Flaws on Aust Kangaroo stamps? Help from the experts please!

david3461 · Post by **david3461** » 03 Aug 2020 19:11

Hi

FYI

This looks like a nice example of AR35. Might show the scratch a bit better than the current wiki example!

david3461 · Post by **david3461** » 03 Aug 2020 19:26

Also

This one is listed as BL8/5 which I have interpreted as BL47.

I have compared it to the example in the wiki, but I am not convinced that the small break in line 7 below the O of POSTAGE qualifies it to be BL47. Could I please have an expert opinion.

Many thanks
David

PhilipAdams · Post by **PhilipAdams** » 03 Aug 2020 20:35

david3461 wrote: ↑
03 Aug 2020 19:11
Hi

FYI

This looks like a nice example of AR35. Might show the scratch a bit better than the current wiki example!

I think you are right.

Hence, https://www.stampboards.com/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=87758&p=5718501#p5718501

Philip

PhilipAdams · Post by **PhilipAdams** » 03 Aug 2020 20:38

david3461 wrote: ↑
03 Aug 2020 19:26
Also

This one is listed as BL8/5 which I have interpreted as BL47.

I have compared it to the example in the wiki, but I am not convinced that the small break in line 7 below the O of POSTAGE qualifies it to be BL47. Could I please have an expert opinion.

Many thanks
David

No, but I'll give you my opinion instead.

The position is exactly right.

The break is small at the best of times, and by small I mean SMALL.

I think you are the proud owner of a BL47.

Philip

david3461 · Post by **david3461** » 04 Aug 2020 00:32

Thanks for the confirmation Philip. I think I am starting to get the hang of these 1d kangaroos

Having said that - what are your thoughts on this being a copy of CL16 - State 3

Cheers
David

PhilipAdams · Post by **PhilipAdams** » 04 Aug 2020 07:17

David I see where you're coming from.

"Shading above N of ONE: 0.5mm break in line 7, starting at 4.0mm from left frame" - Tick for First state.

plus
"Right border: small colour dot, 12.5mm above bottom frame" - Tick for second state.

plus
"Right outer frame: indentation adjacent to the red dot 12.5mm above the bottom frame" - No tick.

Early sign of an indentation, but if it were me, then that stamp gets filed away as second state CL16.

Philip

david3461 · Post by **david3461** » 05 Aug 2020 00:33

Thanks Philip - noted accordingly...

Also a close up of CL38 .....for the wiki maybe??

david3461 · Post by **david3461** » 05 Aug 2020 00:36

And maybe CL42 as well

PhilipAdams · Post by **PhilipAdams** » 05 Aug 2020 07:38

Thanks David,

Since you've posted them, then I'll include them in the WIKI.

In the WIKI, I've adopted the practice of one full-stamp image per flawed unit, without a close up of the specific flaw. This is to save time and effort so that I can move through the flaws a bit quicker.

Is this working for you? Or would it be better to have the full stamp and a close up? Note that you can download any of the full-stamp images (taken at 1200 dpi) to get more detail.

What do others think?

Philip

phoff · Post by **phoff** » 05 Aug 2020 08:10

Although it would be a new approach to add close-ups (for the "roo and KGV topics I follow - maybe others already do), if the close-up can be added side-by-side, that would be a good addition.
Adding them sequentially would not be helpful for looking through the posts, however.

And yes, it would be an added load on the moderator. To me, it would be up to you, Phillip, if you were willing to accept that additional responsibility.
Futher, this would make the 1d 'roo topic unique, which might have ramifications for moderators of other topics. A wider discussion among moderators may be appropriate.

Finally, what of the previous posts? Or posts of scans that are of not the best quality? How would you handle them?
This is kind of a Pandora's Box.

Kainnikanada · Post by **Kainnikanada** » 05 Aug 2020 08:34

Philip,

I agree with Pat. Enlargements are an asset. Uploading with the new board is 10x(plus) faster than the old Imgur/Photobucket arrangement. When you 'add files as attachments they're uploaded in sequence and have their original name appended. All features that aid in uploading. And I agree with Pat the new 'Addspace' button is a game saver.

It's beneficial to have a written commentary of the flaw but reading it slows one's browsing speed. Augment the text with enlargements because you need to identify states.

