Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
There were three engravings of this stamp. The only 30 cent versions were in the original version (#1) and third re engraving version (#3).
The major differences of these two stamps as such:
Version #1- No watermark, size - 19 1/4 x 24 1/2, two faint vertical line to the right of right column, and a faint period after "Falls".
Version #3 - Watermark "Coat of arms", size - 19 x 25, two strong vertical lines tight of right column, and a clear period after "falls".
The stamp in question is 19 x 25, has two strong vertical lines, and a clear period after "Falls". All of these point to version #3. However, I can detect no watermark. I even played with different setting of light a shading.
I'm at a dead end. UNitrade makes no mention of version #3 existing without watermarks.
Must be someone I'm missing here.
Any thoughts
Login to Like
this post
Try washing the stamp (I assume no gum?)
Put in drying book with 30lbs for two days!
Login to Like
this post
I appreciate the thought, but why the heck would I wash it? It is quite clean, and has gum.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
06:26:23pm
"UNitrade makes no mention of version #3 existing without watermarks."
Sorry, but yes it does. After the 3rd set (172-182) it says:
"As the "Coat of Arms" watermark does not show on every stamp in the sheet, pairs are found one with and one without watermark."
The watermark on the watermarked, re-engraved Publicity Issue of 1931 from Newfoundland features the coat of arms design, and it was applied as a repetitive pattern across the entire sheet. However, the design was not aligned with the stamps. This means that each stamp did not receive a full, centered watermark. Instead, the watermark could appear partially on a stamp, sometimes showing just a line or portion of the coat of arms, depending on its position on the sheet. And, in some cases, not at all.
Roy
4 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
06:43:49pm
That's very similar to the infamous US single lined watermark U S P S!!
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
@bigcreekdad
In your OP you did not say it had gum. Looking at the scan of the reverse side it looked very cean but you wanted advice, often times washing and drying sometimes (not always) helps with watermarking, that is what the heck.
I must say your scans were really good!
The reverse side to me looks like it didn't have gum, what do other sor members think?
Login to Like
this post
Thanks Roy.....I did not see that. I should have.
Login to Like
this post
That's a beautiful stamp.
Login to Like
this post
There were three engravings of this stamp. The only 30 cent versions were in the original version (#1) and third re engraving version (#3).
The major differences of these two stamps as such:
Version #1- No watermark, size - 19 1/4 x 24 1/2, two faint vertical line to the right of right column, and a faint period after "Falls".
Version #3 - Watermark "Coat of arms", size - 19 x 25, two strong vertical lines tight of right column, and a clear period after "falls".
The stamp in question is 19 x 25, has two strong vertical lines, and a clear period after "Falls". All of these point to version #3. However, I can detect no watermark. I even played with different setting of light a shading.
I'm at a dead end. UNitrade makes no mention of version #3 existing without watermarks.
Must be someone I'm missing here.
Any thoughts
Login to Like
this post
re: Help With 30 cent Newfoundland Labrador Publicity Issue
Try washing the stamp (I assume no gum?)
Put in drying book with 30lbs for two days!
Login to Like
this post
re: Help With 30 cent Newfoundland Labrador Publicity Issue
I appreciate the thought, but why the heck would I wash it? It is quite clean, and has gum.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
BuckaCover.com - 80,000 covers priced 60c to $1.50 - Easy browsing 500 categories
10 Jan 2025
06:26:23pm
re: Help With 30 cent Newfoundland Labrador Publicity Issue
"UNitrade makes no mention of version #3 existing without watermarks."
Sorry, but yes it does. After the 3rd set (172-182) it says:
"As the "Coat of Arms" watermark does not show on every stamp in the sheet, pairs are found one with and one without watermark."
The watermark on the watermarked, re-engraved Publicity Issue of 1931 from Newfoundland features the coat of arms design, and it was applied as a repetitive pattern across the entire sheet. However, the design was not aligned with the stamps. This means that each stamp did not receive a full, centered watermark. Instead, the watermark could appear partially on a stamp, sometimes showing just a line or portion of the coat of arms, depending on its position on the sheet. And, in some cases, not at all.
Roy
4 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Back when I had a bunch! I think, therefore I am - I think! Descartes, sort of!
10 Jan 2025
06:43:49pm
re: Help With 30 cent Newfoundland Labrador Publicity Issue
That's very similar to the infamous US single lined watermark U S P S!!
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Help With 30 cent Newfoundland Labrador Publicity Issue
@bigcreekdad
In your OP you did not say it had gum. Looking at the scan of the reverse side it looked very cean but you wanted advice, often times washing and drying sometimes (not always) helps with watermarking, that is what the heck.
I must say your scans were really good!
The reverse side to me looks like it didn't have gum, what do other sor members think?
Login to Like
this post
re: Help With 30 cent Newfoundland Labrador Publicity Issue
Thanks Roy.....I did not see that. I should have.
Login to Like
this post
08:40:44pm
re: Help With 30 cent Newfoundland Labrador Publicity Issue
That's a beautiful stamp.
Login to Like
this post