I'm sorry, but my knowledge is limited. The one thing I do know about the Huck Press is that it shows joint lines. Looking at the plate block of 1338D below (Durland Sequence 2), it appears that the plates are only 5 stamps wide. I don't know how many plates fit on the cylinder, but if you knew the cylinder circumference it wouldn't be hard to determine.
From the 3 plate numbers in the example shown, 32113, 31846, and 31833, it looks like there were any number of combinations and you would only see 2 or 3 plate numbers on any single sheet of stamps you could buy at the post office. I would expect there were at least 7 other plates on the press when this particular strip was printed, but that is just a guess. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable can weigh in.
Lars
The only place I found that made mention of the joint lines (Scott Shaulis). He's talking about the coils, but I assume that the same would apply to the sheets. I also assume you meant plates 4 stamps wide.
"One other minor note. Some coil stamps shows partial lines of ink along the perforations. It looks like it should be a line pair. However, the Scott catalog doesn't list prices for line pairs on these coil issues. That's because these stamps were printed on the Huck press. Unlike other rotary press coil stamps which have a gap between the printing plates yielding joint line pairs, the colored lines of ink on the Huck press printed stamps are not from a gap in the printing plates. These extra lines of ink are very common and have no extra value."
http://www.shaulisstamps.com/tips/1338.htm
The only certainty is uncertainty...
And I found this image of a full sheet as well. Since the Durland does say that the plates were 80 subjects, it does make complete sense that the plates were 4 stamps wide (there would be another pane with the top block).
Another puzzle piece.
Yes, I meant 4 stamps wide, not 5. Sorry for the error.
As far as whether the line on sheet stamps (and coils) is really a joint line, I do not know for certain. However, for 1625, Scott says: "Huck Press printings often show portions of a joint line." I'll leave it to you to decide who to believe.
Lars
Lars,
The evidence so far supports your position - or in other words, I believe what you're saying. Thanks for helping me get closer to figuring this out.
It makes me wonder why the plate block size is 20. Seems to me if each plate was actually independent, a plate block of 4 (or 8 to include the Mail Early and Zip Code) would seem more appropriate.
Mike
Mike,
You make a valid point. I believe a plate block should be 4 stamps and a zip block would be 4stamps. My guess is that during that timeframe, many multi-colored stamps were printed with multiple plates and collectors were used to collecting most, if not all, of the selvage at the top or bottom for a "plate block".
Lars
the plate blocks increased in size during one of the USPS's misguided efforts to separate money from collectors and show each plate on a separate piece of selvage. With this flag/over, you can see how see how unnecessarily spread the plate numbers are. Accident? I think not. Carelessness? This lasted a couple of years and drove so many PB collectors away that they abandoned the experiment.
David,
I don't think they "spread out" the plate numbers. This was printed on the Huck 9 color press. There was only one plate per stamp. That's why the colors in the flag (where the red touches the blue) are often blurred. What you are seeing is two full and one partial plate. Each plate was only 4 stamps wide, so the cylinder had many plates on it to make a run. There is a plate number every 4th stamp because there is a new plate every 4th stamp.
Lars
I'm reading from the 1st post. Sorry if some of these got answered/corrected later and I missed it.
"...how to interpret how to determine the possible range of plate blocks?"
"how many plates fit on the cylinder"
"The one thing I do know about the Huck Press is that it shows joint lines."
""Unlike other rotary press coil stamps which have a gap between the printing plates yielding joint line pairs, the colored lines of ink on the Huck press printed stamps are not from a gap in the printing plates. These extra lines of ink are very common and have no extra value.""
"Scott says: "Huck Press printings often show portions of a joint line.""
"It makes me wonder why the plate block size is 20. Seems to me if each plate was actually independent, a plate block of 4 (or 8 to include the Mail Early and Zip Code) would seem more appropriate."
"and a zip block would be 4 stamps"
Great information, thanks!
If I was to entertain a crazy idea like trying to figure this out, is the record of plate installation and printing runs available somewhere?
Mike
I have no doubt that somebody somewhere has that information. But finding them is probably not a trivial task.
If nobody here has that info, I would suggest contacting the United States Stamp Society. They are the ones who publish the Durland catalog. Somebody there probably has it or knows how to get hold of the info.
I would guess the main problem you will run into is that although you can probably get a list of plate installation, it may not necessarily indicate which position that plate has on the cylinder. You not only need to know which plates were installed on a cylinder, but also which plates were adjacent to each other.
Best wishes on your endeavor.
k
Thanks.
Until I can find something more generic, I'm going to build up a set of possibilities by looking at actual plate blocks and just go from there. Since this press was only used for a few issues, I'm hoping that there aren't too many cases where the plates were removed and put back on in completely different sequences, so that if I see plate A is to the left of plate B that means I should not see plate B to the left of Plate A anywhere...but somehow I doubt I can make any conclusions like that.
Plate blocks of 4 or 8 make a lot more sense for this issue.
Mike
"I'm hoping that there aren't too many cases where the plates were removed and put back on in completely different sequences"
This is one (of the few areas) where the Durland hasn't been really helpful. It lists that the plate blocks can be collected in four different configurations, two with three plates numbers, two with two plate numbers. But it doesn't talk about how to determine which plates can appear on the block together.
I've googled about the Huck press but have had no real luck getting anything useful. Anyone know how the press worked or how to interpret how to determine the possible range of plate blocks?
re: Huck Press Plate Blocks (i.e. 1338D, 1338F)
I'm sorry, but my knowledge is limited. The one thing I do know about the Huck Press is that it shows joint lines. Looking at the plate block of 1338D below (Durland Sequence 2), it appears that the plates are only 5 stamps wide. I don't know how many plates fit on the cylinder, but if you knew the cylinder circumference it wouldn't be hard to determine.
