|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 11, 2022 12:09:17 GMT
pls help if you can identify the stamp!   |
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 12, 2022 2:51:24 GMT
Hi all, additional information being added hope that helps just a tiny more! .... As shown in the photo I was holding the stamp against the light... looking at it now from its back side (end) almost a see through, and obviosly the colours are a different ...  |
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 12, 2022 4:48:44 GMT
|
|
tomiseksj
Moderator 
Woodbridge, Virginia, USA
Posts: 6,385 
What I collect: Worldwide stamps/covers, Cinderellas, Ohio Prepaid Sales Tax Receipts, U.S. WWII Ration ephemera
|
Post by tomiseksj on Nov 12, 2022 22:40:28 GMT
The stamps (179 and 185) are differentiated by paper type. Scott 179 is on hard paper and 185 on soft paper. Hard paper is more translucent than soft paper. Look here for more info on the paper types associated with these Taylor stamps. |
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 12, 2022 23:00:14 GMT
The stamps (179 and 185) are differentiated by paper type. Scott 179 is on hard paper and 185 on soft paper. Hard paper is more translucent than soft paper. Look here for more info on the paper types associated with these Taylor stamps. Thank for sending that! what an awesome link... Roni |
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 13, 2022 6:20:15 GMT
Without any prejudices! I love most people... But recently I am becoming convinced more and more there is a big possibility I had killed a China man in my Past Life... Why do I always come across the hard ones?!maybe Steve Can help again!! or anyone who recognize my stamp and know about that paper type I look forward to hearing from You... It does look very odd tho referring here to how the paper had been structured and the contents used ....   |
|
khj
Member 
Posts: 1,524
|
Post by khj on Nov 13, 2022 7:07:15 GMT
Nice clear scans in the last post!  #185 soft porous paper, the many many fiber threads sticking out of almost all the teeth tips are a telltale sign of soft porous paper. However, the absence of many fiber threads doesn't not necessarily mean it isn't soft porous paper. Nice duplex cancel -- the "1" almost looks like he's wearing shades! For the stamp pic in your first post, looks like it might be wove paper? -- so maybe #179. |
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 13, 2022 8:00:20 GMT
Hi Kim! Thanks... yeah, from the link I was reading earlier it also confirms that ... But what caught my eyes, the back of the stamp in real life it kinda looks odd like its hairy (brownish hair) all over it looks way different than all the many other soft ones I have in my collection ... What do you think is the name for such paper? Best Regards Roni |
|
khj
Member
Posts: 1,524
|
Post by khj on Nov 13, 2022 15:25:04 GMT
Not sure. The brownish fibers aren't on the front, and from a pic I can't tell if it's really embedded into/through the paper or just something picked up from the packaging/envelope it was affixed to... Someone else will need to chime in.
|
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 13, 2022 22:36:54 GMT
Not sure. The brownish fibers aren't on the front, and from a pic I can't tell if it's really embedded into/through the paper or just something picked up from the packaging/envelope it was affixed to... Someone else will need to chime in. I see your point and it's a good point you are making! as always ... I think it is actually embedded into through the paper it is evenly spread and pretty much consistent over the whole stamp as shown in the pic... even after soaking it in for a little while I carefully had a go on trying to clean it, but I couldn't .... it's what got me puzzled but now the point you made is stuck in my head so I will have another go to try and see if I can get it off maybe by soaking it for a bit longer.... Cheers Roni |
|
khj
Member
Posts: 1,524
|
Post by khj on Nov 13, 2022 23:59:25 GMT
If it's not coming off after soaking, I wouldn't soak it longer.
