Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Here is an example, which is entirely made up, but representative of a good number of shade discussions commonly posted on Stamporama. It contains, of course, a good dose of hyperbole and is meant to be funny in a self-reflective way.
So, here we go with our hypothetical, yet representative, question: The catalog lists the minimum catalog value 1890 green, and the $500 bluish-green varieties. So, in the “can we help identify thisâ€-section, we find a question showing two specimens of the 1890 green stamp that look different, so, surely, one must be the green and the other the bluish-green?
The typical discussion then continues as follows: The first member responding – albeit being clueless about the stamp in particular – asks for a larger scan; the second person states that shades can only be determined with lots of reference material (a safe bet, neither right nor wrong, depending on the context); the third person states with conviction that colors cannot be determined using scans (mostly correct, but the person saying so also couldn’t do it if the real stamps were in front of her); the fourth persons states that shades are a bitch, the fifth person agrees; the sixth person says that the USPS single and double line watermarks also are a bitch; so was his time in the Marine Corps, member seven is quick to add. Did I ever tell you how we once were on maneuver, and …; because of fading/washing determining shades of used stamps is futile thinks member eight (too broad of a statement); here is the larger scan, the inquirer interjects; Cool! – member five shares his excitement; his time in the Air Force also was pretty rough, person two wants us to know, imagine …; person nine states that only experts can determine shades, and you really need to get the stamp expertized (wrong); you need specialized literature declares person ten (yes, of course, how about naming which book to get?); hey, I found a similar stamp, person five chimes in again – oops the picture upload did not work; person ten adds, in case you did not know, you can borrow books from the library. The inquirer comes back: this was AWESOME, thank you for all your help. I knew I could rely on you guys. Stamporama rocks! All: you are welcome, just keep asking, there is no such thing like a dumb question!
Of course, I shortened this a bit and left out the cut and paste job from Wikipedia with the biographical information of the person depicted on the stamp, the 2-5 posted links to other web content, and the advice to post the question somewhere else – all of which are pretty much standard ingredients in our discussions about shades --, but apart from that: that’s pretty much how it goes ...
To be taken with a grain of salt ...
Can you tell I spent too much time in the darkest corners of the Stamporama archives? 
Login to Like
this post
In any event, the pain and suffering inflicted on me having to read through many of our discussions prompted me to think if not a more structured response to common questions on shades could be given. How grateful I am that being part of the volunteer group allows me to purge much of my own banter from the board ...
So here I go, starting another column on shades, in which I will attempt to offer some general insight(?), and much opinion, on shades in a somewhat more systematic fashion. One issue is that I do not collect any particular country or issue at a level of specialization where I ever worry about shades. I happily ignore shades. For that reason I cannot readily draw on examples from my own collection to discuss the topic in a visually appealing fashion. I therefore reached out to friends and thank Klaus, Bruno, and Alwin, who graciously supplied some pictures of stamps from their collections of the “Germania†series of 1900 – 1922, which is not only rich in shades, but also extremely well researched.
I am delivering my opinion on shades in the forms of "rules." Any expert collectors will tell you however that the topic of colors can really only be adequately discussed for one particular issue at a time. Agreed, I am generalizing. So, perhaps, I should have used the term heuristic instead of rule. I hope that members will offer additional examples, illustrations, or alternate opinions on the broadly stated “rules,†which are an attempt to provide structured guidance on the problem of shades.
Rule #1: In the case where there is one common color, and one (or more) expensive varieties, the common variety usually encompasses a color spectrum, while the expensive variety usually is one very specific shade with a limited range only.
To continue with the above hypothetical example: this rule, or general expectation that you should have, posits that the 1890 green stamps has been printed and re-printed numerous times. This is why it is the cheap variety. By contrast, the bluish-green was one specific printing only in, say, March 1894.
Rule #2: There generally is a much greater difference in the shades of the common variety than between the shade of the common stamp bordering the expensive variety, and the expensive variety.
Ok. Let me say this again. Rule #1 states there will be a range of colors within the common variety. Suppose you organize a couple of hundred 1890 greens stamps according to shade, from light to dark, and you also have one bluish-green stamp, then the color difference between the green stamp that is closest in hue to the bluish-green, and the bluish-green stamp, is much smaller than the difference between that borderline green stamp and most of the stamps at the opposite side of the color spectrum of the 1890 green.
At this point, you may ask why, then, do catalogs not separately list the other shades of the green stamp that make up the range of my hundreds of “1890 greens†that I just organized? Good question! This question comes down to what should be cataloged and recognized separately and what not. Or: what makes a "catalogable" color variety? Catalog editors do not always have good judgment on this issue. However, the general rule is that a color variety should only be recognized, if the shade is characteristic for a specific stamp issue. It must be possible to distinguish the March 1894 bluish-green printing from all other printings of the green stamp based on its characteristic shade (even though it may be close to some of the green printings). By contrast, if the colors of other printings are all over the place and overlap, then no shade of green is characteristic. In other words, differences in appearance are simply random variation.
Rule #3: Beware of paper varieties.
Differences in paper can give the appearance of difference in color. See below, all stamps same color.
Rule #4: Beware of saturation.
See below starved, normal, and saturated printing, all same color.
Login to Like
this post
Rule #5: Use secondary criteria to identify rare color varieties.
Ok, from rules #1 – 4 we learn that most likely our “bluish-green†is a marginal “green†which fools us because we compare it to one of the greens at the other end of the green spectrum. Identification is further complicated by the effect of different papers and differences in color saturation. To sum it all up: the visual appearance, i.e., the color to the naked eye, may not be the best way to go about identifying a rare shade variety.
Therefore knowledgeable collectors will seek supporting evidence for the presence of an expensive color variety based on secondary criteria. Examples for secondary criteria, frequently not mentioned in standard catalogs: certain shades may only exist on certain papers. The application of the color is different, smooth, creamy, blotchy etc. The shade variety has been used only during a certain time frame, or the printing has only been distributed to certain post offices etc.
The most important of these criteria is the appearance of the stamp under UV light. Many shade varieties that are difficult to separate in day light, have distinct properties under UV light. In fact, certain shade varieties can only be distinguished with the assistance of UV light. The German Association of Philatelic Experts (BPP), which greatly influences the Michel catalogs, defines shades as a “significant difference in color which must be visually distinguishable (potentially only under UV-light).†Accordingly, more helpful, in fact essential, is not the information on the color (rose-carmine vs carmine-rose, to give the classic mind-bender example), but what is the glow of the stamp under UV.
