Detailed look at my German Inflation era Postage Stamps

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 13 Jul 2020 19:14

Thanks maptrekker.

Some of the bar aberrations can be ascribed to particular OPDs. I will see what I come up with.

Just thought it might be enlightening to view the very many printing problems seen when one has accumulated examples of the inflation stamps. I scanned the stamps in an attempt to re organise them. Next is to get them in better order.

John

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 14 Jul 2020 05:30

Some more basket issue printing issues.

: Double perforation on Mi. 303AP

: Mis perforation Mi.304A

: Mi.304A with notched on ´1`

: Mi.317A with tip of ´5`missing

: Mi.318A ink spot and damaged ´O`

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 14 Jul 2020 05:33

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 14 Jul 2020 05:37

: Mi.333P Large OP shift

: Mi.333P Warped bars

: Mi.333P Broken tip of ´5`

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 14 Jul 2020 05:39

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 14 Jul 2020 05:44

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 14 Jul 2020 05:52

: Mi 337 examples of errors

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 28 Jul 2020 19:48

Just ´discovered`my album containing the HAN (job numbers on pairs).

This can be an interesting area to collect and achieving a complete series of the high inflation period for mint stamps is not too difficult.

Only a few with printing errors are ranked as having a higher CV but in the main, the mint versions are reasonable and plentiful. Of course genuinely used examples are rare and hence expensive (I admire those who obtained and used these HANS to post).

Here is the Michel table for Mi 313 to Mi. 330 (rosette basket lids issues) and the table for Mi. 333 to Mi. 337.

The pricing are out if date (the Cvs are from older English version of Michel specialised) and I would add about 10% to the ones shown).

: Michel table for HAN for Mi 313 to 330 (rosette basket lids issues).

: Michel table for HAN for Mi 333 to 337 (rosette basket lids issues).

Here are two pages showing spread I have.

Note that there is no reported HAN for Mi.315 and Mi.320, so I have a ´set`for HANs for 313 to 330 though of course I have not shown (or own) all variants in HAN numbering and some serrated (B) HANs.

I am missing Mi.333 HAN and Mi.337 (I will look elsewhere for these).

: HAN for Mi. 313 to Mi. 324.

: HAN for Mi. 325 to Mi. 330 and Mi.333 to Mi.336. Plus Mi.84 Official Hans.

Some enlargements next.

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 28 Jul 2020 20:19

Enlargement 1. Mi.313 A P HAN H 5582.23 /H 5582.23 (in brown).

: Mi.313 A P HAN H 5582.23 /H 5582.23

Enlargement 2. Mi.314 A P HANs, H 5686.23

: Mi.314 A P HANs, H 5686 23 and H 5686 . 23

Note the messy right upper corner horn.

