Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
While I consider, faint pencil markings on the back of the stamp an acceptable flaw of our hobby, I wonder how others feel. Should we require them to me indicated as such?
On the other hand multiple marks, including INK markings are definitely a nono. These should clearly be noted! Had this been indicated, I would have not purchased them.
I think we need to make our rules clearer on this matter.
How do others feel?
rrr...
Just a random pick with two pencil number/note and one ink number. Some were much worse!
Login to Like
this post
From my perspective, those commonly seen pencil markings, if lightly done are of no consequence unless they are on MNH stamps. Even then, I don't mind at all, unless on higher value stamps, which I am unlikely to own anyways.
On the other hand, ink is a big no-no.
Although I do understand on principle, I sometimes think that there are collectors who are sooooooooo picky, that they never manage to collect more than a handful of stamps, rejecting all the rest for any number of "defects".
Login to Like
this post
I personally do not appreciate markings on the back of stamps but can live with pencil ones.
But does this mean that an expertisers mark, usually ink, make the stamp defective?
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Good point sheepshanks. I hadn't thought about expertiser's markings. No doubt because I've never seen one, and probably never will.
Login to Like
this post
I think any and all markings on the backs of stamps should be noted when they're listed for sale. The usual markings in pencil or small expertisers' and owners' ink stamps don't bother me personally, but the fact that some collectors don't appreciate such markings does matter. We sellers should include that important information in a stamp's description. If it's a higher value stamp with such markings, I scan the back to clearly show what I'm describing in the description.
Login to Like
this post
I agree with Benque- pencil marks on used and MH are fine, but I prefer MNH to be mark free. Pen marks are unacceptable all the way around.
Login to Like
this post
so that we're clear about nomenclature, a stamp with any kind of marking on the back can NOT be MNH without further explanation. I would call it MDG or full gum with pencil notations.
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Has anyone ever tried erasing pencil marks? I think it depends on how sharp the pencil lead is and how soft the stamp paper is, but a large percentage of them will not completely erase - some will lighten and some will not erase at all. Therefore, I personally see no difference between writing with pen or pencil - everyone is free to do what they want with their own stamps - but my preference is a clean back, and I would want marks noted before buying.
Josh
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Here's one in pen.. good job!
One eBay dealer has this collection up for sale one cover at a time. Apparently this person typed on every friggin cover! I've avoided buying them for my NJ postmark collection, but did grab a few rare cancels anyway.
and a few more where people felt compelled to write on the front of covers!
Login to Like
this post
Hi Everyone;
I just thought that I should mention something that nobody else has touched on. Watermark fluid has been re-formulated over the years to make it compatible with photogravure inks used in the printing of stamps. However nothing has been done to make it compatible with ball-point pen inks, sharpies, older fountain pen inks or other types, of which there are hundreds of different types.
I personally have had problems with pen markings bleeding thru stamps, and even inks used for cancellations! Most of the cancellations inks were British definitives from the George VI thru the Wildings of QEII. This was especially true when using Ronsonal (white gas) as a watermark fluid. I never made comparisons between watermark fluid, and Ronsonal, but I suppose I should have tho.
So...no ink markings on the backs of stamps are not just a no-no, but in my opinion are worthless, except for starting a fire in the wood stove.
Just sortin' it all out....
TuskenRaider
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Certainly the person who placed marks on the reverse of stamps did not feel they were making the stamp defective. I myself will make small light pencil marks on the reverse for different reasons. I usually make them on subtypes or confusing issues like Washigton/Franklins and Machins. Many of these take considerable time to I.D. correctly
and I like to be able to verify that without having to do it again. I also will often mark subtypes as to color variants and others which are not obvious with a quick look. Hopefully these will also be useful in the future when the collection is disposed. Placing owners marks and expertizer marks use to be a common procedure and the latter was even considered as to giving value to the item. These were also nearly always done with ink without any consideration as to damaging the stamp. Other types of markings relating to catalog numbers and types were also not considered to be damaging. So this is how things were done for over a hundred years without hardly anyone seeing a problem with it. However somewhere along the line someone decided that the backs of stamps were more precious than the front (especially gum)and that's where we are today. So the rules of the game were changed and what was always acceptable is no longer. I can't really agree with the change, thinking it unfair and more the politics of dealers. Sure occasionally you will run across stamps that have unneeded or poorly executed markings which most anyone would find detracting but these are often done by children on stamps with no value.
All sellers should of course mention markings on the reverse simply because there are buyers who do not want them.