The three shades of Scott #55 (Michel #56 a-c)
To be continued.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Arno:
I commend you for your courage in tackling postage-stamp colour and the shades thereof.
As you are well aware, previous Stamporama discussions of this topic indicate it is as much
an emotional as well as a visual issue. My unscientific conclusion is that no two pair of eyes
see colour alike.
Why should your extensive reading, research and editing on this subject be buried in a
soon-to-be-forgotten discussion topic?
I recommend you post your comments in a Stamporama "article" where it may have greater
visibility and and a longer shelf life.
John Derry
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
05:21:20pm
Arno,
Can you please include where we might find some of this information? I have catalogs and about 5 reference books about forgeries, philately in general and some US stamp stuff but nothing about color. Where would we find paper types (if not listed), appearance under UV, etc.? Without that information, many of us would be stuck at rule 1 or 2.
Login to Like
this post
05:27:11pm
Arno
I also agree with John. Please combine these discussions of "shade/color" and place them in the articles section. I know I will want to reference them at a future date and should I have a "senior moment" and forget where they were in the discussion morass, 'twould be good to have them in an easy to find location.
Oh, and BTW, your efforts on the discussion board have not gone unnoticed and are very much appreciated!
Bobby
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Thank you for this Arno, I will use this info quite regularly.
Alyn
Login to Like
this post
Arno great information on color shades. My curiosity about some of the US variations has led me to some interesting articles and sites. There seems to be a lot of differences in opinions, not just on SOR. Please copy and post your information in the articles section.
Les posted a link to a scientific organizations site that would be of interest to those wanting to know how well we perceive color shades. Statistically many of us aren't very good at it.
[blue]http://www.analyticalphilately.org/[/blue]
I am mostly color blind but I can see the difference in shades from one stamp next to another. I bought my wife a SG color chart for Christmas and she has been a big help I think.
Login to Like
this post
Hi all,
This is not finished yet. There will be a few more installments. Some of the questions that have been raised, I was planning to address anyways. I disagree mostly with the statement that shades are subjective. With the right tools and the necessary knowledge, it can be done. This is not to say that at times a stamp can be misidentified. Human error is inevitable. However, the error rate, if you know what you are doing, is probably not much higher than misidentifying paper or watermark varieties.
I will add a section on the optical RGB analysis and will elaborate at the time. In my opinion, as of now, it is hocus-pocus. Naturally, there is a lobby pushing it. Quite similar to the nonsense of grading stamps by measuring scanned images using computer programs. In my crystal ball I see that you will be able to purchase in the near future not just the computer determined "best centered," but also the "greenest green" stamp -- in either case based on differences not discernible to the human eye.
I understand that there is a great demand for fast food. If you want to eat, and there is no fast food, you have to cook. If you can’t cook, you need to learn how to cook. Learning how to cook takes time, patience, and costs money. If you don’t want to learn how to cook, you have to go hungry.
Arno
Login to Like
this post
Rule #6: Use a color guide but know its limitations
I believe that color guides are helpful. Perhaps this should not be stated as a rule, but as an opinion. Nevertheless, if you have no clue what the color “lake†looks like, it is helpful to have a book where you can look it up to get a general idea what you are looking for. There are, however, several reasons why color guides cannot give the kind of easy answers that many collectors unreasonably expect.
Reason one stems from rule #3 – the effect of paper. Even if the color guide accurately reproduces the color lake, a modern print on glossy paper will appear different from lithographed or typographed ink on old stamp paper. Moreover, rule #1 states that the color green given for the stamp likely does not mean that every single stamp of that issue is exactly “green,†but that the color of the stamp is the green spectrum. Lighter, darker, “yellowish-er†etc. hues are all in the mix as long as we are not crossing into the territory of another “characteristic†shade.
Probably the most frustrating limitation, however, is the uncertainty as to whether the color “green†given in the catalog really means “green.†Is a rose is a rose is a rose? You could only assume that you and the catalog editor speak the same language, if the catalog editor characterized the stamp as ‘green’ using the same color guide that is in your hand right now. However, likely at the time of the first cataloging of the stamp some editor “eye-balled†the color as green (or carmine etc.) and that information has been copied from one catalog to the next for the past 100 years. What kind of chocolate did the editor have in mind, milk or bitter?, when calling the stamp chocolate, or how about apple-green? What is that supposed to mean? In other words, a color guide can only be helpful if it is “keyed†to the catalog – and even then the other limitations remain.
I am not aware that Scott has its colors keyed to any particular color guide. I don’t know about SG either, but it is possible. Michel publishes a color guide that has gotten increasingly scientific. Since the 1980s, Michel adopted the Ostwald color system. Prior Michel color guides – that’s the old one I have – are not following this system. All new stamp issues cataloged in Michel since the 1980s are “keyed†to these standard colors. In 1991 once more Michel greatly expanded its color guide. Old color names, the apple greens and other fantasy names, are purged slowly from the catalog and stamp colors are getting reclassified. These new standardized color names are constructed, and therefore can be a little awkward at times, but overall it is a color system that at least has the potential of being informative. For instance, “yellowish orange†is an orange with a touch of yellow. Additional prefixes such as light-, lively- etc. indicate the saturation (see rule #4). As an illustration, here is how the color names for the three shades of the Scott #55 changed in response to the changes in the color guides (“keyingâ€) or most recently due to the incorporation of more contemporary research. I am leaving these in German; it is just an illustration. Translation is pretty intuitive.
Shade a
Michel catalog 1981/82: karminrosa
Michel catalog 1995: karminrosa, rot
Michel catalog 2006: dunkelkarminrot to (dunkel)rötlichkarmin
Shade b
Michel catalog 1981/82: karminrot
Michel catalog 1995: karminrot
Michel catalog 2006: (dunkel)karminrot
Shade c
Michel catalog 1981/82: not yet listed
Michel catalog 1995: dunkelbräunlichrot
Michel catalog 2006: dunkelrosarot
Still, even if the catalog is keyed to a color guide, and even after expanding the number of listed colors multiple times, there are always going to be many more real existing shades of stamps than a color guide ever could list. So, how do we deal with those pesky stamps that are shades of shades?
To be continued
Login to Like
this post
Hmm, It would be interesting to learn what information Scott's Editors used to name their colors. The problem is that there are significant variations in value based on the perception of colors. Did Scott use the printer's definitions?
