Foro de Filatelia Argentina

jorgec escribió:In this case, it is rarer in unused, than used condition. It is still scarce in used condition as well, but not that much (I believe I have it on cover).

Found one of those covers. See this thread: viewtopic.php?f=136&t=3884

Jorgec escribió:
Hmm, but most of these are varieties (M..M), or un-catalogued (the different papers) types. We can't mix the rarity of these "varieties" with the main types, otherwise we should also mention double and inverted overprints, in which case, of course, that there would be some quite rare items.

Main types include different types of paper although catalogues may not want to recgonize them. Types of paper are regular, chronologically often, versions of a particular stamp and the "rules" of scarcity apply to them just as well. The same goes for several other reflections of changes in the way stamps got produced - printing processses, types of perforation, etc...

Double or inverted overprints are monstruosities that escaped destruction in the Printing Works like double or askew perforations, etc.... They have NO philatelic value, they are only worth the money a fool is wanting to pay for it... They are circus attractions like a sheep with five legs or a 3-breasted woman...

The word "variety" is a connotation that belongs to the entertainment industry - the above circus is - and NOT to philately. Some may think their collection as a freak show may be the ultimate goal, I do not think so. And as you have already noticed, I do not oblige to most expectations ....


rc2192

Rein escribió:Main types include different types of paper although catalogues may not want to recgonize them. Types of paper are regular, chronologically often, versions of a particular stamp and the "rules" of scarcity apply to them just as well.

Disregarding how much agree with that or not, it is not relevant in the context we are talking.

We are talking here about overprint forgeries. About how rare, or not, are those overprints and then why the forger bothered. And about how those (forged) overprints are valued in the catalogs.

I suppose you agree with me that the forgers of these overprints didn't care, and probably had no idea whatsoever, about the (modern) sub-division of papers. It might change, eventually, of course.

Double or inverted overprints are monstruosities that escaped destruction in the Printing Works like double or askew perforations, etc.... They have NO philatelic value, ... - the above circus is - and NOT to philately.

Rein. It is perfectly fine if you don't like and don't value such things as inverted overprints. But please, don't tell me and many others that do collect those errors, that our collection is full of monstrosities and it is a circus. We respect your philatelic interest, please respect ours.

Jorgec escribió: Rein. It is perfectly fine if you don't like and don't value such things as inverted overprints. But please, don't tell me and many others that do collect those errors, that our collection is full of monstrosities and it is a circus. We respect your philatelic interest, please respect ours.

Jorge,

I do respect your liking of monstruosities and going to a circus! All I am saying that this has nothing to do with philately! You can like or collect whatever you want.

Jorgec escribió:
I suppose you agree with me that the forgers of these overprints didn't care, and probably had no idea whatsoever, about the (modern) sub-division of papers. It might change, eventually, of course.

I am not worried about forgerers not giving a damn about types of paper; it is the laziness or complacency of modern philatelists and stamp dealers who do not care so much about types of paper anymore...

Why a "modern" sub-division of papers??? Our ancestors did know how to distinguish German and Italian honeycomb watermarks, but after World War I nothing .... Or maybe the philatelists were active and the stamp dealers so passive, lethargic that nothing reached the catalogues..... During the 1923-1935 period so many different papers and watermarks! Most of them multiple Sun + AЯ.

Where are they?

Hi Rein of these stamps can you bring me some comment, thanks for your information
Best regards
Normando

Normando,

the resolution you use is not high enough ! 1200dpi or more!

The 4 ministerials seem OK, the characters are all serifed [perfilados] and the watermark is parallel just as it should. What made you worried?

The other 3 are later printing, the 3rd a rayado vertical [1950 or later].

But in order to tell more I need higher resolution scans and even then ....

Rein I post in 1250 dpi, are the four ministerial; what interests me? is to know what kind of paper is....,Iexpected to be well in this resolution, thanks
Regards
Normando

Normando,

it is what I had expected! So-called Primera Tirada or Granulado Horizontal [in the book of Dario Bardi: MI1]

A parallel watermark with the line of AЯ running parallel to the direction of paper [or in this case the rhombos that give a granular impression and are all standing]:

♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦

Hi Rein here are the other three Sarmiento 1 cts at 1560 ppp; tks
Regards
Normando

Normando escribió:Hi Rein here are the other three Sarmiento 1 cts at 1560 ppp; tks
Regards
Normando

Normando,

the 3rd - at the right - is what I thought it was as well - parallel watermark + asymmetrical mesh or in Bardi's terms: rayado vertical [the horizontal lines vs the vertically running line of AЯ] or MI5

Do not confuse MI5 with the great British Spies!

For the other 2 stamps I would rather see the entire stamp ! Likely to be Zárate!

Rein Thanks for your time, then that label in particular is interesting, more than others ¿?
Normando

Normando escribió:Rein Thanks for your time, then that label in particular is interesting, more than others ¿?
Normando

Normando,

have a look at the other Ministerials of the 1c and 2c PyR I :

viewtopic.php?f=137&t=3839

Hi Rein I found these three Sarmiento 1 cts , cand you tell news of them, tks
Regards
Normando