The confusion about whether we deal here with chalky paper?

Topics about Argentina Philately in english language.

Moderador: Rein

Avatar de Usuario
Rein
Usuario Colaborador
Usuario Colaborador
Mensajes: 6258
Registrado: 13 Mar 2009 15:59
Ubicación: Leiden, Netherlands
Contactar:

The confusion about whether we deal here with chalky paper?

Mensaje por Rein »

60022Mallard escribió:Hello.

I am a collector of BMA Malaya stamps so the question of chalky and ordinary paper is of considerable interest.

I find it can be very annoying to look closely at chalky BMA stamps and find the tell tale black mark! To my mind it reduces its value considerably.

I am a follower of the observation test. I use a Ruper pocket lens. The one I have is a 10x and 20x. Looking on the web it seems to be their 5124 model, and not particularly cheap, but is readily portable to take to stamp fairs etc. such that you can often buy chalky at ordinary paper stamp prices and not purchase "chalky" stamps just on the say so of the vendor.

Using the 20x magnification you have to hold the stamp very close to the lens for it to be in focus. By looking closely at the white areas to the left and right at the bottom of the vignette you can clearly see the paper surface.

Look at the 5c brown as a guide. It is only printed on chalky paper which is smooth with blow holes which gives rise to "the surface of the moon". On ordinary or substitute paper you can clearly see the strands in the paper, sometimes with the "odd blow hole". After a little practice I feel sure you will be 90% sure one way or the other.

Note that cheap 20x, and more, magnification loupes do not produce this clear view of the paper. It seems to be the magnification and very short focal length which works for the Ruper.

I have yet to carry out a satisfactory silver test on the green 50c stamp. The surface of the moon impression is particularly strong on some of these stamps. I find about 50/50 which makes Gibbons valuation difficult to believe.

Some catalogues suggest that the thin striated paper stamps are "chalky" but in view of their price I would not want to silver test them. Hold them at an angle to the light looking from the side and the "lines" should be fairly readily visible or hold them up to a strong light or put them face down on a matt black surface where you can often clearly see the watermarks in the thin paper. They also have off white gums.

While mentioning the BMA Malaya stamps it is well worth examining your 10, 25 and 50c stamps under a UV detector.

In the 10c stamps, if I remember correctly, being away from home at the moment, you will find some where the head changes colour and some where the whole stamp changes colour. This I think tends to correspond with those used ones which when soaked off show purple on the back of the head area only or the whole stamp. On the 25c on one variety the head changes colour. On the 50c stamps look at the red BMA overprint, on many the red will stand out. This occurs on both surface of the moon and ordinary paper stamps.

The best reference source I know of for BMA Malaya stamps is a Gibbons Stamp Monthly article by the Rev. W. G. Cameron dating back to 1950. It is not infallible but better than anything in a catalogue that I know of. It makes a lot of sense on the varieties in colour of the 10c, where Gibbons does not seem to acknowledge the "reddish purple" stamps, and many other areas.

It used to be free on Gibbons website but believe you now need to subscribe to Gibbons on line to access it.

Happy collecting.
It started again from here more or less [in Stampboards]! The "surface of the moon" was so familiar to me!

to be continued ...
Avatar de Usuario
Rein
Usuario Colaborador
Usuario Colaborador
Mensajes: 6258
Registrado: 13 Mar 2009 15:59
Ubicación: Leiden, Netherlands
Contactar:

Re: The confusion about whether we deal here with chalky pap

Mensaje por Rein »

Rein escribió:
60022Mallard escribió:Hello.

I am a collector of BMA Malaya stamps so the question of chalky and ordinary paper is of considerable interest.

I find it can be very annoying to look closely at chalky BMA stamps and find the tell tale black mark! To my mind it reduces its value considerably.
--------

Using the 20x magnification you have to hold the stamp very close to the lens for it to be in focus. By looking closely at the white areas to the left and right at the bottom of the vignette you can clearly see the paper surface.