As a collector, I am faced with the need of matching a stamp to it's appropriate catalogue number. Most of the time that can be done with a perforation measurement or an examination of the design or the presence or absence of a watermark. In some rare instances, it is pigeon blood pink versus rose pink meaning a difference of $4400 in catalogue value. In others the value difference is less, but the inability to properly identify can be disconcerting.
I realize that inks fade, stamps get soaked and mistreated. As we age, we perceive colors differently, but there just has to be a better way to identify the difference in shades. As it is one will either pay 1000 times the worth of a stamp to learn that it is the common variety or choose to ignore the potential of thousands of dollars.
Login to Like
this post
Les,
I share your frustration. There certainly is a reason why I ignore shades
Thus far, I have been only enumerating problems with identifying colors. Some of these issues have been pointed out before. Others problems, I am not aware that they have been specifically empasized yet in the various discussions on colors we have had to date.
Your example of pigeon blood pink versus rose pink is a wonderful example of the limitations of color names in the Scott catalog. "Pigeon blood" does not mean a thing to most people. The color name is not standardized or keyed to a color chart. Accordingly, finding another stamp cataloged identified in Scott as "pigeon blood" does not mean it can be used for comparison (leaving the confounding issues of differences in ink application, ink saturation, and paper aside). Michael, in a parallel thread, presented his home made color chart using cheap stamps from various countries. This is a great idea, if one wants to have a chart identifying what carmine, dark-brown, etc. looks like in general. If the stamp colors are reasonably far apart (carmine vs. pink) Michaels approach, or any color guide, keyed to the catalog or not, will suffice. It is the tough cases that frustrate us: Because the less expensive rose pink represents a spectrum, you can have hundreds of shades of rose pink -- none of which is pigeon blood pink.
Well, I hope to post some more helpful "rules" eventually. I just don't have the time to write up all the various points I scribbled on some scratch paper at one time. But the direction where I am going with this already is pretty clear: In many areas we have limited guidance, because specialist knowledge is not shared by those who possess it. This cloaks the determination of colors more than any other area of collecting in mystery; it appears to be alchemy, not science, entirely subjective and arbitrary.
Pick the $13,000 stamp:
Login to Like
this post
Arno, you make a good point about my homemade catalog handbook. The color section indeed gets one there to permit them to make a basic color identification of a carmine from a carmine rose (for example). Shades do indeed offer a problem. What is the difference between light blue, very light blue and milky blue? There isn't much.
Les, to my understanding from my discussions with Scott about their catalogs, Scott tried to name colors based on the primary ingredients (dies and tints) that made up the color. Now the problem came about where Scott gave each editor that came along and took over the catalogs pretty much a free hand over what to do with most of it. So, some of the color definitions got diluted (so to speak) over time. Also, as printing methods improved and were modernized, color mixing was no longer done manually, but by machines. Many of the color varieties we suffer through are the result of imprecise, and manual, color mixing when new batches of a stamp were printed.
I used to go after the minor variety colors, but stopped most of that a while back, because it was not intentional that many of those stamps be printed in a different shade. It also cleared out hundred of extra pages from my albums! When you collect the world from 1840 to date, space for the albums is at a premium.
I did the same with perf variations, but with perf and color variations, I try to find out why. If there is a good reason for the variations, I will collect them. For example, the King George VI definitives from Ceylon come in a multitude of perf variations. I found out that this was the result of having to move to different printers in different locations around England because printing facilities were destroyed by German bombing during World War II. Stamps will come in different shades when such things occur as well. Good historical reasons for varieties make for interesting additions to one's collection.
Login to Like
this post
05:43:44pm
Arno - Your picture of the German stamps is the exact reason why I have so many of those in my album!!! LOL Aside from the various postmarks on some of the others - the Germania sets? - oy!!!
Soooo, are you going to share which one is the $13,000 stamp or should we keep guessing? ;-)
Kelly
Login to Like
this post
If you think about it, the Scott editors are able to create millionares by simple adjustments to the catalogue description to make an instant rarity. They don't because most of the color variations are rooted in history. The famous Pidgeon Blood Pink 3c
George Washington (it is really a dark Pink) is a relatively rare stamp. Just a poor choice of words to describe the color.
Look at the discussion in the Scott Specialized Color Guides for United States Stamps for the historical basis of the colors. I just wish that they would be a bit more accurate in their color choices in the identifier section of the specialized catalogue.
Login to Like
this post
Regarding the pigeon blood ink/paint color, my understanding is that it had some European military applications during the 19th and 20th Centuries (up through World War I). It was made from a mixture of pigeon blood and vermilion tint. It is difficult to find specifics regarding this, however. It also was used in early tattooing, as was dove blood and other animal bloods. Because of the risk of infection and disease, use of animal fluids in tattoo ink is no longer permitted. You might be able to find it in locales where health codes are not like those in the US.
Login to Like
this post
Rule #7: Use reference material to identify color varieties.
The common advice to use reference material to aid identification may not get you far in the case of really rare colors. If the rare shade is one in ten thousand, you can organize a lot of “1890 greens†before you hit the jackpot. If you further assume that any bulk lots and bundles of 1890 greens likely have been searched many times over by generations of prior collectors, you probably should be even less optimistic. However, a reference collection will give you an idea as to the range of the “greens†and certainly will allow you to identify more common shades.
One has to realize that catalog values include the dealers’ cost of handling. When it comes to shades, the cost of the time spent identifying the color variety often dominates the catalog price. Moreover, you also pay for the knowhow how to do it – as in the old joke “Two dollars for tapping on the computer and $498 for knowing where to tap!†That means with the exception of the super-rare, the price of many shades is not in direct proportion to the CV of the common stamp. To give an example, if the 1890 green is $0.20 minimum catalog value, and a yellow-green variety is $50, it does not follow that 1 in 250 stamps is yellow-green. Perhaps the actual ratio is only 1:20 – but you have to pay someone to pick it out for you. There is a lot of sweat equity in identifying shades.
From rule #1 we learn that having two stamps that look differently does not mean anything. You need comprehensive reference material. And because colors are issue specific, any inference about the 1890 greens by comparing 1920s green stamps from a different country is irrelevant. You need piles of 1890s green stamps to build your own color chart to identify the spectrum of the common variety as well as the cut-off points in between characteristic shades. Stamps at the margin will count as the lesser variety.