Take a look at the ½d Geo V wiki where Gutters has not included enlargements. That's the result of no one taking the time to cutout the flaws. My own library is cluttered with enlargements. If they're only a clip out of the original and appear smaller at least one knows the significant flaws for each cliche. One's eyes don't have to roam around the stamp trying to find each flaw.

Only one drawback to the additional work. From my experience I find few members actually compliment one for taking such effort to create and maintain these wikis. Only a handful are actually grateful and appreciative. Not bitter! .....just observant.

PhilipAdams · Post by **PhilipAdams** » 05 Aug 2020 14:19

Pat and Rod,

Thank you for your responses.

It looks as if additional close-up images would be useful.

(&[at]^%(&[at]#($^&&%%

Philip

Kainnikanada · Post by **Kainnikanada** » 05 Aug 2020 16:35

PhilipAdams wrote: ↑
05 Aug 2020 14:19
(&(at)^%(&(at)#($^&&%%

Did someone scramble then encode the letters of your word? ...or new symptoms of Covid-19?

PhilipAdams · Post by **PhilipAdams** » 05 Aug 2020 16:48

No,

That's my foolproof way of adding a space.

Philip

Pampstamp · Post by **Pampstamp** » 06 Aug 2020 00:44

The below is 1/ - 2nd Watermark Roo OS NSW.

The ACSC lists this as 31A ba, CV$475 for OS

My question is is there are premium for OS rather that OS NSW and is it scarcer?

: Roo 1/- 2nd wmk OS NSW

PhilipAdams · Post by **PhilipAdams** » 06 Aug 2020 06:38

Pampstamp,

I doubt whether there is an answer. Certainly, in my view, there is no definitive answer.

Have a look at the posts to this thread (there are probably others) to gauge for yourself.

https://www.stampboards.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=38919&start=50

Philip

Pampstamp · Post by **Pampstamp** » 06 Aug 2020 11:34

PhilipAdams wrote: ↑
06 Aug 2020 06:38
Pampstamp,

I doubt whether there is an answer. Certainly, in my view, there is no definitive answer.

Philip

Yes Phillip, I agree to some extent.

These are notoriously badly centered, and being a 2nd watermark even harder to get in decent condition.

How many in 1/- 2wmk NSW OS ( in what looks like the Bright Blue Green shade) exist is anybodies guess!

Cant be that many

langtounlad · Post by **langtounlad** » 06 Aug 2020 15:20

Pampstamp

There is an answer and it is in the ACSC - all you have to do is read the whole book and not just the values. It states "Stamps punctured by State Government Departments for official use do not rank as Commonwealth issues and we do not include these in this catalogue."

Regards
Frank

Pampstamp · Post by **Pampstamp** » 06 Aug 2020 15:56

langtounlad wrote: ↑
06 Aug 2020 15:20
Pampstamp

There is an answer and it is in the ACSC - all you have to do is read the whole book and not just the values. It states "Stamps punctured by State Government Departments for official use do not rank as Commonwealth issues and we do not include these in this catalogue."

Regards
Frank

Frank, I am fully aware of this as it is spelt out in the introduction

Your implication that people just look up values and ignore everything else is just wrong

They stopped using them in 1933! Probably printed millions upon millions!!

My question remains how scarce is it to Commonwealth OS in THIS particular stamp?

I feel it cant be that many

BUT impossible to determine!

josto · Post by **josto** » 06 Aug 2020 21:28

Hi!

here are my Kangaroo 1/- green 2nd wmk perf. OS to compare. I have two OS NSW and six OS examples. I was lucky to find most of them in an old collection housed in many glassines. Of course both are normally quite hard to find, but I can`t say which are scarcer! The problem with the OS NSW perfins is, that they are not catalogued and thus suffer demand. Of course, if they`d ever be catalogued, they would surely attract many more people!

Greetings

josto

david3461 · Post by **david3461** » 07 Aug 2020 15:17

Hi Philip et al

I have a couple of tricky ones for you!!

(1) This appears to be a copy of CR9 (with close up)

Your thoughts please ??

PhilipAdams · Post by **PhilipAdams** » 07 Aug 2020 18:35

David,

On your stamp, there is some disturbance to the shading line exactly where the CR9 break is located. But it is unclear whether it is coming directly from the plate, or is an inking flaw, or is some damage to the paper surface.