: Messy horn on Mi.324 HAN

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 29 Jul 2020 01:47

Enlargement 3. Mi.316 A P HAN, H 5886.23

: Mi.316 A P HAN, H 5886.23

Enlargement 4. Mi.317 A P HAN, H 5687. 23

: Mi.317 A P HAN, H 5687.23

Enlargement 5. Mi.318 A P HAN H 5887 . 23

: Mi.318 A P HAN H 5887 .23

Enlargement 6. Mi.318 B P HAN H 5887 . 23

: Mi.318 B P HAN H 5887 .23

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 29 Jul 2020 01:56

Enlargement 7. Mi.319 A P HAN H 5888 . 23

: Mi.319 A P HAN H 5888 . 23

Enlargement 8. Mi.319 B P HAN H 5888 . 23

: Mi.319 B P HAN H 5888 . 23

Enlargement 9. Mi.321 A P HAN H 5885 . 23

: Mi.321 A P HAN H 5885 . 23

Enlargement 10. Mi.321 B P HAN H 5885 . 23

: Mi.321 B P HAN H 5885 . 23

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 29 Jul 2020 02:06

Enlargement 11. Mi.322 A P HAN H 5955 . 23

: Mi.322 A P HAN H 5955 . 23

Enlargement 12. Mi.322 A P HAN H 6021 . 23

: Mi.322 A P HAN H 6021 . 23

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 29 Jul 2020 05:28

Enlargement 13. Mi.323 A P HAN H 5955. 23

: Mi.323 A P HAN H 5955. 23

Enlargement 14. Mi.323 A P HAN H 6022. 23

: Mi.323 A P HAN H 6022. 23

Enlargement 15. Mi.323 B P HAN H 6024. 23

: Mi.323 B P HAN H 6022. 23

Enlargement 16. Mi.324 A P HAN H 6022. 23

: Mi.324A P HAN H 6024. 23

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 29 Jul 2020 05:40

Enlargement 17. 2 x Mi.325 A P HAN H 6274. 23

: 2 x Mi.325 A P HAN H 6274. 23

Enlargement 18. Mi.326 A P HAN H 6297. 23

: Mi.326 A P HAN H 6297. 23

Enlargement 19. Mi.326 B P HAN H 6297. 23

: Mi.326 B P HAN H 6297. 23

Enlargement 20. Mi.327 A P HAN H 6308. 23

: Mi.327 A P HAN H 6308. 23

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 29 Jul 2020 05:54

Enlargement 21. Mi.327 B P HAN H 6308. 23

: Mi.327 B P HAN H 6308. 23

Enlargement 22. Mi.328 A P HAN H 6309. 23

: Mi.328 B P HAN H 6309. 23

Enlargement 23. Mi.329 A P HAN H 6310. 23

: Mi.329 A P HAN H 6310. 23

Enlargement 24. Mi.330 BP HAN H 6310. 23

: Mi.330 B P HAN H 6311. 23

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 29 Jul 2020 06:10

Just noticed there is NO Mi.332 HAN listed.

Enlargement 25. Mi.333 A P HAN H 5886 . 23

: Mi.333 A P HAN H 5886 . 23

Enlargement 26. Mi.334 A P HAN H 5887 . 23

: Mi.334 A P HAN H 5887 . 23

Enlargement 27. Mi.335 A P HAN H 5888 . 23

: Mi.335 A P HAN H 5888. 23

Enlargement 28. Mi.336 A P HAN H 5885 . 23

: Mi.336 A P HAN H 5885. 23

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 14 Sep 2020 08:56

Browsing some letters.

Here is one with a peculiar date before the stamps were issued in November 1923!

Did someone forget to alter the 8 to an 11?

1.

: German postage letter with pre-dated cancels

2.

: Close up of cancellation date on German postage letter with pre-dated cancellations..

3. Here is one suggesting that the rate should be 112 billion Marks and yet only 28 billion worth of stamps were used. I am assuming that destination was outside Germany?

: Underpaid German post letter.

4. Two more letters with same description in German for underpaid.

Please correct me by properly translating the German and expertise.

: Underpaid German post letters.

5. Letter with mixed old and new currency stamps.

: German post letter dated 2.12.23 with mixed currency stamps.

: Close up of German post letter dated 2.12.23 mixed currency stamps.

faro · Post by **faro** » 14 Sep 2020 09:25

johnrcrow wrote: ↑
14 Sep 2020 08:56
3. Here is one suggesting that the rate should be 112 billion Marks and yet only 28 billion worth of stamps were used. I am assuming that destination was outside Germany?

As noted in the description and this article, the stamps were rated at 4x their nominal value from 26/11 through 30/11.
112 Billion Marks is sufficient for a non-local letter weighing 20 to 100 grams.

Pretty cover.

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 14 Sep 2020 20:02

Many thanks faro.

Not underpaid at all but 4 x rated as described.

The same for the letters under 4.

So, I have the start of my collection in this area.

The relevant bit from the article you gave me is here. This also describes the mixed ´old` and ´new` stamps on letter 5.

: Information on German high inflation period postage stamp usage November and December 1923.

Thanks again.

John

faro · Post by **faro** » 14 Sep 2020 20:20

johnrcrow wrote: ↑
14 Sep 2020 20:02
Many thanks faro.

Not underpaid at all but 4 x rated as described.

Bonus marks for #3 being a "last day cover" for the inflation period, of course.