Here is one page of Scott #55s organized by shades:
As you organize your shades it is imperative to use a controlled environment, i.e., use a natural daylight lamp. All stamps showing evidence of fading etc. should be discarded before building your color chart. Moreover, rule #4 dictates that it is impossible to compare stamps with different levels of ink saturation (starved vs. over-saturated etc.). For an apples-to-apples comparison, only stamps with similar saturation should be used. Accordingly, the above example shows stamps with well saturated printing on the left, and increasingly starved printings moving from left to right. Shade varieties are then organized top down ranging from the dark red carmine (more blue components) to the dark rose red (more yellow components) within the same level of saturation.
If certain stamps in this chart appear to “stick out†and don’t appear to fit the sequence: this is because of the often-heard claim that colors cannot be determined based on scans over the internet. Well, here is your proof. This chart, prepared by my friend Klaus, is an amazing work of art if you see it in the original. Yes, nuances are subtle, but it truly represents a sliding scale. Proper categorization of stamps was also ascertained by using UV-light (Michel provides the characteristic appearance under UV). However, due to the technical limitations of scanning and depending on the display of your monitor, certain colors will appear livelier than others, which essentially renders the digitalized version of the chart useless. The value of the picture is more in the illustration of how to organize stamps by shades for the novice collector – according to saturation and shade.
To be continued
Login to Like
this post
Rule #8: Knowledge and triangulation.
Because of the problems associated with identifying shades, secondary criteria are very important as already mentioned in rule #5. How, now, can one obtain the crucial knowledge of secondary criteria, or clearly identified reference copies, which enable the identification and/or validation of a specific shade?
Unfortunately, there is no quick and easy way. There is no substitute for learning what there is to learn about a specific stamp issue. One needs literature, and often it is the older and out of print books that contain the most relevant information. Not to get off-topic, but, as we all know, stamp collecting is a hobby in transition. There are many opportunities – often overlooked by the doomsayers of the hobby – but also many challenges. One of the challenges to our hobby is a decline in basic research. Obviously, the availability of literature and the output of new publications varies greatly by collecting area. However, in my opinion, very little new has been published on U.S. stamps in recent years, and even less has been published that is important. Lacking the one comprehensive, nicely illustrated handbook that has it all, getting an education therefore requires the combination of information from a multitude of often older sources.
Here is what triangulation and knowledge does. The $13,000 (EURO 10,000) stamp on the stock card pictured above is this one:
It is the rare Michel catalog number 86IIg. Here is the cert (Thanks, Alwin).
The war printings of the 10Pf Germania cover an enormous spectrum of colors due to war time shortages. The color names given in the catalog are useless to identify the shades of this stamp (dark-red vs. dark-red carmine vs. dark-rose red etc. etc.). Why has the "dark-red" shade of the 86IIg been singled out as one specific discernible printing?
One needs the back story, which of course cannot be found in the standard catalog. The stamp was printed in Berlin and produced exclusively as raw material for the purpose of being overprinted in Romania as an occupation stamp (German military administration of Romania, Scott # 3N9, Michel #9b). Not all of the stamps had been overprinted, when Germany’s military fortunes turned. The number of stamps needed had been overestimated, and the remaining stock was shuttled back to Berlin, earmarked for destruction. "Somewhere - somehow," however, several unoverprinted sheets of the remainders disappeared from the railway car.
So, what do we learn from this information? Firstly, the best reference copy to identify the elusive Michel Germany 86IIg is a relatively inexpensive Michel Romania 9b. Albeit, the 9b is the more expensive of the two shades listed in the Michel specialized for this stamp. Secondly, the stamp must have a fall 1918 postmark date (no unused copies of the 86IIg are known to date). Thirdly, -- this information is in the Michel specialized catalog – the distinctive feature of the 86IIg is its unique vermillion glow under UV while other shades glow in a variety of shades of red or carmine. How, do you know the glow is vermillion, and not red or carmine? Well, it glows like a Romania 9b, right?
Given that the 86IIg is a very rare stamp, you will likely turn up nothing even after screening thousands of the 10Pf Germanias. However, your knowledge enables you to narrow down stamps that are at least even suitable candidates for this expensive variety. Of course, if you should ever come across a stamp that meets the filter criteria, expertization will be mandatory. In the mean time, your knowledge saves you from sending scores of stamps for expertization that less educated collectors simply eyeball as “looking different.â€
The “trick†of using overprinted varieties as reference copies works quite well if one just does the research. You will hear frequently that ownership of expertized reference copies is the only way to identify shades. While circumstances may exist where this is true, usually this broad statement is both helpless and useless. If you are not sure about the red-carmine vs. carmine-red difference, the alternative to buying a certified red-carmine 2c Washington for reference purposes, perhaps is buying a less expensive Philippine or Cuba overprinted stamp that ONLY exists in red-carmine (or carmine-red, or whatever -- this is a made-up example). Alternatively, more often than not the plate numbers or printing order numbers are known for all shades. For instance, with the appropriate literature, a Germania stamp with attached selvage showing the printing order number instantly identifies the shade – yet an alternate way of obtaining clearly identifiable reference copies at least for the common varities.
To be continued
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
03:06:35am
Due to some recent interest shown on the DB in this subject matter I am "bumping" it up to the head of the line. If you are the least bit interested in color varieties, the posts here are well worth a read.
Bobby
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
It is difficult to avoid standing in the shadow of that enormous
mountain of fact, knowledge, information and illustrative
minutiae that Rhinelander has compiled dissecting the rainbow and
laying out the colourful forensic evidence for all of us to behold.
This has been the most educational discussion thread I have
read since joining Stamporama, and I salute, with respect,
all members who have contributed to it.
John Derry
Login to Like
this post
03:23:05pm
Yes, shades again.
By all means please continue, Arno, if you have the time, to share your research into what for many, many collectors is a fascinating subject.
Login to Like
this post
I worked many hours in the last two weeks in the archives of the old Stamporama discussion board as a member of the volunteer group, moving (and renaming as needed) old discussions to the “new and improved†board. The project is still ongoing. Nevertheless, if you go in “Show Topics†you should already find many discussions on a certain collecting interest conveniently under one appropriate heading. As I was going through hundreds of old discussions thus far, one recurring topic catching my attention was shades. There were dozens of questions in “Can you help identify this?†on shades, and numerous pleas for advice how to distinguish shades in General Philatelic. Considering these countless discussions of shades, do we need another one?
Here is an example, which is entirely made up, but representative of a good number of shade discussions commonly posted on Stamporama. It contains, of course, a good dose of hyperbole and is meant to be funny in a self-reflective way.