I'm going for "probably not" on this one. Certainly the break illustrated in the WIKI is more pronounced.

Philip

PhilipAdams · Post by **PhilipAdams** » 07 Aug 2020 20:27

The stamp below was purchased at a recent Phoenix auction.

It is a grey 2d CA monogram single - Third watermark, Die IIA - ACSC 8(3)za.

Of interest is the very noticeable break in the outer circle at around 9.00 o'clock.

I've not seen anything like this, but I have very little experience with Monograms.

Is this something that others have seen either on the Kangaroo or on other Australian monogram stamps?

.

Thanks,

Philip

langtounlad · Post by **langtounlad** » 07 Aug 2020 21:57

Philip
If you have the Hardy catalogue from Phoenix you will find one there on page 59 lot 255. Otherwise check the Phoenix website - they have past catalogues there. When you find the item I think you just click on the image to enlarge. Looks as if that was how the plate was made. Noticed this when I got the catalogue at Melbourne 2013 but as I do not collect these delicacies it went out of my mind until your post.

Will be responding to your email this weekend.

Regards
Frank

Pampstamp · Post by **Pampstamp** » 07 Aug 2020 23:50

PhilipAdams wrote: ↑
07 Aug 2020 20:27
The stamp below was purchased at a recent Phoenix auction.

It is a grey 2d CA monogram single - Third watermark, Die IIA - ACSC 8(3)za.

Of interest is the very noticeable break in the outer circle at around 9.00 o'clock.

I've not seen anything like this, but I have very little experience with Monograms.

Philip

Phillip

I have an interest in the Roo Monograms and any break on the circle is scarce.

Used examples of course are 100 times scarcer than mint

Which brings me to the infamous JBC stamp below!! The bottom of the outer ring is missing!!

At least I got a free Nip & Tuck after I showed the repairer the encouraging comments on an earlier thread

!!

: Roo 2d 8A zc

PhilipAdams · Post by **PhilipAdams** » 08 Aug 2020 07:35

langtounlad wrote: ↑
07 Aug 2020 21:57
Philip
If you have the Hardy catalogue from Phoenix you will find one there on page 59 lot 255. Otherwise check the Phoenix website - they have past catalogues there. When you find the item I think you just click on the image to enlarge. Looks as if that was how the plate was made. Noticed this when I got the catalogue at Melbourne 2013 but as I do not collect these delicacies it went out of my mind until your post.

Will be responding to your email this weekend.

Regards
Frank

Excellent advice Frank, thank you.

Have now done a little bit of research on the Cooke round control monograms that are inserted into the upper plate of the Third watermark 2d (Die IIA).

Prior to around the middle of 1915 all the upper plates used by Cooke had no control monograms. Subsequently, all upper plates had them. Upper plate control monograms can be distinguished because the marginal line is always cut away to allow the insertion of the control.

This applies to the CA and the JBC monograms shown by me and Pampstamps.

Another characteristic of the monograms on the 2d Die IIA plate (which is an upper plate) is the break (CA) and the shaved bottom (JBC).

Here are the blocks referred to be Frank from the Stuart Hardy auction held by Phoenix. The cut away of the marginal line, the break in the CA monogram and the shaved bottom of the JBC monogram can be clearly seen.

.

.

.
Philip

PS. This is the type of thing that might have been discussed elsewhere on the Board. I did look, but could not find anything.

david3461 · Post by **david3461** » 08 Aug 2020 08:56

Thanks Philip - I thought that might be the case.

However, the second one I have might get you thinking.....

This one is also listed as CR9 and I think looks a lot closer to the mark

HOWEVER - this stamp is attached to what should be CR10. BUT, neither of the flaws listed in the wiki for CR10 are present on this stamp..........!! Any ideas??

Cheers
David

PhilipAdams · Post by **PhilipAdams** » 08 Aug 2020 14:48

David,

At the best of times the CR9 break is small.

Again, you have early evidence of a break starting at the right spot. However, as you point out, there are no flaw markers on the right hand stamp that are consistent with what we know about CR10.

As the lawyers would say, "the evidence is far from compelling".

Philip

david3461 · Post by **david3461** » 09 Aug 2020 00:30

Thanks for your input Philip - much appreciated.

