Braunschweig (Brunswick)

If you are not sure, use Stamp Lift. That will be better than soaking, would it not?

It might if you leave it long enough. Just be careful attempting removing the stamp, if you can...

mikeclevenger can certainly attest to that!

Good thread, Stan (stainlessb )!  Interesting stamps, as always.

I love the fact that you are always asking if it is safe to soak things.  Not enough people do; I know I didn't.  But once I started to soak WW classic issues, I began to see problems with certain stamps, and I became much more cautious.  These days, I have probably gone too far in the other direction.  I do lots of items individually by hand that probably could just be safely soaked.  But I applaud your thoroughness in this regard!

Werner (salentin ), I must compliment you on a very fine scan of your 1-Sgr carmine red.  It is very nicely done.  It also illustrates your point about color very well.

Stan, I am not aware of any problems with soaking these, but if Werner thinks your 2-Sgr on blue paper appears lighter blue than typical, I would tend to agree with him that you should avoid soaking it.  If the back is messy, and you still want to remove hinge remnants or something, you should be able to do that with an art-brush application of a little Stamp-Lift fluid.  That's what I use on all of my Hong Kong KEVII and KGV definitives with the fugitive ink vignettes.  It works well as long as you don't get too heavy-handed with the fluid.

As for the others, it appears that the two on the right are stained or foxed or something, so perhaps the red ones on the left have been discolored.  I agree with Werner that they appear more brownish than red.  It could be that the color has been sulphuretted.  We have had other examples here on TSF, especially orange color stamps, that will turn brown to various degrees due to absorbing sulphur content from the air.  Alex (vikingeck) commented about this once, too.

If you are up for experimenting, and if those stamps are indeed sulphuretted, a bath in dilute hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂) will re-oxygenate the surface and restore the color.

Received this week, MiNr. 6aY, Braunschweig 1 silbergroschen black on yellow, with a posthorn watermark:

I am in a quandary and wish to poll the opinion of the learned membership of TSF to help in my decision. Please see the two stamps in the scan below:



The stamp on the left is the one I have posted before in this thread. The one on the right I received today on approval. They both come from the same serious dealer in Germany. The first, on the left,  was sold to me as a MiNr. 6aY, while the second, on the right, is advertised as a MiNr. 6b. I do not have a Michel catalog for the German states. Instead I rely on my Yvert catalog that lists the 1 groschen stamps as YT #7 (black on yellow) or #7a (black on dark yellow). My AFA catalog also has two listings, namely #6 (sort, brunlig) and #6a (sort, gullig) [i.e. for those whose Danish is rusty: (black on brownish paper) and (black on yellowish paper)]. With these descriptions, I am somewhat at a loss to tell whether the two stamps are really different or rather just slightly different shades of the same original yellow color affected by their idiosyncratic histories. The darker smudge on the top part of the stamp on the right is due to a hinge remnant on the back. The posthorn watermark is also much clearer to see on the left specimen.

So, my question is, am I really looking at two different stamps? The scan actually makes their shades look even more similar than under my magnifying light, which makes the stamp on the right appear slightly darker. But I'm not convinced that it's dark enough to qualify as "jaune foncé" in French or "brunlig" in Danish. Since the price of the second stamp is significant enough that it'd be worth my while returning it if I decide it's more likely than not a duplicate of the one I already have, I am hesitating and eager to hear your opinions.

They look alike to me, and very different from my own, which are clearly yellowish and one is labeled 6aY.

I would keep the one the left, and pass on the other. The postmark is indistinct and the smudge is distracting.

I cannot see any difference of colour with these two examples. I have had the same type of problem with my Nova Scotia stamps. I agree with what others have posted. It looks like two copies of same stamp.

Those are my thoughts.

David

Michel 6a seies is "chrome yellow" while 6b series is "brown yellow". To my eyes I think Hrdoktorx is being offered 2 6b, not a 6a and 6b. 6a should look more "American Yellow Mustard" yellow, as in Greaden's image

 salentin . I agree with the unanimous opinion of TSF that these two stamps are essentially the same shade. So now I had to check the watermark. On my original stamp copy, the watermark is very clear and, looking at the back of the stamp while holding it upright, the mouth of the horn is to the right. On the new stamp on approval, I cannot make out the watermark at all. It may be hidden below the hinge remnant . So I think the decision is that I will not be purchasing the second stamp. I appreciate all the comments and interest my question got!

Another Braunschweig arrival, if you'll forgive the cross-posting, as this is MiNr. 1:

A new arrival today, Braunschweig 1 silbergroschen black on yellow, AFA #11:
 


The scan doesn't do it justice, but it is a much lighter and sharper shade of yellow that the other two I have posted earlier in this thread.