So, here we go with our hypothetical, yet representative, question: The catalog lists the minimum catalog value 1890 green, and the $500 bluish-green varieties. So, in the “can we help identify thisâ€-section, we find a question showing two specimens of the 1890 green stamp that look different, so, surely, one must be the green and the other the bluish-green?
The typical discussion then continues as follows: The first member responding – albeit being clueless about the stamp in particular – asks for a larger scan; the second person states that shades can only be determined with lots of reference material (a safe bet, neither right nor wrong, depending on the context); the third person states with conviction that colors cannot be determined using scans (mostly correct, but the person saying so also couldn’t do it if the real stamps were in front of her); the fourth persons states that shades are a bitch, the fifth person agrees; the sixth person says that the USPS single and double line watermarks also are a bitch; so was his time in the Marine Corps, member seven is quick to add. Did I ever tell you how we once were on maneuver, and …; because of fading/washing determining shades of used stamps is futile thinks member eight (too broad of a statement); here is the larger scan, the inquirer interjects; Cool! – member five shares his excitement; his time in the Air Force also was pretty rough, person two wants us to know, imagine …; person nine states that only experts can determine shades, and you really need to get the stamp expertized (wrong); you need specialized literature declares person ten (yes, of course, how about naming which book to get?); hey, I found a similar stamp, person five chimes in again – oops the picture upload did not work; person ten adds, in case you did not know, you can borrow books from the library. The inquirer comes back: this was AWESOME, thank you for all your help. I knew I could rely on you guys. Stamporama rocks! All: you are welcome, just keep asking, there is no such thing like a dumb question!
Of course, I shortened this a bit and left out the cut and paste job from Wikipedia with the biographical information of the person depicted on the stamp, the 2-5 posted links to other web content, and the advice to post the question somewhere else – all of which are pretty much standard ingredients in our discussions about shades --, but apart from that: that’s pretty much how it goes ...
To be taken with a grain of salt ... Can you tell I spent too much time in the darkest corners of the Stamporama archives?
Login to Like
this post
re: On shades -- again?
In any event, the pain and suffering inflicted on me having to read through many of our discussions prompted me to think if not a more structured response to common questions on shades could be given. How grateful I am that being part of the volunteer group allows me to purge much of my own banter from the board ...
So here I go, starting another column on shades, in which I will attempt to offer some general insight(?), and much opinion, on shades in a somewhat more systematic fashion. One issue is that I do not collect any particular country or issue at a level of specialization where I ever worry about shades. I happily ignore shades. For that reason I cannot readily draw on examples from my own collection to discuss the topic in a visually appealing fashion. I therefore reached out to friends and thank Klaus, Bruno, and Alwin, who graciously supplied some pictures of stamps from their collections of the “Germania†series of 1900 – 1922, which is not only rich in shades, but also extremely well researched.
I am delivering my opinion on shades in the forms of "rules." Any expert collectors will tell you however that the topic of colors can really only be adequately discussed for one particular issue at a time. Agreed, I am generalizing. So, perhaps, I should have used the term heuristic instead of rule. I hope that members will offer additional examples, illustrations, or alternate opinions on the broadly stated “rules,†which are an attempt to provide structured guidance on the problem of shades.
Rule #1: In the case where there is one common color, and one (or more) expensive varieties, the common variety usually encompasses a color spectrum, while the expensive variety usually is one very specific shade with a limited range only.
To continue with the above hypothetical example: this rule, or general expectation that you should have, posits that the 1890 green stamps has been printed and re-printed numerous times. This is why it is the cheap variety. By contrast, the bluish-green was one specific printing only in, say, March 1894.
Rule #2: There generally is a much greater difference in the shades of the common variety than between the shade of the common stamp bordering the expensive variety, and the expensive variety.
Ok. Let me say this again. Rule #1 states there will be a range of colors within the common variety. Suppose you organize a couple of hundred 1890 greens stamps according to shade, from light to dark, and you also have one bluish-green stamp, then the color difference between the green stamp that is closest in hue to the bluish-green, and the bluish-green stamp, is much smaller than the difference between that borderline green stamp and most of the stamps at the opposite side of the color spectrum of the 1890 green.
At this point, you may ask why, then, do catalogs not separately list the other shades of the green stamp that make up the range of my hundreds of “1890 greens†that I just organized? Good question! This question comes down to what should be cataloged and recognized separately and what not. Or: what makes a "catalogable" color variety? Catalog editors do not always have good judgment on this issue. However, the general rule is that a color variety should only be recognized, if the shade is characteristic for a specific stamp issue. It must be possible to distinguish the March 1894 bluish-green printing from all other printings of the green stamp based on its characteristic shade (even though it may be close to some of the green printings). By contrast, if the colors of other printings are all over the place and overlap, then no shade of green is characteristic. In other words, differences in appearance are simply random variation.
Rule #3: Beware of paper varieties.
Differences in paper can give the appearance of difference in color. See below, all stamps same color.
Rule #4: Beware of saturation.
See below starved, normal, and saturated printing, all same color.
Login to Like
this post
re: On shades -- again?
Rule #5: Use secondary criteria to identify rare color varieties.
Ok, from rules #1 – 4 we learn that most likely our “bluish-green†is a marginal “green†which fools us because we compare it to one of the greens at the other end of the green spectrum. Identification is further complicated by the effect of different papers and differences in color saturation. To sum it all up: the visual appearance, i.e., the color to the naked eye, may not be the best way to go about identifying a rare shade variety.
Therefore knowledgeable collectors will seek supporting evidence for the presence of an expensive color variety based on secondary criteria. Examples for secondary criteria, frequently not mentioned in standard catalogs: certain shades may only exist on certain papers. The application of the color is different, smooth, creamy, blotchy etc. The shade variety has been used only during a certain time frame, or the printing has only been distributed to certain post offices etc.
The most important of these criteria is the appearance of the stamp under UV light. Many shade varieties that are difficult to separate in day light, have distinct properties under UV light. In fact, certain shade varieties can only be distinguished with the assistance of UV light. The German Association of Philatelic Experts (BPP), which greatly influences the Michel catalogs, defines shades as a “significant difference in color which must be visually distinguishable (potentially only under UV-light).†Accordingly, more helpful, in fact essential, is not the information on the color (rose-carmine vs carmine-rose, to give the classic mind-bender example), but what is the glow of the stamp under UV.
The three shades of Scott #55 (Michel #56 a-c)
To be continued.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
The past is a foreign country, they do things different there.
23 Feb 2013
04:13:40pm
re: On shades -- again?