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
I consider it a defect. I do not like to receive stamps that I purchase with markings on the backs. I expect a refund when such occurs if there was no indication of this in the description as I consider such as "not as described". If the seller doesn't issue a refund, then I file a dispute with PayPal, ebay, etc.
When I try to erase pencil markings, I use a mechanical eraser with a plastic eraser. Often the pencil markings are not removable due to heaviness of the writing, written on first, then a hinge applied over the pencil marks, etc. Those stamps go into the trash bin.
If a stamp that I mount onto an album page needs special identification, I write it in pencil in the space on the album page where the stamp will be placed. From collections that I have seen, I guess many collectors rather mark the stamps, rather than ruin an album page.
Login to Like
this post
Why throw it in the trash? I can understand not liking them but still collectible to many. For used stamps, I do not usually care about the backside unless I was paying any premium for it. For an individually priced stamp, it should be mentioned.
6 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
I don't throw ANY stamps in the trash -
they either go to the kid's table or to the Holocaust Project.
Login to Like
this post
Pencil notations on the back of stamps do not bother me at all,umm catalogue numbers etc... that's the way it was years ago, before that dealers would use tacks or pins to display their stamps for sale. I will take any stamps that some take offense to because the stamps have hideous pencil notations on the side you don't see, I will pay postage and envelope, really. Please don't throw them away.
4 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
"that's the way it was years ago, before that dealers would use tacks or pins to display their stamps for sale. "
I read where dealers of the past would line up on Nassau Street in NYC and hope to catch business folks on their lunch hour with stamps pinned to boards. Every so often I see a classic stamp advertised as having a pin hole in it. If that stamp could talk!
Login to Like
this post
I agree with Michael. I do not want stamps that have notations of any kind marked on the reverse (or the front) of the stamps. In my opinion, any such markings, whether in pencil, pen, marker or whatever should be clearly noted when offering for sale or trade.
Liz
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
"I guess many collectors rather mark the stamps, rather than ruin an album page."
This statement reminds me of the guy that sold the car so he could buy gas.
Login to Like
this post
I may be open to pencil markings on the back in some cases, but I agree they are defects. I also would want to know ahead of time if there are marks/writing on the back.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
As I have moved into a general world wide collection rather than my original, primarily mint USA collection I have learned to enjoy the side effects of others' prior ownership of the stamps I acquire primarily through collection purchases and quit letting it bother me. So now there are stamps in my collection with the occasional back marking, hinge marks, and, yes, sometimes even hinge remnants on mint stamps that I can't remove without damaging the stamps. C'est la vie!
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
I think Antonio sums this up nicely: some times he appreciates markings on the back of stamps, but we should consider them defects to be acknowledged at the very least, so that those who do not share Antonio's appreication (and those who do) are forewarned of their existence.
My own feeling about markings is related more to what they are than any absolute. I like expertizers' marks, which are common on many of my older Czech stamps; they add to the stamp's provenance, in my opinion. I have no use for the average previous owners' catalogue number and, worse, CV. But I can live with it, assuming it's appropriately discounted.
David
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
10:50:04pm
I have no issue with very light pencil marks on the back of a used stamp. After all, there's bound to be hinge remnants as well. Heavy pencil or pen marks will leave some type of blemish on the front of a stamp possibly not noticeable to the naked eye but since I use my "reading finger" extensively to determine whether a stamp is engraved, typo, litho or combination, a heavy pencil mark or a pen mark on the back will show through to the front for me and can cause confusion, particularly if the stamp is issued in two types with one being a combination with minimal engraving.
On the other hand, I don't collect stamps to look at the backside, I collect it for what is on the front.
I've come across stamps that for the majority of people using only their eyes cannot see that the stamp has been previously hinged from the back - perhaps because the hinge remnant was soaked off but when I run my "reading finger" across the front of the stamp, lo and behold, I come across a slight line that I know is a hinge remnant. I can put that stamp under my magnifier on my 32" tv that magnifies more than you can imagine and a completely sighted friend looking at it cannot see anything that resembles a mark.
So, to each his/her own. I'm not going to quibble because there is a light pencil mark on the back - if I wanted to do that, I could go back to many individuals and tell them that even though they cannot see a hinge remnant, I can feel it on the front side.
On the other hand if I am purchasing a MNH, then I expect to get post office fresh material, no creases no matter how slight, no short perfs, no blemishes at all - front or back.
4 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
I received recently a large quantity of stamps with marking on the back.
While I consider, faint pencil markings on the back of the stamp an acceptable flaw of our hobby, I wonder how others feel. Should we require them to me indicated as such?