|
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 14, 2022 0:25:25 GMT
Not sure. The brownish fibers aren't on the front, and from a pic I can't tell if it's really embedded into/through the paper or just something picked up from the packaging/envelope it was affixed to... Someone else will need to chime in. I see your point and it's a good point you are making! as always ... I think it is actually embedded into through the paper it is evenly spread and pretty much consistent over the whole stamp as shown in the pic... even after soaking it in for a little while I carefully had a go on trying to clean it, but I couldn't .... it's what got me puzzled but now the point you made is stuck in my head so I will have another go to try and see if I can get it off maybe by soaking it for a bit longer.... Cheers Roni changed my mind!... Thought of a better way to determine the outcome....Ready?!     And No this isnt Mars Or Planet Jupiter we looking at here  (you know me by now) Joking! ...... under the microscope can you see how all the brown fiber embedded into the stamp and the other fiber in some spots are over the brown fibre... Cheers Roni |
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 14, 2022 0:45:25 GMT
Not sure. The brownish fibers aren't on the front, and from a pic I can't tell if it's really embedded into/through the paper or just something picked up from the packaging/envelope it was affixed to... Someone else will need to chime in. Whoever designed that paper type surely would have also made sure for the brown fibre not to show through the front otherwise the stamp wont look right and whoever great character meant to be on that stamp will also look hairy too  ... True ? |
|
khj
Member
Posts: 1,524
|
Post by khj on Nov 14, 2022 1:12:30 GMT
Nice microsope pics!!! Sigh, I miss my days in the lab.
I doubt it was intentional. Maybe something caused those particular fibers to turn brown? I really don't know and don't want keep taking guesses. I'm not a paper guy, and this is easily beyond my simple joy of pushing around little bits of printed paper around with a metal stick. Need to have one of the printing/paper members chime in...
|
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 14, 2022 1:31:17 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 14, 2022 1:52:33 GMT
Nice microsope pics!!! Sigh, I miss my days in the lab. I doubt it was intentional. Maybe something caused those particular fibers to turn brown? I really don't know and don't want keep taking guesses. I'm not a paper guy, and this is easily beyond my simple joy of pushing around little bits of printed paper around with a metal stick. Need to have one of the printing/paper members chime in... First Thank You Kim! Nothing would have or could have cause the change in color as you suggested because if that was the case it wouldn't be one fiber out of millions affected by that change you say could have happened... instead it would have been a whole section affected by that same change ... I hope you getting my point I am trying to make here... basically all I am saying is nothing that could have happened to be able to change a single microfiber out of millions which are knitted together rubbing shoulders touching one another so to speak.. That will be impossible!! Regards Roni |
|
hdm1950
Member
Posts: 1,886
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 Nov 14, 2022 1:58:09 GMT
One has to remember that quality control in paper production 140-150 years ago was quite different from today. I am not a paper expert but I do not see some contamination in the fibre too unusual for the era. It could be bark fibres.
|
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 14, 2022 3:14:46 GMT
One has to remember that quality control in paper production 140-150 years ago was quite different from today. I am not a paper expert but I do not see some contamination in the fibre to unusual for the era. It could be bark fibres. I think you are very right mate ... its gotta be something that was extracted from some type of wood.... or belong to some specific wood type... But with the production lines and quality control in paper and all things you can think of, I will have to disagree with you there my friend ...... back in the days everything was made inhouse with the best quality to dream for comparing it from Today's in this day and age... as once Donald Trump said its Made in Chhhinnna... Mind you I love Chinese food and the people .... we talking about quality here nothing else  Regards Roni |
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 14, 2022 3:43:23 GMT
Nice microsope pics!!! Sigh, I miss my days in the lab. if you don't mind me asking, what did you do in the lab? what line of work were you involved with? Roni |
|
khj
Member
Posts: 1,524
|
Post by khj on Nov 14, 2022 4:30:53 GMT
Semiconductor research, primarily chemical vapor deposition and analysis using microscopy/spectroscopy. Later on, photoluminescence research. But that was a couple decades ago. They stopped the photoluminescence research when I left, so I astutely traded 5 years of technical journals for the lab's filtered UV lamp -- which I now use to find tagging EFOs.  Regarding the paper fibers, I do agree it is likely some contaminant. Soft porous paper tended to be on the low end of stamp paper quality in terms of uniformity/consistency back in that era. |
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 14, 2022 5:07:32 GMT
Semiconductor research, primarily chemical vapor deposition and analysis using microscopy/spectroscopy. Later on, photoluminescence research. But that was a couple decades ago. They stopped the photoluminescence research when I left, so I astutely traded 5 years of technical journals for the lab's filtered UV lamp -- which I now use to find tagging EFOs. Regarding the paper fibers, I do agree it is likely some contaminant. Soft porous paper tended to be on the low end of stamp paper quality in terms of uniformity/consistency back in that era. Sounds very cool... It's one of those things- you aren't just a pretty face aye?!... Pls just take that the good way Tho the innocent way! the fact I don't know what you look like confirms that lol |
|
|
|
Post by michael on Nov 14, 2022 8:36:39 GMT
The best way to learn the difference between paper types like 'soft porous' or 'hard white' is to get reference samples of stamps printed in the same era, preferably from the same printer, that were only printed on those types of paper.
