Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
http://stamporama.com/discboard/disc_main.php?action=20&id=12587#91733
This time, I am presenting examples that show a clear connection between the outside ribbon line and the tooth below the “E†in CENTS. This variety may have already been reported elsewhere. I simply don’t know. I do know it is not one of the 29 varieties that Dickinson documented in 1955.
The presentation form I am using here is a work in progress that I was developing back in 2007. As I have stated in the graphic’s notes, I found six of these, but one has since been misplaced—temporarily, I hope! Like all of the five I have illustrated here, the missing example is on white paper as well. (Yes, #5 in the graphic is on white paper!) The full cut square image I have included below is the source for example #1 in the graphic.
One interesting aspect of this variety is the slight inward bulge in the outer ribbon line where the tooth connects.
Two other aspects of these examples are the “G†in POSTAGE and the connection of the inner toothed frame line with the shoulder of the shield. The “Gs†are quite variable among the U311s/Die 88s generally. However, four of the five “Gs†in this little group are nearly identical; the “G†on example #5 has been effectively obscured by the cancel. There is also variation in the nature of the inner toothed frame line connection with the shield, but these examples appear to be nearly identical in that regard.
I’ve put together a graphic showing several of the “G†variations, but need to update it before posting it.
Watermarks
#1 watermark #8
#2 cannot be identified
#3 cannot be identified
#4 watermark #8
#5 watermark #8
Questions and comments are welcome. Just remember. I’m an amateur with a trove of information to share and only superficial knowledge of the subject.
Login to Like
this post
This one I have seen. I have scans from 4 examples. I have a temporary numbering system for the Die 88's I find. This one is 88vT44.
"Two teeth behind the bust . . . "
I agree that you see this on many different varieties. Always the same two teeth (though other random teeth will often show this shallowness, from time to time). I wonder what about the process of making these stamps causes this?
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Since I found so many of these, I assumed it must be a known variety. Are yours on white paper as well?
I probably have hundreds of cut squares with those two teeth partially green and sometimes the middle tooth partially green as well. There is also the green around the hair knot (that Dickinson listed as B-23), the green eye spot, green mouth (only 3 found) and other examples of extra ink here and there such as a missing ornament center or ornament ray. I can't explain these because I have only a very rudimentary understanding of the production process. Some of these are very rare in my limited experience and at least interesting curiosities if not worthy of the "variety" moniker.
The printing of these envelopes was so imprecise that many minor (and questionable) variations show up, but they're often not clear-cut and I often find only one or two examples and then set them aside. One exception here was the "G" in POSTAGE. There was definitely something else going on there besides simple inking variations.
One of the problems with categorizing these variations (I hesitate to call them varieties) is that multiple variations routinely show up on a group of cut squares, sometimes in large numbers of cut squares, but there can be wide variation in the combinations that show up. For example, I might have four variations showing up on a decent-size group of cut squares and then discover that there are also examples where various combinations of only two or three of those four variations appear. It complicates any effort to categorize them and suggests to me that many of these are simply inking issues that may not be worth pursuing.
It gets to be time consuming!
Login to Like
this post
"Are yours on white paper as well?"
They are, but I don't think it matters. There is no hard and fast connection between paper color and die variety. It is true that a particular press might have only been used for, say, blue paper, but there would have been nothing preventing a supervisor from instructing the operator to "use white blanks this afternoon, we have a large order we need to fill", or some such scenario.
Now, if we're talking about producing a catalog listing akin to the appendix for the 1904 Recuts (now separately produced as a monograph and available for free on the UPSS.org website), then paper color, watermark, and knife will all be needed. For that reason, I record those attributes as I find U311's to include in my study.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
". . . with those two teeth partially green and sometimes the middle tooth partially green as well. There is also the green around the hair knot (that Dickinson listed as B-23), the green eye spot, green mouth (only 3 found) and other examples of extra ink here and there such as a missing ornament center or ornament ray. I can't explain these because I have only a very rudimentary understanding of the production process."
There are die varieties and there are printing varieties. Only die varieties are a result of some physical attribute of the die. Printing varieties are a result of ink getting into places where it shouldn't be.
A simplistic way to view it: white attributes where there should be green {e.g., the outer frame line break in your original example} are die varieties; whereas green attributes where there should be white {e.g., green border around the knot in the queue} are printing varieties.
Many of Dickinson's varieties are actually printing varieties.
In general, printing varieties go away as soon as the operator cleans the press. Die varieties will remain and show up even after a good cleaning.
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
That's good to know about the paper color for the Die 88s. Back when I was trying to categorize these, I was trying to keep track of paper color. Eliminating that layer of complexity makes organization of all the varieties more manageable! Since I was dealing solely with cut squares, I had already eliminated the envelope size and knife variables from my effort to categorize these, and trying to keep track of the watermark was hit or miss as you might expect!
My view of the die varieties vs. printing varieties was slightly more complex. I was assuming that some of the repetitive uninked spots/areas/marks might also be printing varieties. Aren't some of these due to printing issues even though they may show up on multiple copies? I was under the impression there was a gray area here and wasn't sure where the line was drawn between printing issues of this sort and die varieties.
An educational discussion, Thomas!!!
Login to Like
this post
This is entry #2 in my attempt to share what I found several years ago while sorting through over 11,000 U311/Die 88 cut squares. Entry #1 showed a clear frame break and I provided some general background information with that post. You can find it here.
http://stamporama.com/discboard/disc_main.php?action=20&id=12587#91733
This time, I am presenting examples that show a clear connection between the outside ribbon line and the tooth below the “E†in CENTS. This variety may have already been reported elsewhere. I simply don’t know. I do know it is not one of the 29 varieties that Dickinson documented in 1955.
