Wow! 42 reads and ZERO response. I think "Bullseye" is the same thing as (or a subset of) "In-Line" perfs, so I'll go with that. In the mean time, if anyone knows, please chime in.
Anyone?
Bueller?
Anyone?
Lars, I didn't want to reply until I had a chance to pull out my Great Americans plate blocks and examine the selvage perfs. I still haven't done that yet.
I took a break from stamp collecting around the time the in-line perforator began to dominate. So I cannot confirm my guess to what happened. But...
The L perforator produced what is also referred to as line perforations (Scott calls it line, rather than L). When I returned to stamp collecting, this caused me no shortage of grief in trying to remember which was line perforation and which was in-line perforation (EE perforator had phased out by then). Once the phrase "bullseye" started taking prominence, my confusion disappeared fairly quickly. I suspect that was one reason behind the switch in terminology.
An example is US #C105-C108(bullseye) vs. C105a-108a(line) in the Scott catalog.
There may have been something associated with the press used, but a quick glance doesn't seem to show any obvious links.
"An example is US #C105-C108(bullseye) vs. C105a-108a(line) in the Scott catalog."
"But L-perf and In-Line perf are not the same thing."
"That being said, there are advantages to selvage collecting."
Absolutely!
There are some printings that can ONLY be distinguished by selvage, because the stamps themselves are identical but the selvage is not!
For example, the 29c wildflower setenants #2696a(24Jul1992) were printed in two configurations. Scott puts a note in the header about 6 panes of 50 and 4 panes of 50. The press sheet area diagram in the selvage shows which configuration (6 blocks or 4 blocks) in addition to shading the block corresponding to the pane position.
"Absolutely!
There are some printings that can ONLY be distinguished by selvage, because the stamps themselves are identical but the selvage is not!"
Hi Lars and khj -- Just to let you know that this posting is pretty good stuff. I don't collect much with respect to US. I even had to google what the Durland catalog is. But I find the reconciliation of different terminology used in Scott and Durland most helpful (if I should ever need it, that is).
Arno
For US Perforations I understand the Micarelli guide is a must have.
"For US Perforations I understand the Micarelli guide is a must have."
The Micarelli Guide is now sold as the Scott Identification Guide to US Regular Issue Stamps 1847-1934, 6th Ed. Buy at AmosPress.com--if you're a Linn's subscriber you qualify for the AmosAdvantage discounts. My edition of the book is the 5th, and was still called the Micarelli Guide to US Regular Issue Stamps 1847-1934. I bought my copy on eBay for a significant discount. You might also try Abebooks.com or Alibris.com to see if they have any of the older editions. The new one from Amos is 39.95 (regular). I think I paid $15.00 for my copy. Hope this helps. BTW I use it primarily for classic US, especially nos. 10 & 11 and 26 (in all its variations). There are expanded line drawings for the changes in the different categories. I don't know how it is on the Washington-Franklins, as that is one set that totally confuses me--I spend a little time on it and then do the Monty Python "Run away!" routine.
Roger
I'm trying to identify the types of some stamps using the perforation type. I'm not talking about the gauge (perf 10 or 11) but the perforator used.
For example, according to Durland, 1580 was perforated 11.2x11.2 by In-Line Perforator; 1580B was perforated 10.5x11.3 by EE (Electric Eye) Perforator; and 1580c was perforated 10.9x10.9 by "L" Perforator. Each of these are quite different at the margins. I can tell the difference by looking at any corner block, such as a simple zip block.
My question regards Bullseye perfs mentioned later in the Durland catalog (such as 1844). Are they the same thing as In-Line perfs, or do they at least present in the same way (perfs don't go to either margin)? I don't see a note anywhere in my 2005 Durland that explains the apparent change of nomenclature.
Lars
re: Perforation types on US stamps
Wow! 42 reads and ZERO response. I think "Bullseye" is the same thing as (or a subset of) "In-Line" perfs, so I'll go with that. In the mean time, if anyone knows, please chime in.
Anyone?
Bueller?
Anyone?
re: Perforation types on US stamps
Lars, I didn't want to reply until I had a chance to pull out my Great Americans plate blocks and examine the selvage perfs. I still haven't done that yet.
I took a break from stamp collecting around the time the in-line perforator began to dominate. So I cannot confirm my guess to what happened. But...
The L perforator produced what is also referred to as line perforations (Scott calls it line, rather than L). When I returned to stamp collecting, this caused me no shortage of grief in trying to remember which was line perforation and which was in-line perforation (EE perforator had phased out by then). Once the phrase "bullseye" started taking prominence, my confusion disappeared fairly quickly. I suspect that was one reason behind the switch in terminology.
An example is US #C105-C108(bullseye) vs. C105a-108a(line) in the Scott catalog.
There may have been something associated with the press used, but a quick glance doesn't seem to show any obvious links.
re: Perforation types on US stamps
"An example is US #C105-C108(bullseye) vs. C105a-108a(line) in the Scott catalog."
re: Perforation types on US stamps
"But L-perf and In-Line perf are not the same thing."
re: Perforation types on US stamps
"That being said, there are advantages to selvage collecting."
re: Perforation types on US stamps
Absolutely!
There are some printings that can ONLY be distinguished by selvage, because the stamps themselves are identical but the selvage is not!
For example, the 29c wildflower setenants #2696a(24Jul1992) were printed in two configurations. Scott puts a note in the header about 6 panes of 50 and 4 panes of 50. The press sheet area diagram in the selvage shows which configuration (6 blocks or 4 blocks) in addition to shading the block corresponding to the pane position.
re: Perforation types on US stamps
"Absolutely!
There are some printings that can ONLY be distinguished by selvage, because the stamps themselves are identical but the selvage is not!"
re: Perforation types on US stamps
Hi Lars and khj -- Just to let you know that this posting is pretty good stuff. I don't collect much with respect to US. I even had to google what the Durland catalog is. But I find the reconciliation of different terminology used in Scott and Durland most helpful (if I should ever need it, that is).
Arno
re: Perforation types on US stamps
For US Perforations I understand the Micarelli guide is a must have.
re: Perforation types on US stamps
"For US Perforations I understand the Micarelli guide is a must have."
re: Perforation types on US stamps
The Micarelli Guide is now sold as the Scott Identification Guide to US Regular Issue Stamps 1847-1934, 6th Ed. Buy at AmosPress.com--if you're a Linn's subscriber you qualify for the AmosAdvantage discounts. My edition of the book is the 5th, and was still called the Micarelli Guide to US Regular Issue Stamps 1847-1934. I bought my copy on eBay for a significant discount. You might also try Abebooks.com or Alibris.com to see if they have any of the older editions. The new one from Amos is 39.95 (regular). I think I paid $15.00 for my copy. Hope this helps. BTW I use it primarily for classic US, especially nos. 10 & 11 and 26 (in all its variations). There are expanded line drawings for the changes in the different categories. I don't know how it is on the Washington-Franklins, as that is one set that totally confuses me--I spend a little time on it and then do the Monty Python "Run away!" routine.
Roger