Look at the 5c brown as a guide. It is only printed on chalky paper which is smooth with blow holes which gives rise to "the surface of the moon". On ordinary or substitute paper you can clearly see the strands in the paper, sometimes with the "odd blow hole". After a little practice I feel sure you will be 90% sure one way or the other.
-----

Happy collecting.
http://www.stampboards.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=22290
Rein escribió:Stamps of the Federated Malay States issued in 1907 had been printed in typography on coated paper - chalky paper as the English used to say - that shows exactly the same type of pockmarks as the Argentine stamps on coated Zárate paper in the period 1966-1967:


Imagen
Imagen
Imagen

Welcome to the Moon!

groetjes, Rein
Avatar de Usuario
Rein
Usuario Colaborador
Usuario Colaborador
Mensajes: 6258
Registrado: 13 Mar 2009 15:59
Ubicación: Leiden, Netherlands
Contactar:

Re: The confusion about whether we deal here with chalky pap

Mensaje por Rein »

60022Mallard escribió:Congratulations Rein.

Your second picture probably adds more to helping identify "chalky" paper visually by looking at the plain paper areas than many words can.
Avatar de Usuario
Rein
Usuario Colaborador
Usuario Colaborador
Mensajes: 6258
Registrado: 13 Mar 2009 15:59
Ubicación: Leiden, Netherlands
Contactar:

Re: The confusion about whether we deal here with chalky pap

Mensaje por Rein »

Rog escribió:Yes I just did in fact as I was going through some GVI. I remembered this thread so thought I would report back.

So, two GVI Leeward Islands definitives 1938 shown here - both 3d orange. The chalk surfaced one is on the left, the ordinary paper is on the right. I can see the slight difference with the naked eye, chalk surfaced is just a better quality.

So blown up this becomes more apparent. The chalks have better surface coverage, cleaner lines and little in the way of fibre or weak spots. In the lower image it can be clearly seen that the dots in the design are better defined on the chalk (left) and again the edges are sharper.

I think the ordinary paper soaks up the ink more which accounts for the blotchy-ness if that's a word.

As well, if you look closely at the top image and the perforations (especially the middle perf on the left stamp), you can make out the coating, which is not apparent on the ordinary paper perfs.

This is just a basic usb microscope for PCs I picked up on eBay a while back, does the trick :)

Imagen

Imagen
Rog escribió:Hi again. It's been pointed out to me that I might have (read probably) misidentified a couple of stamps on my blog. I was thinking I had figured it out !

So, can anyone help point me in the right direction. It's these two stamps :

Imagen

Imagen

In the close up, the left stamp remains on the left.

Anyone see enough to be able to tell what paper these are please ?

Cheers :)
Rog
Avatar de Usuario
Rein
Usuario Colaborador
Usuario Colaborador
Mensajes: 6258
Registrado: 13 Mar 2009 15:59
Ubicación: Leiden, Netherlands
Contactar:

Re: The confusion about whether we deal here with chalky pap

Mensaje por Rein »

Rein escribió:http://www.murraypayne.com/vPages.asp?vpagesid=Papers
Recently, Myles Glazer has published articles which state that the silver test reaction is nothing whatsoever to do with chalk in the surfacing of the paper. John Hereford published a response to this in Geosix, holding that the mark left by the silver test is actually caused by tarnish, and that the chalk which is reacting with the tarnish is in the form of chalk powder residue on the surface of the stamp rather than chalk present in the coating. These excellent contributions to the debate approach the problem from a scientific viewpoint; we need to consider where this leaves the collector, dealer and catalogue-editor!

To reiterate, the traditional view is that reaction to the silver test equates with chalk-surfaced paper; a lack of reaction with ordinary (or 'substitute') paper. There have been calls for the term 'chalky' to be removed from the Gibbons and Commonwealth catalogues, on the grounds that the test is unreliable and destructive. What I propose is that we continue to use the terms, partly to save the countless hours which could be sacrificed by collectors in re-writing descriptions, but also because the terms are (by now) pretty much part of the philatelic furniture. I suggest that the catalogues incorporate in their introductions new definitions of paper-surfacing and suggest methods of distinguishing between them. A phrase such as 'the paper-surfacing traditionally known as chalky….' will, I hope, go some way towards mollifying the radicals!

So, the silver test is unreliable and should be discouraged. Let us then consider alternative methods of distinguishing paper. Our late Japanese friend pointed out that pitting is a characteristic of chalky paper. This is true; take a look at an early printing (prior to 1943) of the KG VI Bermuda 12/6d with a good magnifying glass. There are masses of small holes in the surface, which are caused by the escape of air trapped under the surfacing. This does not occur with ordinary paper. This is very useful in identification, but be aware that with some issues the holes are almost invisible (as with some of the Malayan States).
The unreliability of the silver test was pointed out by me in my posting of 06.04.2010 [!] and the pitted surface I had in my posting of 19.03.2013!