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 14 Sep 2020 22:22

Again well spotted faro.

I am just beginning to look in more detail at the letters I have so appreciate inputs.

Hyper-inflation, troubled times indeed.

John

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 14 Sep 2020 22:54

Here is a charming post card with I assume an added piece of original art?

1.12.23 and using the older currency stamp.

I include the very busy pencilled text (maybe someone can translate this or some of it).

Card front.

Card back.

Enlarged section of script on front.

Enlarged art on back.

Script on back.

Text under art.

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 14 Sep 2020 23:03

Here is another use of stamps 6-12-23 40 x 10 milliard = 400 Milliarden (400 billion).

The use of new currency stamps would be at 40 Rentgen-Pfennige and saved a deal of licking!

: Use of 40 x 10 Milliarden (400 milliarden total) stamps on letter in high inflation era Germany on Dec 6th 1923.

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 01 Oct 2020 00:50

Mi.246. The 50 Mark Regular issue shades.

Another shade attack by me. This time for the Mi 246 50M 1922 stamps.

Three ´colours ` listed by Michel, translations are from Michel specialised.

246a. dark- to blackish-blue ((dark(violet) blue)) €1 NHM €0.3 HM €2 used... so common.

246b. (dark) Prussian blue (dark grey-blue) €17 NHM €6 HM €11 used, slightly less common.

246c. dark- to black-violet-ultramarine (black-blue). €70 NHM €25 HM €55 used, scarcest of the three.

The descriptions of ´shade`are rather difficult to interpret, a common theme in examining colours of stamps.

Here are a bunch of Mi.246 stamps I played with.

: Examples of Mi.246 German postage stamps scanned normally.

Here are the same stamps after tweaking the brightness, saturation and contrast to achieve some possible separation of the shades.

: Examples of Mi.246 German postage stampsenhanced scans.

I took the same field from each one and reassembled the pieces according to perceived shade differences on computer (of course).

: Selected areas of scans sorted into similar shades.

I was able to define three shades and examples for each are shown below.

: Summation of shades seen in mint and used stamps according to Michel criteria.

The scan above can be re-enhanced as show below.

: More enhanced summation of shades seen in mint and used stamps according to Michel criteri

The ´make-up) of the selected stamps can be looked at by selecting a given small area of the scans and enlarging these.

: High ´magnification`of the same area taken from illustrative stamps for shade.

Notes

1. Only two stamps were identified as 246 c dark- to black-violet-ultramarine (black-blue). Most were as for 246a with less for 246b. This ´fits`the pattern that my be expected for scarcity a judged by CVs.

2. The 246b. are easy to define as against the similar 246a and c. The 246b. has a distinct blue observable by eye as well as after enhancement.

3. 246c at high magnification show (after the enhancements) a good deal of very dark clustered dark material as against the 246a. Both contain some ´red`areas. The 246a has more light blue areas. This is born out for the 246a by me looking at many of the stamps (not shown).

Conclusions.

a. Enhancement helped sort the stamps into three shades.

b. Although, as with other studies, the ratio of the various enhanced effects (colours, distribution) that shows differences in content of the pigments, seems to be more of transition between stamps, probably reflecting the different conditions (ink constituents).

c. Just when a shade becomes a new shade is debatable, but from this mini study one can assess 246b as being very different to 246a and c at least. The ´drift`into a 246c from 246a. can be speculated. The colour descriptions in Michel for these two are very similar in favouring dark to blackish.....seems to be a question of how much violet vs how much ultramarine!

d. Of course there is bias in that Michel does say there are three distinct colours!

Although this looks complicated, once one has a scan then the manipulations are relatively simple and results can be a useful aid to the by-eye estimation of colours.

maptrekker · Post by **maptrekker** » 01 Oct 2020 02:40

Your technique for identifying colors has reached a new height. The examination of the images at the pixel level makes determining the colors more definitive.

Which two stamps in your image of the whole stamps are 246c?

Now that you have identified the two 246c stamps, can you see the difference in color compared to 246a with the unaided eye?

Excellent.

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 01 Oct 2020 04:00

Kind words map.