The presentation form I am using here is a work in progress that I was developing back in 2007. As I have stated in the graphic’s notes, I found six of these, but one has since been misplaced—temporarily, I hope! Like all of the five I have illustrated here, the missing example is on white paper as well. (Yes, #5 in the graphic is on white paper!) The full cut square image I have included below is the source for example #1 in the graphic.
One interesting aspect of this variety is the slight inward bulge in the outer ribbon line where the tooth connects.
Two other aspects of these examples are the “G†in POSTAGE and the connection of the inner toothed frame line with the shoulder of the shield. The “Gs†are quite variable among the U311s/Die 88s generally. However, four of the five “Gs†in this little group are nearly identical; the “G†on example #5 has been effectively obscured by the cancel. There is also variation in the nature of the inner toothed frame line connection with the shield, but these examples appear to be nearly identical in that regard.
I’ve put together a graphic showing several of the “G†variations, but need to update it before posting it.
Watermarks
#1 watermark #8
#2 cannot be identified
#3 cannot be identified
#4 watermark #8
#5 watermark #8
Questions and comments are welcome. Just remember. I’m an amateur with a trove of information to share and only superficial knowledge of the subject.
Login to Like
this post
re: 2c Washington 1890s Plimpton & Morgan / Purcell varieties, printing problems, plate flaws, etc. #2
This one I have seen. I have scans from 4 examples. I have a temporary numbering system for the Die 88's I find. This one is 88vT44.
"Two teeth behind the bust . . . "
I agree that you see this on many different varieties. Always the same two teeth (though other random teeth will often show this shallowness, from time to time). I wonder what about the process of making these stamps causes this?
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: 2c Washington 1890s Plimpton & Morgan / Purcell varieties, printing problems, plate flaws, etc. #2
Since I found so many of these, I assumed it must be a known variety. Are yours on white paper as well?
I probably have hundreds of cut squares with those two teeth partially green and sometimes the middle tooth partially green as well. There is also the green around the hair knot (that Dickinson listed as B-23), the green eye spot, green mouth (only 3 found) and other examples of extra ink here and there such as a missing ornament center or ornament ray. I can't explain these because I have only a very rudimentary understanding of the production process. Some of these are very rare in my limited experience and at least interesting curiosities if not worthy of the "variety" moniker.
The printing of these envelopes was so imprecise that many minor (and questionable) variations show up, but they're often not clear-cut and I often find only one or two examples and then set them aside. One exception here was the "G" in POSTAGE. There was definitely something else going on there besides simple inking variations.
One of the problems with categorizing these variations (I hesitate to call them varieties) is that multiple variations routinely show up on a group of cut squares, sometimes in large numbers of cut squares, but there can be wide variation in the combinations that show up. For example, I might have four variations showing up on a decent-size group of cut squares and then discover that there are also examples where various combinations of only two or three of those four variations appear. It complicates any effort to categorize them and suggests to me that many of these are simply inking issues that may not be worth pursuing.
It gets to be time consuming!
Login to Like
this post
re: 2c Washington 1890s Plimpton & Morgan / Purcell varieties, printing problems, plate flaws, etc. #2
"Are yours on white paper as well?"
They are, but I don't think it matters. There is no hard and fast connection between paper color and die variety. It is true that a particular press might have only been used for, say, blue paper, but there would have been nothing preventing a supervisor from instructing the operator to "use white blanks this afternoon, we have a large order we need to fill", or some such scenario.
Now, if we're talking about producing a catalog listing akin to the appendix for the 1904 Recuts (now separately produced as a monograph and available for free on the UPSS.org website), then paper color, watermark, and knife will all be needed. For that reason, I record those attributes as I find U311's to include in my study.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: 2c Washington 1890s Plimpton & Morgan / Purcell varieties, printing problems, plate flaws, etc. #2
". . . with those two teeth partially green and sometimes the middle tooth partially green as well. There is also the green around the hair knot (that Dickinson listed as B-23), the green eye spot, green mouth (only 3 found) and other examples of extra ink here and there such as a missing ornament center or ornament ray. I can't explain these because I have only a very rudimentary understanding of the production process."
There are die varieties and there are printing varieties. Only die varieties are a result of some physical attribute of the die. Printing varieties are a result of ink getting into places where it shouldn't be.
A simplistic way to view it: white attributes where there should be green {e.g., the outer frame line break in your original example} are die varieties; whereas green attributes where there should be white {e.g., green border around the knot in the queue} are printing varieties.
Many of Dickinson's varieties are actually printing varieties.
In general, printing varieties go away as soon as the operator cleans the press. Die varieties will remain and show up even after a good cleaning.
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: 2c Washington 1890s Plimpton & Morgan / Purcell varieties, printing problems, plate flaws, etc. #2
That's good to know about the paper color for the Die 88s. Back when I was trying to categorize these, I was trying to keep track of paper color. Eliminating that layer of complexity makes organization of all the varieties more manageable! Since I was dealing solely with cut squares, I had already eliminated the envelope size and knife variables from my effort to categorize these, and trying to keep track of the watermark was hit or miss as you might expect!
My view of the die varieties vs. printing varieties was slightly more complex. I was assuming that some of the repetitive uninked spots/areas/marks might also be printing varieties. Aren't some of these due to printing issues even though they may show up on multiple copies? I was under the impression there was a gray area here and wasn't sure where the line was drawn between printing issues of this sort and die varieties.
An educational discussion, Thomas!!!
Login to Like
this post