Arno:
I commend you for your courage in tackling postage-stamp colour and the shades thereof.
As you are well aware, previous Stamporama discussions of this topic indicate it is as much
an emotional as well as a visual issue. My unscientific conclusion is that no two pair of eyes
see colour alike.
Why should your extensive reading, research and editing on this subject be buried in a
soon-to-be-forgotten discussion topic?
I recommend you post your comments in a Stamporama "article" where it may have greater
visibility and and a longer shelf life.
John Derry
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
It is during our darkest moments that we must focus to see the light. - Aristotle Onassis
23 Feb 2013
05:21:20pm
re: On shades -- again?
Arno,
Can you please include where we might find some of this information? I have catalogs and about 5 reference books about forgeries, philately in general and some US stamp stuff but nothing about color. Where would we find paper types (if not listed), appearance under UV, etc.? Without that information, many of us would be stuck at rule 1 or 2.
Login to Like
this post
They who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. -Benjamin Franklin
23 Feb 2013
05:27:11pm
re: On shades -- again?
Arno
I also agree with John. Please combine these discussions of "shade/color" and place them in the articles section. I know I will want to reference them at a future date and should I have a "senior moment" and forget where they were in the discussion morass, 'twould be good to have them in an easy to find location.
Oh, and BTW, your efforts on the discussion board have not gone unnoticed and are very much appreciated!
Bobby
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: On shades -- again?
Thank you for this Arno, I will use this info quite regularly.
Alyn
Login to Like
this post
re: On shades -- again?
Arno great information on color shades. My curiosity about some of the US variations has led me to some interesting articles and sites. There seems to be a lot of differences in opinions, not just on SOR. Please copy and post your information in the articles section.
Les posted a link to a scientific organizations site that would be of interest to those wanting to know how well we perceive color shades. Statistically many of us aren't very good at it.
[blue]http://www.analyticalphilately.org/[/blue]
I am mostly color blind but I can see the difference in shades from one stamp next to another. I bought my wife a SG color chart for Christmas and she has been a big help I think.
Login to Like
this post
re: On shades -- again?
Hi all,
This is not finished yet. There will be a few more installments. Some of the questions that have been raised, I was planning to address anyways. I disagree mostly with the statement that shades are subjective. With the right tools and the necessary knowledge, it can be done. This is not to say that at times a stamp can be misidentified. Human error is inevitable. However, the error rate, if you know what you are doing, is probably not much higher than misidentifying paper or watermark varieties.
I will add a section on the optical RGB analysis and will elaborate at the time. In my opinion, as of now, it is hocus-pocus. Naturally, there is a lobby pushing it. Quite similar to the nonsense of grading stamps by measuring scanned images using computer programs. In my crystal ball I see that you will be able to purchase in the near future not just the computer determined "best centered," but also the "greenest green" stamp -- in either case based on differences not discernible to the human eye.
I understand that there is a great demand for fast food. If you want to eat, and there is no fast food, you have to cook. If you can’t cook, you need to learn how to cook. Learning how to cook takes time, patience, and costs money. If you don’t want to learn how to cook, you have to go hungry.
Arno
Login to Like
this post
re: On shades -- again?
Rule #6: Use a color guide but know its limitations
I believe that color guides are helpful. Perhaps this should not be stated as a rule, but as an opinion. Nevertheless, if you have no clue what the color “lake†looks like, it is helpful to have a book where you can look it up to get a general idea what you are looking for. There are, however, several reasons why color guides cannot give the kind of easy answers that many collectors unreasonably expect.
Reason one stems from rule #3 – the effect of paper. Even if the color guide accurately reproduces the color lake, a modern print on glossy paper will appear different from lithographed or typographed ink on old stamp paper. Moreover, rule #1 states that the color green given for the stamp likely does not mean that every single stamp of that issue is exactly “green,†but that the color of the stamp is the green spectrum. Lighter, darker, “yellowish-er†etc. hues are all in the mix as long as we are not crossing into the territory of another “characteristic†shade.
Probably the most frustrating limitation, however, is the uncertainty as to whether the color “green†given in the catalog really means “green.†Is a rose is a rose is a rose? You could only assume that you and the catalog editor speak the same language, if the catalog editor characterized the stamp as ‘green’ using the same color guide that is in your hand right now. However, likely at the time of the first cataloging of the stamp some editor “eye-balled†the color as green (or carmine etc.) and that information has been copied from one catalog to the next for the past 100 years. What kind of chocolate did the editor have in mind, milk or bitter?, when calling the stamp chocolate, or how about apple-green? What is that supposed to mean? In other words, a color guide can only be helpful if it is “keyed†to the catalog – and even then the other limitations remain.
I am not aware that Scott has its colors keyed to any particular color guide. I don’t know about SG either, but it is possible. Michel publishes a color guide that has gotten increasingly scientific. Since the 1980s, Michel adopted the Ostwald color system. Prior Michel color guides – that’s the old one I have – are not following this system. All new stamp issues cataloged in Michel since the 1980s are “keyed†to these standard colors. In 1991 once more Michel greatly expanded its color guide. Old color names, the apple greens and other fantasy names, are purged slowly from the catalog and stamp colors are getting reclassified. These new standardized color names are constructed, and therefore can be a little awkward at times, but overall it is a color system that at least has the potential of being informative. For instance, “yellowish orange†is an orange with a touch of yellow. Additional prefixes such as light-, lively- etc. indicate the saturation (see rule #4). As an illustration, here is how the color names for the three shades of the Scott #55 changed in response to the changes in the color guides (“keyingâ€) or most recently due to the incorporation of more contemporary research. I am leaving these in German; it is just an illustration. Translation is pretty intuitive.
Shade a
Michel catalog 1981/82: karminrosa
Michel catalog 1995: karminrosa, rot
Michel catalog 2006: dunkelkarminrot to (dunkel)rötlichkarmin
Shade b
Michel catalog 1981/82: karminrot
Michel catalog 1995: karminrot
Michel catalog 2006: (dunkel)karminrot
Shade c
Michel catalog 1981/82: not yet listed
Michel catalog 1995: dunkelbräunlichrot
Michel catalog 2006: dunkelrosarot
Still, even if the catalog is keyed to a color guide, and even after expanding the number of listed colors multiple times, there are always going to be many more real existing shades of stamps than a color guide ever could list. So, how do we deal with those pesky stamps that are shades of shades?
To be continued
Login to Like
this post
re: On shades -- again?