As we colour enthusiasts know this is a very difficult area for several reasons, but enhancement is a useful adjunct to seeing how stamps behave when scanned together and ´processed`in the same way.

One can only go by what one looks at and see whether results match anything previously reported.

I do think that enhancing scanned images and then selecting similar areas for enlargement gives an idea as to the distribution and variation in pixellated colours in a stamp and therefore indicates differences in the formulated ink for the stamps. In this way one can see the development maybe across number of stamps and see if there is a continuum of changes (shades) or a sharper difference in ´profile` (a different colour) . Works most times.

I will have to illustrate this ´continuum` reflecting smaller and larger changes across pixel patterns more clearly by showing results using a large number of the same issue stamp. In fact I may as well try this 246 lot as a starter.

Note.
1. The descriptions of the colours in catalogues is often bizarre as often said in SB.
2. The changes in hue, shade etc. in older stored stamps is problematic.
3. Showing scans over the ether is not ideal since individual monitors show differences in colours anyway and what I see here on mine is not necessarily true for others.
4. The ´true colours` are not shown in enhanced scans but are a result of enhancement of inherent particles in the inks used. So the mix gives the true perceived overall colour of a stamp (depending on light used) due to the overall reflectance of the stamp. The scans and selection of a similar area for study focus on showing (or not) subtle differences at the particulate level.

Maps questions.

I would be over emphasising the by eye assessment of the 256c as against the 256a if I said I could identify them easily. However, I did look at the used 256c shown in scans and thought it much darker than the rest. The mint shown top right in selected six scans was more problematic and indeed if one looks at the enlarged enhanced scans one can see that the mint 256c has less dark ´patches`than the used 256c speculated.

I will show what I men next post.

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 01 Oct 2020 05:40

Here is the ´proposed`used 256c (centre stamp) next to other stamps.

This was earmarked as a darker (more violet?) example than the rest.

Flanked by, on the right, a lighter blue and on the left ,a darker blue-but not as dark as the centre stamp.

Normal scan used

Enhanced scan used

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 01 Oct 2020 20:17

Back to the ´basket lid ` or ´rosetten` flaws.

Here is a refresher based on an almost complete pane.

Handy to identify positions of flaws.

I have marked this up with flaw identification and included some less publicised flaws.

Mi 318A block showing almost complete pane (fields 11 to 100).

: Mi 318A German postage stamp block showing almost complete pane (fields 11 to 100).

Here is enlarged sections of scan.

A left upper quarter.
B right upper quarter.
C. left lower quarter.
D right over quarter.

A.

: Mi 318A Portion of German postage stamp pane, top left quarter.

B.

: Mi 318A. Portion of German postage stamp pane, top right quarter.

C.

: Mi 318A. Portion of German postage stamp pane, lower left quarter.

D.

: Mi 318A. Portion of German postage stamp pane, lower right corner.

Individual enlargements shown next.

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 01 Oct 2020 20:29

Flaws enlarged.

1. HT

: Mi. 318 HT flaw. German postage stamp.

2. PE2

: Mi. 318 PE2 flaw. German postage stamp.

3. PE3

: Mi. 318 PE3 flaw. German postage stamp.

4. PE4

: Mi. 318 PE4 flaw. German postage stamp.

5. PE5

: Mi. 318 PE5 flaw. German postage stamp.

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 01 Oct 2020 20:53

6. PE6

: Mi. 318 PE6 flaw. German postage stamp.

7. PE 7

: Mi. 318 PE7 flaw. German postage stamp.

8. PE10 (PP 17)

: Mi. 318 PP10 flaw. German postage stamp.

9. Summary of flaws including PE1 and PE 8 from 5 million Mi.337.

: Summary of flaws including PE1 and PE8 from 5 million Mi.337 German postage stamps.

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 01 Oct 2020 22:14

Two areas that received attention in later studies on flaws are in left bottom corner.

PP4 with left corner trimmed up.

PP12 with left corner extended down and indented frame lines to left.

PP4a. Diagrams of various manifestations of PP4.

: Diagrams of various manifestations of PP4 on Mi.318 German postage stamp.