On the other hand multiple marks, including INK markings are definitely a nono. These should clearly be noted! Had this been indicated, I would have not purchased them.
I think we need to make our rules clearer on this matter.
How do others feel?
rrr...
Just a random pick with two pencil number/note and one ink number. Some were much worse!
Login to Like
this post
01:45:09pm
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
From my perspective, those commonly seen pencil markings, if lightly done are of no consequence unless they are on MNH stamps. Even then, I don't mind at all, unless on higher value stamps, which I am unlikely to own anyways.
On the other hand, ink is a big no-no.
Although I do understand on principle, I sometimes think that there are collectors who are sooooooooo picky, that they never manage to collect more than a handful of stamps, rejecting all the rest for any number of "defects".
Login to Like
this post
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
I personally do not appreciate markings on the back of stamps but can live with pencil ones.
But does this mean that an expertisers mark, usually ink, make the stamp defective?
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
01:59:08pm
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
Good point sheepshanks. I hadn't thought about expertiser's markings. No doubt because I've never seen one, and probably never will.
Login to Like
this post
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
I think any and all markings on the backs of stamps should be noted when they're listed for sale. The usual markings in pencil or small expertisers' and owners' ink stamps don't bother me personally, but the fact that some collectors don't appreciate such markings does matter. We sellers should include that important information in a stamp's description. If it's a higher value stamp with such markings, I scan the back to clearly show what I'm describing in the description.
Login to Like
this post
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
I agree with Benque- pencil marks on used and MH are fine, but I prefer MNH to be mark free. Pen marks are unacceptable all the way around.
Login to Like
this post
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
so that we're clear about nomenclature, a stamp with any kind of marking on the back can NOT be MNH without further explanation. I would call it MDG or full gum with pencil notations.
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
Has anyone ever tried erasing pencil marks? I think it depends on how sharp the pencil lead is and how soft the stamp paper is, but a large percentage of them will not completely erase - some will lighten and some will not erase at all. Therefore, I personally see no difference between writing with pen or pencil - everyone is free to do what they want with their own stamps - but my preference is a clean back, and I would want marks noted before buying.
Josh
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
Here's one in pen.. good job!
One eBay dealer has this collection up for sale one cover at a time. Apparently this person typed on every friggin cover! I've avoided buying them for my NJ postmark collection, but did grab a few rare cancels anyway.
and a few more where people felt compelled to write on the front of covers!
Login to Like
this post
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
Hi Everyone;
I just thought that I should mention something that nobody else has touched on. Watermark fluid has been re-formulated over the years to make it compatible with photogravure inks used in the printing of stamps. However nothing has been done to make it compatible with ball-point pen inks, sharpies, older fountain pen inks or other types, of which there are hundreds of different types.
I personally have had problems with pen markings bleeding thru stamps, and even inks used for cancellations! Most of the cancellations inks were British definitives from the George VI thru the Wildings of QEII. This was especially true when using Ronsonal (white gas) as a watermark fluid. I never made comparisons between watermark fluid, and Ronsonal, but I suppose I should have tho.
So...no ink markings on the backs of stamps are not just a no-no, but in my opinion are worthless, except for starting a fire in the wood stove.
Just sortin' it all out....
TuskenRaider
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
Certainly the person who placed marks on the reverse of stamps did not feel they were making the stamp defective. I myself will make small light pencil marks on the reverse for different reasons. I usually make them on subtypes or confusing issues like Washigton/Franklins and Machins. Many of these take considerable time to I.D. correctly
and I like to be able to verify that without having to do it again. I also will often mark subtypes as to color variants and others which are not obvious with a quick look. Hopefully these will also be useful in the future when the collection is disposed. Placing owners marks and expertizer marks use to be a common procedure and the latter was even considered as to giving value to the item. These were also nearly always done with ink without any consideration as to damaging the stamp. Other types of markings relating to catalog numbers and types were also not considered to be damaging. So this is how things were done for over a hundred years without hardly anyone seeing a problem with it. However somewhere along the line someone decided that the backs of stamps were more precious than the front (especially gum)and that's where we are today. So the rules of the game were changed and what was always acceptable is no longer. I can't really agree with the change, thinking it unfair and more the politics of dealers. Sure occasionally you will run across stamps that have unneeded or poorly executed markings which most anyone would find detracting but these are often done by children on stamps with no value.
All sellers should of course mention markings on the reverse simply because there are buyers who do not want them.
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
12:39:25am
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
I consider it a defect. I do not like to receive stamps that I purchase with markings on the backs. I expect a refund when such occurs if there was no indication of this in the description as I consider such as "not as described". If the seller doesn't issue a refund, then I file a dispute with PayPal, ebay, etc.