Hmm, It would be interesting to learn what information Scott's Editors used to name their colors. The problem is that there are significant variations in value based on the perception of colors. Did Scott use the printer's definitions?
As a collector, I am faced with the need of matching a stamp to it's appropriate catalogue number. Most of the time that can be done with a perforation measurement or an examination of the design or the presence or absence of a watermark. In some rare instances, it is pigeon blood pink versus rose pink meaning a difference of $4400 in catalogue value. In others the value difference is less, but the inability to properly identify can be disconcerting.
I realize that inks fade, stamps get soaked and mistreated. As we age, we perceive colors differently, but there just has to be a better way to identify the difference in shades. As it is one will either pay 1000 times the worth of a stamp to learn that it is the common variety or choose to ignore the potential of thousands of dollars.
Login to Like
this post
re: On shades -- again?
Les,
I share your frustration. There certainly is a reason why I ignore shades
Thus far, I have been only enumerating problems with identifying colors. Some of these issues have been pointed out before. Others problems, I am not aware that they have been specifically empasized yet in the various discussions on colors we have had to date.
Your example of pigeon blood pink versus rose pink is a wonderful example of the limitations of color names in the Scott catalog. "Pigeon blood" does not mean a thing to most people. The color name is not standardized or keyed to a color chart. Accordingly, finding another stamp cataloged identified in Scott as "pigeon blood" does not mean it can be used for comparison (leaving the confounding issues of differences in ink application, ink saturation, and paper aside). Michael, in a parallel thread, presented his home made color chart using cheap stamps from various countries. This is a great idea, if one wants to have a chart identifying what carmine, dark-brown, etc. looks like in general. If the stamp colors are reasonably far apart (carmine vs. pink) Michaels approach, or any color guide, keyed to the catalog or not, will suffice. It is the tough cases that frustrate us: Because the less expensive rose pink represents a spectrum, you can have hundreds of shades of rose pink -- none of which is pigeon blood pink.
Well, I hope to post some more helpful "rules" eventually. I just don't have the time to write up all the various points I scribbled on some scratch paper at one time. But the direction where I am going with this already is pretty clear: In many areas we have limited guidance, because specialist knowledge is not shared by those who possess it. This cloaks the determination of colors more than any other area of collecting in mystery; it appears to be alchemy, not science, entirely subjective and arbitrary.
Pick the $13,000 stamp:
Login to Like
this post
02:01:01pm
re: On shades -- again?
Arno, you make a good point about my homemade catalog handbook. The color section indeed gets one there to permit them to make a basic color identification of a carmine from a carmine rose (for example). Shades do indeed offer a problem. What is the difference between light blue, very light blue and milky blue? There isn't much.
Les, to my understanding from my discussions with Scott about their catalogs, Scott tried to name colors based on the primary ingredients (dies and tints) that made up the color. Now the problem came about where Scott gave each editor that came along and took over the catalogs pretty much a free hand over what to do with most of it. So, some of the color definitions got diluted (so to speak) over time. Also, as printing methods improved and were modernized, color mixing was no longer done manually, but by machines. Many of the color varieties we suffer through are the result of imprecise, and manual, color mixing when new batches of a stamp were printed.
I used to go after the minor variety colors, but stopped most of that a while back, because it was not intentional that many of those stamps be printed in a different shade. It also cleared out hundred of extra pages from my albums! When you collect the world from 1840 to date, space for the albums is at a premium.
I did the same with perf variations, but with perf and color variations, I try to find out why. If there is a good reason for the variations, I will collect them. For example, the King George VI definitives from Ceylon come in a multitude of perf variations. I found out that this was the result of having to move to different printers in different locations around England because printing facilities were destroyed by German bombing during World War II. Stamps will come in different shades when such things occur as well. Good historical reasons for varieties make for interesting additions to one's collection.
Login to Like
this post
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).
01 Mar 2013
05:43:44pm
re: On shades -- again?
Arno - Your picture of the German stamps is the exact reason why I have so many of those in my album!!! LOL Aside from the various postmarks on some of the others - the Germania sets? - oy!!!
Soooo, are you going to share which one is the $13,000 stamp or should we keep guessing? ;-)
Kelly
Login to Like
this post
re: On shades -- again?
If you think about it, the Scott editors are able to create millionares by simple adjustments to the catalogue description to make an instant rarity. They don't because most of the color variations are rooted in history. The famous Pidgeon Blood Pink 3c
George Washington (it is really a dark Pink) is a relatively rare stamp. Just a poor choice of words to describe the color.
Look at the discussion in the Scott Specialized Color Guides for United States Stamps for the historical basis of the colors. I just wish that they would be a bit more accurate in their color choices in the identifier section of the specialized catalogue.
Login to Like
this post
01:19:47pm
re: On shades -- again?
Regarding the pigeon blood ink/paint color, my understanding is that it had some European military applications during the 19th and 20th Centuries (up through World War I). It was made from a mixture of pigeon blood and vermilion tint. It is difficult to find specifics regarding this, however. It also was used in early tattooing, as was dove blood and other animal bloods. Because of the risk of infection and disease, use of animal fluids in tattoo ink is no longer permitted. You might be able to find it in locales where health codes are not like those in the US.
Login to Like
this post
re: On shades -- again?
Rule #7: Use reference material to identify color varieties.
The common advice to use reference material to aid identification may not get you far in the case of really rare colors. If the rare shade is one in ten thousand, you can organize a lot of “1890 greens†before you hit the jackpot. If you further assume that any bulk lots and bundles of 1890 greens likely have been searched many times over by generations of prior collectors, you probably should be even less optimistic. However, a reference collection will give you an idea as to the range of the “greens†and certainly will allow you to identify more common shades.
One has to realize that catalog values include the dealers’ cost of handling. When it comes to shades, the cost of the time spent identifying the color variety often dominates the catalog price. Moreover, you also pay for the knowhow how to do it – as in the old joke “Two dollars for tapping on the computer and $498 for knowing where to tap!†That means with the exception of the super-rare, the price of many shades is not in direct proportion to the CV of the common stamp. To give an example, if the 1890 green is $0.20 minimum catalog value, and a yellow-green variety is $50, it does not follow that 1 in 250 stamps is yellow-green. Perhaps the actual ratio is only 1:20 – but you have to pay someone to pick it out for you. There is a lot of sweat equity in identifying shades.