Here, I have attached three cut down scans of CR12 showing the listed flaws and also the unlisted flaw above Cape Londonderry. I have also highlighted a disturbance in shade line 11 below AU of AUSTRALIA that may also be an unlisted flaw. Do you agree??

Thanks David

josto · Post by **josto** » 09 Aug 2020 01:19

Hi!

I just won this little lot on ebay or 6£ including shipping costs and am now waiting for it to arrive soon. The scan is not the best, but the lower stamp of the vertical pair of the 1d red die I kangaroos seems to be ACSC (2A)h "Retouch under "Y" of "PENNY" (and frame break under "N" of "PENNY" pos. AR51 with cat. value of 100AU$ used. Can anyone confirm this variety?

Thanks a lot

david3461 · Post by **david3461** » 09 Aug 2020 01:29

Hi Josto

If you have a look in the 1d kangaroo wiki put together by Philip Adams you will find an excellent example for you to compare to

Cheers David

https://stampboards.com/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=87758&start=50

josto · Post by **josto** » 09 Aug 2020 01:48

Hi David,

a quite good match to Philips OS example! A nice buy I think.

Greetings

PhilipAdams · Post by **PhilipAdams** » 09 Aug 2020 07:52

david3461 wrote: ↑
09 Aug 2020 00:30
Thanks for your input Philip - much appreciated.

Here, I have attached three cut down scans of CR12 showing the listed flaws and also the unlisted flaw above Cape Londonderry. I have also highlighted a disturbance in shade line 11 below AU of AUSTRALIA that may also be an unlisted flaw. Do you agree??

Thanks David

David,

ABP's full description of the CR12 flaws:

(a) Upper frame: break or notch in frame above I of AUSTRALIA, 3.5mm from right frame.
(b) Shading above last A of AUSTRALIA: break in lines 1 and 2, 2.5mm from right frame.
(c) Shading above Cape Londonderry: beaks in (i) lines 8 and 9 at 4.5mm; (ii) lines 11 and 12 at 3.25mm; (iii) lines 1 and 2 over point of Cape, 6.75mm. All measurements from left frame.

So as nearly always, ABP have it covered.

Philip

david3461 · Post by **david3461** » 09 Aug 2020 23:25

Thanks Philip - and ABP for the extra info

Pampstamp · Post by **Pampstamp** » 09 Aug 2020 23:39

The below pair- 2/ Roo in 3rd watermark OS stood out !!

I think it is the ACSC listed 37I Brownish-Grey(os)? Can anyone confirm?

: Roo 2/ os Brownish -Grey

david3461 · Post by **david3461** » 09 Aug 2020 23:42

I hope you can help me with this one.

I guess it is either CR21 or CR22 - but I am thinking CR21 because of the location of the flaw off the east coast. I have looked at the examples in the wiki and I am still not sure where it fits as it doesn't actually match. Are there any other identifying marks that I am missing and/or are there different states.....??

Thanks for looking
David

Pampstamp · Post by **Pampstamp** » 10 Aug 2020 23:44

Could not find this flaw in the ACSC or Wiki

The stamp is SMW. Anyone else have it?

: Roo 1/ Coast Break of Broome SMW

Lesley · Post by **Lesley** » 11 Aug 2020 16:27

Help required with this pair ½d.The left stamp has damage above S and damaged T in AUSTRALIA. Water mark centraland to the left.

: ½d

Thanks,

Les

The Pom · Post by **The Pom** » 11 Aug 2020 22:40

Lesley wrote: ↑
11 Aug 2020 16:27
Help required with this pair ½d.The left stamp has damage above S and damaged T in AUSTRALIA. Water mark central and to the left.

Thanks,

Les

2L13 "Defective ST of AUSTRALIA" CV $50.

PhilipAdams · Post by **PhilipAdams** » 12 Aug 2020 10:29

Pampstamp wrote: ↑
09 Aug 2020 23:39
The below pair- 2/ Roo in 3rd watermark OS stood out !!

I think it is the ACSC listed 37I Brownish-Grey(os)? Can anyone confirm?

Pampstamp,

The ACSC lists a number of shades for the third watermark brown, including "Greyish-Brown (shades)" and "Brownish-Grey (punctured OS only)".

Your stamps are punctured OS, but I don't think it is possible for anyone viewing the stamps electronically to tell whether they have a greyish, or brownish, or greyish-brown or browish-grey ....