From the 3 plate numbers in the example shown, 32113, 31846, and 31833, it looks like there were any number of combinations and you would only see 2 or 3 plate numbers on any single sheet of stamps you could buy at the post office. I would expect there were at least 7 other plates on the press when this particular strip was printed, but that is just a guess. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable can weigh in.
Lars
re: Huck Press Plate Blocks (i.e. 1338D, 1338F)
The only place I found that made mention of the joint lines (Scott Shaulis). He's talking about the coils, but I assume that the same would apply to the sheets. I also assume you meant plates 4 stamps wide.
"One other minor note. Some coil stamps shows partial lines of ink along the perforations. It looks like it should be a line pair. However, the Scott catalog doesn't list prices for line pairs on these coil issues. That's because these stamps were printed on the Huck press. Unlike other rotary press coil stamps which have a gap between the printing plates yielding joint line pairs, the colored lines of ink on the Huck press printed stamps are not from a gap in the printing plates. These extra lines of ink are very common and have no extra value."
http://www.shaulisstamps.com/tips/1338.htm
The only certainty is uncertainty...
re: Huck Press Plate Blocks (i.e. 1338D, 1338F)
And I found this image of a full sheet as well. Since the Durland does say that the plates were 80 subjects, it does make complete sense that the plates were 4 stamps wide (there would be another pane with the top block).
Another puzzle piece.
re: Huck Press Plate Blocks (i.e. 1338D, 1338F)
Yes, I meant 4 stamps wide, not 5. Sorry for the error.
As far as whether the line on sheet stamps (and coils) is really a joint line, I do not know for certain. However, for 1625, Scott says: "Huck Press printings often show portions of a joint line." I'll leave it to you to decide who to believe.
Lars
re: Huck Press Plate Blocks (i.e. 1338D, 1338F)
Lars,
The evidence so far supports your position - or in other words, I believe what you're saying. Thanks for helping me get closer to figuring this out.
It makes me wonder why the plate block size is 20. Seems to me if each plate was actually independent, a plate block of 4 (or 8 to include the Mail Early and Zip Code) would seem more appropriate.
Mike
re: Huck Press Plate Blocks (i.e. 1338D, 1338F)
Mike,
You make a valid point. I believe a plate block should be 4 stamps and a zip block would be 4stamps. My guess is that during that timeframe, many multi-colored stamps were printed with multiple plates and collectors were used to collecting most, if not all, of the selvage at the top or bottom for a "plate block".
Lars
re: Huck Press Plate Blocks (i.e. 1338D, 1338F)
the plate blocks increased in size during one of the USPS's misguided efforts to separate money from collectors and show each plate on a separate piece of selvage. With this flag/over, you can see how see how unnecessarily spread the plate numbers are. Accident? I think not. Carelessness? This lasted a couple of years and drove so many PB collectors away that they abandoned the experiment.
re: Huck Press Plate Blocks (i.e. 1338D, 1338F)
David,
I don't think they "spread out" the plate numbers. This was printed on the Huck 9 color press. There was only one plate per stamp. That's why the colors in the flag (where the red touches the blue) are often blurred. What you are seeing is two full and one partial plate. Each plate was only 4 stamps wide, so the cylinder had many plates on it to make a run. There is a plate number every 4th stamp because there is a new plate every 4th stamp.
Lars
re: Huck Press Plate Blocks (i.e. 1338D, 1338F)
I'm reading from the 1st post. Sorry if some of these got answered/corrected later and I missed it.
"...how to interpret how to determine the possible range of plate blocks?"
"how many plates fit on the cylinder"
"The one thing I do know about the Huck Press is that it shows joint lines."
""Unlike other rotary press coil stamps which have a gap between the printing plates yielding joint line pairs, the colored lines of ink on the Huck press printed stamps are not from a gap in the printing plates. These extra lines of ink are very common and have no extra value.""
"Scott says: "Huck Press printings often show portions of a joint line.""
re: Huck Press Plate Blocks (i.e. 1338D, 1338F)
"It makes me wonder why the plate block size is 20. Seems to me if each plate was actually independent, a plate block of 4 (or 8 to include the Mail Early and Zip Code) would seem more appropriate."
"and a zip block would be 4 stamps"
re: Huck Press Plate Blocks (i.e. 1338D, 1338F)
Great information, thanks!
If I was to entertain a crazy idea like trying to figure this out, is the record of plate installation and printing runs available somewhere?
Mike
re: Huck Press Plate Blocks (i.e. 1338D, 1338F)
I have no doubt that somebody somewhere has that information. But finding them is probably not a trivial task.
If nobody here has that info, I would suggest contacting the United States Stamp Society. They are the ones who publish the Durland catalog. Somebody there probably has it or knows how to get hold of the info.
I would guess the main problem you will run into is that although you can probably get a list of plate installation, it may not necessarily indicate which position that plate has on the cylinder. You not only need to know which plates were installed on a cylinder, but also which plates were adjacent to each other.
Best wishes on your endeavor.
k
re: Huck Press Plate Blocks (i.e. 1338D, 1338F)
Thanks.
Until I can find something more generic, I'm going to build up a set of possibilities by looking at actual plate blocks and just go from there. Since this press was only used for a few issues, I'm hoping that there aren't too many cases where the plates were removed and put back on in completely different sequences, so that if I see plate A is to the left of plate B that means I should not see plate B to the left of Plate A anywhere...but somehow I doubt I can make any conclusions like that.
Plate blocks of 4 or 8 make a lot more sense for this issue.
Mike
re: Huck Press Plate Blocks (i.e. 1338D, 1338F)
"I'm hoping that there aren't too many cases where the plates were removed and put back on in completely different sequences"