You can then compare your stamps with ones of known paper type.
|
|
vikingeck
Member
Posts: 3,546
What I collect: Samoa, Tobacco theme, Mail in Wartime, anything odd and unusual!
|
Post by vikingeck on Nov 14, 2022 12:49:22 GMT
One has to remember that quality control in paper production 140-150 years ago was quite different from today. I am not a paper expert but I do not see some contamination in the fibre to unusual for the era. It could be bark fibres. Not so sir. hdm1950 is absolutely right! in 1880 paper production was NOT a precise art, in-house manufacture and end quality could vary considerably, and not always top quality. Why else would we have to be concerned with, soft, porous, thick, thin, hard , translucent , cream colour, off white, white or even brownish fibre papers ? As another example of quality control we only have to look at perforations and centring on the contemporary stamps …off centre is the norm and best quality is rare. Hence the current Numerical Grading system on classic US . “Back in the days” no one bothered about position as long as the perfs worked to separate the stamps. |
|
tomiseksj
Moderator
Woodbridge, Virginia, USA
Posts: 6,385
What I collect: Worldwide stamps/covers, Cinderellas, Ohio Prepaid Sales Tax Receipts, U.S. WWII Ration ephemera
|
Post by tomiseksj on Nov 14, 2022 13:08:48 GMT
In the paper titled " Paper Used For United States Stamps" the late Bill Weiss describes a variety called "straw paper" found in the 1851-77 issues as follows: The editors of the Scott U.S. Specialized note: Perhaps the stamp posted by decentguy is one of these straw paper varieties. |
|
|
|
Post by decentguy on Nov 14, 2022 13:41:14 GMT
But with the production lines and quality control in paper and all things you can think of, I will have to disagree with you there my friend ...... back in the days everything was made inhouse with the best quality to dream for comparing it from Today's Not so sir. hdm1950 is absolutely right! in 1880 paper production was NOT a precise art, in-house manufacture and end quality could vary considerably, and not always top quality. Why else would we have to be concerned with, soft, porous, thick, thin, hard , translucent , cream colour, off white, white or even brownish fibre papers ? As another example of quality control we only have to look at perforations and centring on the contemporary stamps …off centre is the norm and best quality is rare. Hence the current Numerical Grading system on classic US . “Back in the days” no one bothered about position as long as the perfs worked to separate the stamps. Ok thank You! Very good points much appreciated .... Now I only half disagree with hdm1950 but nothing personal more than likely he is a very nice guy but if I was to hundred percent agree with everyone, and everything they say then it wouldn't be much of a good discussion, only for argument sakes...... Regards Roni |
|
khj
Member
Posts: 1,524
|
Post by khj on Nov 14, 2022 14:34:11 GMT
You can then compare your stamps with ones of known paper type. The cheapest "easy" reference stamp for soft porous paper I can think of is the 2¢ Columbian, which was only produced using soft porous paper. |
|
... True ?
