelson (@falshung ).  I confess that I missed the original comment in the Switzerland thread by Werner (salentin ) that prompted this discussion.

For me, I think that definitions of "classic" stamps will differ from place to place, from catalogue publisher to catalogue publisher, and from collector to collector.  I am not troubled by that, as we each put our collections together based on what we each find to be most interesting, logical, appropriate, or by whatever criteria we each determine.  To my thinking, this is an individual choice to which we are all entitled.  Just because my interpretation of what I consider classic may be different from someone else's interpretation doesn't bother me.  I try to be tolerant of others' opinions just as I hope that they will be tolerant of mine.

All of that said, I agree that most publishers of catalogues and albums consider 1840-1940 to be the usual classic period, but as Scott goes all the way to 1952 for British Commonwealth classics, I can see that stretching the time period to the early 1950s can also make sense.  That is how Scott is choosing to do it, and one can either embrace that, too, or choose another direction.  It's your choice.

For me personally, I have chosen to limit my primary collecting era to 1840-1930, but that was driven mostly by my desire to limit the size of my collection, and because I had an album that covered that period.  As it happens, I still add stamps to my collection if I like them, even if they fall outside of that period.  My collection, my choice.  Live and let live works for me.

No matter how you define the classic period for stamps, I do like the early material the best, and I will continue to focus my collecting towards that era, gravitating in general towards older and older material.

I agree with much of what khj says. When I was living in Korea, I started expanding my collecting from my original core collections US, Canada and Russia (and others) to include South Korea and I was starting to accumulate a lot of worldwide items that caught my fancy. It was also at that time that Scott was pushing their 4 volume Scott International 1840-1940 set that you could buy for roughly $300.00. This was in the 90s and I asked for it as a Christmas gift from my mother and received it. Once I moved back to the US from Korea in the late 90s I thought I would solely concentrate on classics and started selling off much of what I had accumulated except for some core collections.

I quickly realized, however, that the Scott International set was disappointing. I wanted something more complete and the stamp layout was still that old layout with rows of printed boxes with no space in between and the pages were double-sided, which, in my opinion is just silly. So I set this idea aside for awhile. Plus my wife and I had a 1 year old son and later another child and I only intermittently worked on stamps.

Later, however, once our lives had settled into a new pattern and I was able to find time to work on stamps again, I discovered Steiner. This kinda blew the lid off of my plans as a classics collector. I bought his CD with both his classic pages and worldwide pages to 2010 and I quickly realized I could print and collect whatever I wanted. I also realized there was no more need to update my old Scott albums (or any other pre-printed albums for that matter) with expensive album supplements.

I also feel that Steiner and the personal computer sort of revolutionized stamp collecting because we were no longer tied to companies manufacturing expensive pre-printed albums and expensive annual supplements. I personally love to have the ability to just print when I want and collect what I want and not feel as if it is going to be a huge expense to start collecting another country.

I still like the idea of collecting classics and when I buy a collection like the India stamps that I bought yesterday at the show I attended, I am more likely to buy something with classic stamps in it than otherwise, and for all the same reasons stated above by khj and @falshung . In the end, however, I really subscribe to the philosophy of "collect what you want, the way you want, because it's your collection and your enjoyment".

Ah, the Scott 1999 Classic -- softcover and lightweight. One dealer was clearing them out for a couple of bucks, so I bought an extra one and used it to mark my inventory with a light red color pencil. Carried it to shows as a "ready-checklist". Don't do that anymore, but does bring back memories.

That is my preferred method as well. Which is why my cataloguing efforts take so long, as I mark everything I had in the new books. But I find that I cannot rely on memory alone anymore to remember what I have or not. Hopefully more a question of having a larger inventory than my memory stack allows, instead of my own memory faltering because of growing up in years!

The Scott Classical catalog would be more useful if they extended their stopping point for Germany from 1940 to 1945.

For over 30 years my major collection was the Classic issues of Denmark 1851-64 the so called  "Square Stamps".


I got hooked on these when asked to assist a friend with a pre 1940s classic album he had inherited. A dealer had offered him £200 so he wanted a second opinion. Page 1 India used in Aden blew my socks off! 


We got him £5000 after 18 months trading and I got a couple of "little Square stamps".


The collection was sold in 2016 via Postiljonen in Sweden and these remain: 
                                                                                  

AS a token collection of Classics I'm building a collection of 1st Issues of Europe. I have to confess Italy and German States  I treat with great caution!