PP4b. Stamp at position 54 showing PP4 flaw.

: Mi.318 German postage stamp with PP4 flaw.

PP4c. Enlarged area showing PP4 flaw. Note indented frame lines on left.

: Enlarged PP4 flaw on Mi.318 German postage stamp.

PP12a. Diagrams of various manifestations of PP12.

: Diagrams of various manifestations of PP12 on Mi.318 German postage stamp.

PP12b. Stamp at position 22 showing PP12 flaw.

: Mi.318 German postage stamp with PP12 flaw.

PP12c. Enlarged PP12 flaw.

: Enlarged PP12 flaw on Mi.318 German postage stamp.

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 01 Oct 2020 22:39

Here is a more dramatic printing error on the Pfennig 1923 issue. Mi.338.

: Large scale printing error on Mi.338 German postage stamp 1923 Pfennig issue.

killmenow · Post by **killmenow** » 19 Oct 2020 18:35

I am not sure if this question is valid here, but I recently purchased this inflation era cover. It was posted from Berlin to Nuremberg, registered. As of 20th September 1923, non local postage was 250000 RM and 250000 RM for registration making it 500000. There are no stamps here for 500000, instead the rate was scribbled. Can anyone explain this phenomena to me?

Thank you

Lawrence
Author of "Kill Me Now"

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 19 Oct 2020 19:37

Thanks killlmenow.

I think Maptrecker or OldDuffer1 might deal with this.

The letter is marked with PORTO (postage due).

I assume that this has to be paid. Maybe there were no stamps available in Berlin when posted or an agreement between the receiver and sender was arranged. The letter seems to be an official letter and I suspect that commercial concerns and Banks etc. used (and were sanctioned to use) the postage due mechanism.

The destination address is in Nürnberg and the PORTO stamp Nürnberg, so paid for in that city?

I am guessing, but I assume there were many instances where postage due was necessary in those hard times.

One can also see examples of scribbled sums even where stamps have been applied to letters but not at the full value needed for postage. As below on eBay

https://www.ebay.de/itm/452396-DR-Inflation-Nr-282-auf-Blg-a ... SwWGFfOISD

I would wait for other replies to get more informed answer.

john

killmenow · Post by **killmenow** » 19 Oct 2020 19:52

johnrcrow wrote: ↑
19 Oct 2020 19:37
The letter is marked with PORTO (postage due).

I assume that this has to be paid. Maybe there were no stamps available in Berlin when posted or an agreement between the receiver and sender was arranged. The letter seems to be an official letter and I suspect that commercial concerns and Banks etc. used (and were sanctioned to use) the postage due mechanism.

The destination address is in Nürnberg and the PORTO stamp Nürnberg, so paid for in that city?

I would wait for other replies to get more informed answer.

john

Thank you John. I was not aware of the Porto meaning Postage Due, You did help. But if it was postage due, then the amount to pay would be double, meaning 1000000 RM

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 19 Oct 2020 20:32

As I said Killmenow, we await a better explanation.

There were ´variations` to postal rules at the time and I am not sure how the Porto fits in with practices.

John

maptrekker · Post by **maptrekker** » 20 Oct 2020 09:22

This is marked "Portopflichtige Dienstsache".

Certain authorities were allowed to send official mail without postage. The recipient paid the postage.

This is not the usual postage due in that there was no 50% surcharge paid.

Interestingly, if you check the official stamps of Württemberg, the ones for these authorities were marked "Portopflichtige Dienstsache"

maptrekker · Post by **maptrekker** » 20 Oct 2020 09:34

As for this "Porto" letter it looks like 20,000 is correct for a regional letter at this time.

I think the letter was overweight and an extra 5,000 + 50% was charged postage due.

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 20 Oct 2020 18:43

Thanks for clearing the PORTO area up Map.

Kilmenow brought up an interesting question about an interesting time.

John

killmenow · Post by **killmenow** » 21 Oct 2020 06:19

maptrekker wrote: ↑
20 Oct 2020 09:22
This is marked "Portopflichtige Dienstsache".

Certain authorities were allowed to send official mail without postage. The recipient paid the postage.