When I try to erase pencil markings, I use a mechanical eraser with a plastic eraser. Often the pencil markings are not removable due to heaviness of the writing, written on first, then a hinge applied over the pencil marks, etc. Those stamps go into the trash bin.
If a stamp that I mount onto an album page needs special identification, I write it in pencil in the space on the album page where the stamp will be placed. From collections that I have seen, I guess many collectors rather mark the stamps, rather than ruin an album page.
Login to Like
this post
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
Why throw it in the trash? I can understand not liking them but still collectible to many. For used stamps, I do not usually care about the backside unless I was paying any premium for it. For an individually priced stamp, it should be mentioned.
6 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
I don't throw ANY stamps in the trash -
they either go to the kid's table or to the Holocaust Project.
Login to Like
this post
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
Pencil notations on the back of stamps do not bother me at all,umm catalogue numbers etc... that's the way it was years ago, before that dealers would use tacks or pins to display their stamps for sale. I will take any stamps that some take offense to because the stamps have hideous pencil notations on the side you don't see, I will pay postage and envelope, really. Please don't throw them away.
4 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
"that's the way it was years ago, before that dealers would use tacks or pins to display their stamps for sale. "
I read where dealers of the past would line up on Nassau Street in NYC and hope to catch business folks on their lunch hour with stamps pinned to boards. Every so often I see a classic stamp advertised as having a pin hole in it. If that stamp could talk!
Login to Like
this post
06:26:32am
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
I agree with Michael. I do not want stamps that have notations of any kind marked on the reverse (or the front) of the stamps. In my opinion, any such markings, whether in pencil, pen, marker or whatever should be clearly noted when offering for sale or trade.
Liz
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Approvals
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
"I guess many collectors rather mark the stamps, rather than ruin an album page."
This statement reminds me of the guy that sold the car so he could buy gas.
Login to Like
this post
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
I may be open to pencil markings on the back in some cases, but I agree they are defects. I also would want to know ahead of time if there are marks/writing on the back.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
As I have moved into a general world wide collection rather than my original, primarily mint USA collection I have learned to enjoy the side effects of others' prior ownership of the stamps I acquire primarily through collection purchases and quit letting it bother me. So now there are stamps in my collection with the occasional back marking, hinge marks, and, yes, sometimes even hinge remnants on mint stamps that I can't remove without damaging the stamps. C'est la vie!
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
I think Antonio sums this up nicely: some times he appreciates markings on the back of stamps, but we should consider them defects to be acknowledged at the very least, so that those who do not share Antonio's appreication (and those who do) are forewarned of their existence.
My own feeling about markings is related more to what they are than any absolute. I like expertizers' marks, which are common on many of my older Czech stamps; they add to the stamp's provenance, in my opinion. I have no use for the average previous owners' catalogue number and, worse, CV. But I can live with it, assuming it's appropriately discounted.
David
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
A Service Dog gives a person with a disability independence. Never approach, distract or pet a working dog, especially when (s)he is in harness. Never be afraid to ask questions to the handler (parent).
26 Oct 2017
10:50:04pm
re: Are markings on the back of stamps considered "defects"?
I have no issue with very light pencil marks on the back of a used stamp. After all, there's bound to be hinge remnants as well. Heavy pencil or pen marks will leave some type of blemish on the front of a stamp possibly not noticeable to the naked eye but since I use my "reading finger" extensively to determine whether a stamp is engraved, typo, litho or combination, a heavy pencil mark or a pen mark on the back will show through to the front for me and can cause confusion, particularly if the stamp is issued in two types with one being a combination with minimal engraving.
On the other hand, I don't collect stamps to look at the backside, I collect it for what is on the front.
I've come across stamps that for the majority of people using only their eyes cannot see that the stamp has been previously hinged from the back - perhaps because the hinge remnant was soaked off but when I run my "reading finger" across the front of the stamp, lo and behold, I come across a slight line that I know is a hinge remnant. I can put that stamp under my magnifier on my 32" tv that magnifies more than you can imagine and a completely sighted friend looking at it cannot see anything that resembles a mark.
So, to each his/her own. I'm not going to quibble because there is a light pencil mark on the back - if I wanted to do that, I could go back to many individuals and tell them that even though they cannot see a hinge remnant, I can feel it on the front side.
On the other hand if I am purchasing a MNH, then I expect to get post office fresh material, no creases no matter how slight, no short perfs, no blemishes at all - front or back.
4 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.