Check the watermarks. 1933 set is unwatermarked, the 1937 set is watermarked.
Cheers!
David
Ottawa, Canada
One area that I think Scott could improve is their "it's this until it's something else" policy on things like printing type and watermarks.
For instance 164-88 are photogravure, but one has to go back to #163 to find that out.
And 200-225 are watermarked #202, but one has to go back to #196-9 to find that out.
They don't do the same thing with perforations, so why not with printing and watermarks as well.
I know they've done it that way for as long as I can remember, but it would make life a lot simpler (and reduce questions like this) if they showed that information with every set.
How to identify the two sets of large Wilhelmina stamps, each according to Scott to have perf 12 1/2 . For the 1938-1940 stamps, there is the addition of a 2g and 5g. But the colors according to Scott are the same for the other values. OR are the stamps the same for 1933-37 and 1938-40. For the smaller stamps the different perfs are easy to identify. Your thoughts, please.
re: Dutch Indies Q. Wilhelmina Scott #'s 183-188 and #'s 218--225
Check the watermarks. 1933 set is unwatermarked, the 1937 set is watermarked.
Cheers!
David
Ottawa, Canada
re: Dutch Indies Q. Wilhelmina Scott #'s 183-188 and #'s 218--225
One area that I think Scott could improve is their "it's this until it's something else" policy on things like printing type and watermarks.
For instance 164-88 are photogravure, but one has to go back to #163 to find that out.
And 200-225 are watermarked #202, but one has to go back to #196-9 to find that out.
They don't do the same thing with perforations, so why not with printing and watermarks as well.
I know they've done it that way for as long as I can remember, but it would make life a lot simpler (and reduce questions like this) if they showed that information with every set.