Philip

PhilipAdams · Post by **PhilipAdams** » 12 Aug 2020 10:38

david3461 wrote: ↑
09 Aug 2020 23:42
I hope you can help me with this one.

I guess it is either CR21 or CR22 - but I am thinking CR21 because of the location of the flaw off the east coast. I have looked at the examples in the wiki and I am still not sure where it fits as it doesn't actually match. Are there any other identifying marks that I am missing and/or are there different states.....??

Thanks for looking
David

David,

Looking at the pictures in Adams, Bell and Pope it would seem that if we concentrate only on the flaw in the Bight:

CR20 - the flaw is very weak;
CR21 - the flaw is visible, but has a step pattern;
CR22 - the flaw is strong and straight from the top of the value circle to the SA coast.

It would seem, therefore, that you have CR21, and a nice example.

Philip

david3461 · Post by **david3461** » 13 Aug 2020 23:08

Thanks Philip for the confirmation of CR21

And here is my copy of DL20

Cheers

Pampstamp · Post by **Pampstamp** » 14 Aug 2020 22:54

I have another contestant for the Roo 2½d third wmk offset variety in used!!

Any opinions on this one, and by not being listed in the ACSC as used it may not exist.

: Roo 2½d Blue 3rd wmk - offset

GUTTERS · Post by **GUTTERS** » 15 Aug 2020 01:16

I think you will find that your offset is a bleed through were the ink has come through from the other side of the stamp you will note the top curve of the heavy post mark has also come through

PhilipAdams · Post by **PhilipAdams** » 15 Aug 2020 16:51

david3461 wrote: ↑
13 Aug 2020 23:08
Thanks Philip for the confirmation of CR21

And here is my copy of DL20

Cheers

Nice David.

Straight to the WIKI it goes. Hence https://www.stampboards.com/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=87758&p=6765988#p6765988

Philip

PhilipAdams · Post by **PhilipAdams** » 15 Aug 2020 16:56

GUTTERS wrote: ↑
15 Aug 2020 01:16

I think you will find that your offset is a bleed through were the ink has come through from the other side of the stamp you will note the top curve of the heavy post mark has also come through

Ink bleeding versus offset has been discussed a number of times.

You might find the posts starting with the following useful (I did).

https://www.stampboards.com/viewtopic.php?p=2067146#p2067146

Philip

Kainnikanada · Post by **Kainnikanada** » 15 Aug 2020 22:58

PhilipAdams wrote: ↑
15 Aug 2020 16:56
I think you will find that your offset is a bleed through were the ink has come through from the other side of the stamp you will note the top curve of the heavy post mark has also come through
Philip

Philip,
One doesn't need to consult former posts for an answer.

I'd be holding the stamp before a strong/bright light source. If the perceived/apparent offset matched the face it would be ink bleed; if no agreement then it might be an offset.

Pampstamp · Post by **Pampstamp** » 15 Aug 2020 23:26

Kainnikanada wrote: ↑
15 Aug 2020 22:58

PhilipAdams wrote: ↑
15 Aug 2020 16:56
I think you will find that your offset is a bleed through were the ink has come through from the other side of the stamp you will note the top curve of the heavy post mark has also come through
Philip
Philip,
One doesn't need to consult former posts for an answer.

I'd be holding the stamp before a strong/bright light source. If the perceived/apparent offset matched the face it would be ink bleed; if no agreement then it might be an offset.

Tried the bright light

It doesn't seem to match?

Kainnikanada · Post by **Kainnikanada** » 15 Aug 2020 23:32

Pampstamp wrote: ↑
15 Aug 2020 23:26
It doesn't seem to match?

Are you confident? If I align the top of the stamp's outer frame with the perf tips on both images they seem to be identically positioned - ergo it's the same image front and back.

Pampstamp · Post by **Pampstamp** » 15 Aug 2020 23:39

Kainnikanada wrote: ↑
15 Aug 2020 23:32

Pampstamp wrote: ↑
15 Aug 2020 23:26
It doesn't seem to match?
Are you confident? If I align the top of the stamp's outer frame with the perf tips on both images they seem to be identically positioned - ergo it's the same image front and back.

Not really confident!
Its hard to tell with the naked eye with the light- It seemed out - but it could be my eyes!!