This is not the usual postage due in that there was no 50% surcharge paid.

Thank you very much

aerogi · Post by **aerogi** » 01 Nov 2020 18:08

johnrcrow wrote: ↑
19 Jan 2015 08:18

Three printing types were made. Flat plate (P), Rotary press (W) and rouletted (B).

These are described in tables below (Table 35). Basically the Flat plate, top border to bottom border is 21.5mm and side borders 17.7mm. The Rotary press is 22mm x 18mm respectively. The rouletted are easy to determine having a high characteristic perforation.
The best way of determining the sizes is to obtain a fresh 500 Tausend M stamp (Mi 313 A P). These are only Flat plate printings. Aligning this to other stamps it is relatively easy to determine whether the stamp is longer top border to bottom border, therefore a W or the same hence a P. I like the various flaws in this series and there are many. I shall deal with some and there are other threads where these are examined.

Thank you very much for this! Finally an easy way to sort out the flat plate or rotary printings!

aerogi · Post by **aerogi** » 01 Nov 2020 19:32

Even though I am a worldwide collector, Germany is not very high on my priority list when it comes to variants or watermarks, especially regarding the German Realm. Regarding the inflation series, most of the stamps I have are MH or MNH condition, whereas used is the way to go. I do have a number of used stamps, of which these are the most interesting from my collection.

Perfin on Mi:DR 280, nice bulseye on Mi:DR 284, but not sure what town cancel it is on top.

the rouletted Mi:DR 319BP on the right, apparently is a very high value for used. But I assume this is not postally used, or at least will not qualify for that high value.

Not sure what the first cancel is

Note the ink fingerprints on the first block. And a nice block used with 80 billion...

Blocks of 4 with rouletted perforation MNH. Some badly damaged though.

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 01 Nov 2020 21:04

Thanks for post aerogi.

Typical bunch of stamps. The cancel on lower CV stamps are probably genuine.

The 20 millionen serrated stamp might be a fake cancel, the stamp looks far too clean to have been on a letter and the hiding at a corner suspect. Has it any gum? Always look at the back.

Blocks are always interesting.

I cannot make out any other aberrations in the overprints (values and bars) apart from some sloping of bars on the left side of the bottom left stamp of the block with 2 on 200 and also the first ´0`in ´100`top right in 100 Tausend on 100 block with peculiar kinked top (under ´fingerprint`). Note the the overprint is also high on this block).

5 Milliarden has a partial date ?3. 11.23 so used when new into inflation currency came in on in November 1923, older currency stamps still valid.

Hard to say where and when the ´fingerprint`lines appeared in this stamp´s life, the right two column stamps in block suffer the same lines.

Tried to see flaws on the blocks but not so easy with resolution of scans.

The left two blocks show overprint displacement (common enough) 2 on 5 (to right) 5 on 10 (to left).

Not really badly damaged, fairly typical of stamps ripped from sheets.

John

Tod.Moore · Post by **Tod.Moore** » 07 Nov 2020 17:30

: Germany 1923 inflation stamp, 50 Milliarden, postmarked.

This 50 MD appears to be postally used, possibly Hamburg. It is clean in appearance and has no gum residue. I know the provenance since the early 1970s, and believe it to be genuine. What do the experts have to say?

johnrcrow · Post by **johnrcrow** » 07 Nov 2020 23:58

Hello Tod.

I always shy away from diminished cancels.

This one a quarter cancel and no date.

Probably OK though as forging on this stamp not so worth the effort (€45 used).

Does it look like it has been on an envelope? I looks like it has been soaked/washed at some stage.

My opinion only.

Now if it looked like this you are OK

Proofed example of 50 MRD. Totally unreadable, heavy duty cancel.

John

Micky · Post by **Micky** » 02 Mar 2021 21:04

johnrcrow wrote: ↑
20 Jan 2015 09:43
First some easy to identify ST flaws. Scans have superimposed the diagrams of ST as in diagrams above.

Figure 45. ST III

Hi John, here is my example. Note there is a spot over to the right side between the 1 and circle.

Micky