Imagen
Imagen

Imagen

groetjes, Rein
Avatar de Usuario
Rein
Usuario Colaborador
Usuario Colaborador
Mensajes: 6258
Registrado: 13 Mar 2009 15:59
Ubicación: Leiden, Netherlands
Contactar:

Re: The confusion about whether we deal here with chalky pap

Mensaje por Rein »

Rein escribió:
setemmy escribió:>Andrew,
If you look at the copies from Straits/BMA 5c & 12c they are only available in chalky paper (so says the ISC catalogue) the outer frame line should look solid whether they are mint or used.
If you look at the 50c - $5 purple&orange (all ordinary paper) the lines will look mouldy with tiny white specs all over, mint or used.

Sorry for the poor scan but here it is.
Imagen


Imagen
2nd right is chalky paper
Seeing your scan my first reaction is: all are on coated paper!!! I.e all are chalky!

I haven't looked at my Malayan stamps for a long time, and using the 25th edition of the ISC catalogue, the information about chalky paper is mentioned rather haphazardly it seems to me....

Just a quick look - not studying yet all I have - and I got the impression that most stamps in typography in the 1935-1957 period are on coated paper! Most of them have plenty of the tiny holes I have shown here before!

The 1941 issued 3c green or 8c scarlet are among the exceptions - uncoated paper! Although not all of them!

I have NO problems at all telling uncoated from coated - just be looking at them! The shine is enough and the uncoated paper often has a "hairy" surface! Among the uncoated stamps - in particular when mint - we see a very fade shine due to calendering. Individual fibers at the front of stamp often are a bit shiny where their background does not .....

Judging from my quick experience with the Malayan stamps I reckon to have no problems with other Commonwealth stamps either!

groetjes, Rein
Avatar de Usuario
Rein
Usuario Colaborador
Usuario Colaborador
Mensajes: 6258
Registrado: 13 Mar 2009 15:59
Ubicación: Leiden, Netherlands
Contactar:

Re: The confusion about whether we deal here with chalky pap

Mensaje por Rein »

A few examples, although the scans do not yet grab the "hairs" I wanted to!

And do pay attention to the double plates shift! Two plates were used for green!

Imagen

The 2c is coated with plenty of pits!

Imagen

Imagen

The 3c is UNcoated! Like many other 1941 2c orange, 3c green and 8c scarlet...

Imagen

Imagen

groetjes, Rein
Avatar de Usuario
Rein
Usuario Colaborador
Usuario Colaborador
Mensajes: 6258
Registrado: 13 Mar 2009 15:59
Ubicación: Leiden, Netherlands
Contactar:

Re: The confusion about whether we deal here with chalky pap

Mensaje por Rein »

Some Straits Settlements on COATED paper:

And do pay attention to the double plates shift! Two plates were used in both cases!

Imagen

Both stamps are coated with plenty of pits!

Imagen

Imagen

Imagen

Imagen

groetjes, Rein
Avatar de Usuario
Rein
Usuario Colaborador
Usuario Colaborador
Mensajes: 6258
Registrado: 13 Mar 2009 15:59
Ubicación: Leiden, Netherlands
Contactar:

Re: The confusion about whether we deal here with chalky pap

Mensaje por Rein »

The ISC Catalogue does mention some BMA stamps with ordinary paper only like the $1 and 2$.

How come I do only have them on coated paper????

Somehow it seems that the whole subject of chalky paper was/is a big mess!

to be continued ....
Avatar de Usuario
Rein
Usuario Colaborador
Usuario Colaborador
Mensajes: 6258
Registrado: 13 Mar 2009 15:59
Ubicación: Leiden, Netherlands
Contactar:

Re: The confusion about whether we deal here with chalky pap

Mensaje por Rein »

The mess is understandable mainly due to this silver test confusion! We still see a lot of stamps ruined by it!

In the early days the layer [or coating] was rather thick and when applied the beverage must have been quite hot resulting in lots of puffing holes in the surface of the coating.

In the Argentina context I referred to it as TV or tizado varioloso [pock marked coating]. We can see degrees of TV were the holes were so numerous [TV 3] to hardly any hole [TV 1].

The variation also occurs in the coatings of the papers De La Rue used for typographed stamps...

However, already by 1939 - or may be earlier - the technique of applying coatings to stamp paper had improved a lot. The coating could be awfully thin! And even applied on thin paper it self!