From rule #1 we learn that having two stamps that look differently does not mean anything. You need comprehensive reference material. And because colors are issue specific, any inference about the 1890 greens by comparing 1920s green stamps from a different country is irrelevant. You need piles of 1890s green stamps to build your own color chart to identify the spectrum of the common variety as well as the cut-off points in between characteristic shades. Stamps at the margin will count as the lesser variety.
Here is one page of Scott #55s organized by shades:
As you organize your shades it is imperative to use a controlled environment, i.e., use a natural daylight lamp. All stamps showing evidence of fading etc. should be discarded before building your color chart. Moreover, rule #4 dictates that it is impossible to compare stamps with different levels of ink saturation (starved vs. over-saturated etc.). For an apples-to-apples comparison, only stamps with similar saturation should be used. Accordingly, the above example shows stamps with well saturated printing on the left, and increasingly starved printings moving from left to right. Shade varieties are then organized top down ranging from the dark red carmine (more blue components) to the dark rose red (more yellow components) within the same level of saturation.
If certain stamps in this chart appear to “stick out†and don’t appear to fit the sequence: this is because of the often-heard claim that colors cannot be determined based on scans over the internet. Well, here is your proof. This chart, prepared by my friend Klaus, is an amazing work of art if you see it in the original. Yes, nuances are subtle, but it truly represents a sliding scale. Proper categorization of stamps was also ascertained by using UV-light (Michel provides the characteristic appearance under UV). However, due to the technical limitations of scanning and depending on the display of your monitor, certain colors will appear livelier than others, which essentially renders the digitalized version of the chart useless. The value of the picture is more in the illustration of how to organize stamps by shades for the novice collector – according to saturation and shade.
To be continued
Login to Like
this post
re: On shades -- again?
Rule #8: Knowledge and triangulation.
Because of the problems associated with identifying shades, secondary criteria are very important as already mentioned in rule #5. How, now, can one obtain the crucial knowledge of secondary criteria, or clearly identified reference copies, which enable the identification and/or validation of a specific shade?
Unfortunately, there is no quick and easy way. There is no substitute for learning what there is to learn about a specific stamp issue. One needs literature, and often it is the older and out of print books that contain the most relevant information. Not to get off-topic, but, as we all know, stamp collecting is a hobby in transition. There are many opportunities – often overlooked by the doomsayers of the hobby – but also many challenges. One of the challenges to our hobby is a decline in basic research. Obviously, the availability of literature and the output of new publications varies greatly by collecting area. However, in my opinion, very little new has been published on U.S. stamps in recent years, and even less has been published that is important. Lacking the one comprehensive, nicely illustrated handbook that has it all, getting an education therefore requires the combination of information from a multitude of often older sources.
Here is what triangulation and knowledge does. The $13,000 (EURO 10,000) stamp on the stock card pictured above is this one:
It is the rare Michel catalog number 86IIg. Here is the cert (Thanks, Alwin).
The war printings of the 10Pf Germania cover an enormous spectrum of colors due to war time shortages. The color names given in the catalog are useless to identify the shades of this stamp (dark-red vs. dark-red carmine vs. dark-rose red etc. etc.). Why has the "dark-red" shade of the 86IIg been singled out as one specific discernible printing?
One needs the back story, which of course cannot be found in the standard catalog. The stamp was printed in Berlin and produced exclusively as raw material for the purpose of being overprinted in Romania as an occupation stamp (German military administration of Romania, Scott # 3N9, Michel #9b). Not all of the stamps had been overprinted, when Germany’s military fortunes turned. The number of stamps needed had been overestimated, and the remaining stock was shuttled back to Berlin, earmarked for destruction. "Somewhere - somehow," however, several unoverprinted sheets of the remainders disappeared from the railway car.
So, what do we learn from this information? Firstly, the best reference copy to identify the elusive Michel Germany 86IIg is a relatively inexpensive Michel Romania 9b. Albeit, the 9b is the more expensive of the two shades listed in the Michel specialized for this stamp. Secondly, the stamp must have a fall 1918 postmark date (no unused copies of the 86IIg are known to date). Thirdly, -- this information is in the Michel specialized catalog – the distinctive feature of the 86IIg is its unique vermillion glow under UV while other shades glow in a variety of shades of red or carmine. How, do you know the glow is vermillion, and not red or carmine? Well, it glows like a Romania 9b, right?
Given that the 86IIg is a very rare stamp, you will likely turn up nothing even after screening thousands of the 10Pf Germanias. However, your knowledge enables you to narrow down stamps that are at least even suitable candidates for this expensive variety. Of course, if you should ever come across a stamp that meets the filter criteria, expertization will be mandatory. In the mean time, your knowledge saves you from sending scores of stamps for expertization that less educated collectors simply eyeball as “looking different.â€
The “trick†of using overprinted varieties as reference copies works quite well if one just does the research. You will hear frequently that ownership of expertized reference copies is the only way to identify shades. While circumstances may exist where this is true, usually this broad statement is both helpless and useless. If you are not sure about the red-carmine vs. carmine-red difference, the alternative to buying a certified red-carmine 2c Washington for reference purposes, perhaps is buying a less expensive Philippine or Cuba overprinted stamp that ONLY exists in red-carmine (or carmine-red, or whatever -- this is a made-up example). Alternatively, more often than not the plate numbers or printing order numbers are known for all shades. For instance, with the appropriate literature, a Germania stamp with attached selvage showing the printing order number instantly identifies the shade – yet an alternate way of obtaining clearly identifiable reference copies at least for the common varities.
To be continued
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
They who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. -Benjamin Franklin
16 Apr 2014
03:06:35am
re: On shades -- again?
Due to some recent interest shown on the DB in this subject matter I am "bumping" it up to the head of the line. If you are the least bit interested in color varieties, the posts here are well worth a read.
Bobby
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
The past is a foreign country, they do things different there.
16 Apr 2014
01:32:37pm
re: On shades -- again?
It is difficult to avoid standing in the shadow of that enormous
mountain of fact, knowledge, information and illustrative
minutiae that Rhinelander has compiled dissecting the rainbow and
laying out the colourful forensic evidence for all of us to behold.
This has been the most educational discussion thread I have
read since joining Stamporama, and I salute, with respect,
all members who have contributed to it.
John Derry
Login to Like
this post
Silence in the face of adversity is the father of complicity and collusion, the first cousins of conspiracy..
16 Apr 2014
03:23:05pm
re: On shades -- again?
Yes, shades again.
By all means please continue, Arno, if you have the time, to share your research into what for many, many collectors is a fascinating subject.
Login to Like
this post