The Argentina 1939 5c Moreno and 10c Rivadavia stamps had a coating - still rather crackled - that bore no ressemblance to the coatings of the previous decades... It is this type of coating we see in the BMA stamps!

The 1951 "tizado delgado" [thin coating] for Argentina stamps still are referred to as "satinado" [calendered] as the philatelists refused to believe that the paper manufacturer [Wiggins Teape!] was capable of manufacturing such type of coated paper!

Imagen
Imagen
Imagen
Imagen

to be continued ....
Avatar de Usuario
Rein
Usuario Colaborador
Usuario Colaborador
Mensajes: 6258
Registrado: 13 Mar 2009 15:59
Ubicación: Leiden, Netherlands
Contactar:

Re: The confusion about whether we deal here with chalky pap

Mensaje por Rein »

Imagen
Imagen
Imagen
Imagen

We can see here clearly the TV3 for the $1!

The total impression of this typographed stamp does somehow remind me of offset-litho! No contour-edges! In that respect the two BMA stamps are more like typography!

Imagen

to be continued ....
Avatar de Usuario
Rein
Usuario Colaborador
Usuario Colaborador
Mensajes: 6258
Registrado: 13 Mar 2009 15:59
Ubicación: Leiden, Netherlands
Contactar:

Re: The confusion about whether we deal here with chalky pap

Mensaje por Rein »

To make the confusion even worse! Look at some of the 1935 values as well!

At the left a typical typographed stamp! At the right a stamp that could have been printed in offset-litho! Look at the grain in the solid prints left of the "M" and in the palm tree branches! Representing the rubber offset cylinders !?!?!

And also remember that in the 1930-ies the process of "dry offset" or "letterset" was introduced... A indirect typography process using rubber offset cylinders.

Imagen
Imagen
Imagen

The right stamp has TV3!

to be continued ...
Avatar de Usuario
Rein
Usuario Colaborador
Usuario Colaborador
Mensajes: 6258
Registrado: 13 Mar 2009 15:59
Ubicación: Leiden, Netherlands
Contactar:

Re: The confusion about whether we deal here with chalky pap

Mensaje por Rein »

Reading the Stanley Gibbons Commonwealth catalogue as well, I now get the idea that the so-called "ordinary paper" is a mix between a really ordinary paper [used among others in 1941 when the DLR printing house could not do their job due to wartime damages and other printing houses like Harrison and Sons, Bradbury Wilkinson and Williams Lea took over] and a type of coated paper as used for the BMA 8c Scarlet, $1 and $2! The latter stamps as I showed here ressembling a lot more the typography we were used to!

The referring to "ordinary paper" for the above BMA stamps is a serious mistake made by all catalogues [ISC, S.G.] and confused the philatelists for a long time now....

How come serious philatelists have not seen this before or asked questions???

to be continued ....
Avatar de Usuario
Rein
Usuario Colaborador
Usuario Colaborador
Mensajes: 6258
Registrado: 13 Mar 2009 15:59
Ubicación: Leiden, Netherlands
Contactar:

Re: The confusion about whether we deal here with chalky pap

Mensaje por Rein »

I am aware of the fact that this thread turns into one about Malaya stamps! But it is still about the so-called chalky paper used by De la Rue for typography!

I do have quite some Malaya stamps and hardly any Leeward Isl. or Hongkong stamps as otherwise I would have shown here the same aspects! I believe we are dealing there with the same problem!

I will use the term "indirect typography" when the traditionally known features of typography are NOT present or very vaguely due to the smoothening of the rubber offset cylinder! I know this is MY hypothesis!

Should anyone have hard proof that I am wrong!? Please tell me and show me why!

Imagen

indirect typo with even some aspects of screens; coated paper with pits - the BMA is direct typo !!!:

Imagen
Imagen

direct typo; coated paper with no or hardly any pit; called by most "ordinary paper":

Imagen
Imagen


to be continued ...
Avatar de Usuario
Rein
Usuario Colaborador
Usuario Colaborador
Mensajes: 6258
Registrado: 13 Mar 2009 15:59
Ubicación: Leiden, Netherlands
Contactar:

Re: The confusion about whether we deal here with chalky pap

Mensaje por Rein »

Imagen

indirect typo; coated paper:

Imagen
Imagen

direct typo; coated paper with no or hardly any pit; called by most "ordinary paper":

Imagen
Imagen

to be continued ...
Responder

Volver a “Argentina Philately in the language of Shakespeare”