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

josto · Post by **josto** » 03 Jan 2008 20:37

Hi!

Looking through my Roo stamps I found some pieces that I couldn`t find in ACSC. I don`t know if these are possible constant flaws!?

Perhaps I`m going to start to show the 1/2 d green ones! I hope that anyone can perhaps help me with identifying! I marked the aerea of interest!

The last one has also a pretty thin "1" in the value circle, I don`t know if a "Thin One" is existing.

Hope to hear from you

Greetings

josto

josto · Post by **josto** » 04 Jan 2008 02:31

Any roo-specialists out there who could help me with these?

The Pom · Post by **The Pom** » 04 Jan 2008 03:36

I used to have an identical copy to the second stamp, so this is a constant flaw.

Can't help with the other two I'm afraid.

Oh, and you said "Any roo-specialists out there who could help me with these?" in your second post at 2.30 in the morning Australian time, so you'll probably have to wait till they wake up to get a reply!

josto · Post by **josto** » 04 Jan 2008 04:37

Hi The Pom!

Sorry, I forgot that in Australia it`s a very different time than in germany! Here it is abou half past 6 in the evening!

Greetings

josto · Post by **josto** » 04 Jan 2008 20:58

Another Finding is this 9d stamp with NWPI overprint. It has several line-breaks under the words nine pence which seem to be very prominent. Can anyone say something about this one?

Greetings

josto · Post by **josto** » 30 Jan 2008 04:01

Hi!

I have many roos with different flaws. Perhaps anyone could help me with these!?

I`ll start with this two 1 shilling stamps!
The first one has a long vertical scratch in the left part of the stamp. Is this known?

The second stamp has a strange colouring on the roo. It looks like if something could be retouched. Is there something known?

Is there more literature about flaws on roos besides ACSC? I mean like Bell Pope Adams for the 1d red roo.

Greetings

josto

Post by **ozstamps** » 30 Jan 2008 04:05

josto wrote:
It has several line-breaks under the words nine pence which seem to be very prominent.

"PROMINENT" -You are kidding josto!!!!

Blown up 10 times you can barely see them!

It is fiscal canceled by the way.

josto · Post by **josto** » 30 Jan 2008 04:25

Here are some more 1 sh stamps!

One with a broken coast

One with a broken line behind the "1" in the value tablet.

One with a flaw right above the value tablet

One with a flaw at the right leg of the roo

One with a coloured flaw under the Overprint-"N" in the coastline

Another one with a broken coastline

And one with a few flaws f.e. at Tasmania or in the upper left corner frameline

You said that the cancelled Nauru is a fiscal. I just had a discussion with a PNG collector about that cancellation and he mentioned that there were such postally used cancels!
About the flaws on the 9d roo, I didn`t mean that the flaws are very big, but they are good visible and have an interesting pattern!

Greetings

Post by **ozstamps** » 30 Jan 2008 04:40

josto wrote:

You said that the cancelled Nauru is a fiscal.

I just had a discussion with a PNG collector about that cancellation and he mentioned that there were such postally used cancels!

Well you better tell that genius he has a lot to learn about NWPI.

Always 105% FISCAL from the radio station there, for Telegram use.

Get him to join stamboards and learn something new. 8)

Glen

Post by **ozstamps** » 30 Jan 2008 04:42

Josto it is evident someone has slept on this stamp for a month.

It is HEAVILY creased and scuffed.

The TERRIBLE and severe crease that runs past Tasmania is what caused your "flaw" and the chewed top left clearly is the same reason for that "flaw".

Surely you can see that?

josto · Post by **josto** » 30 Jan 2008 04:59

Hi Oz!

Of course I see the bad scratches but I meant the cut frameline in the left upper corner. I also thought there`d be a flaw besides Tasmania that`s not according to the scratch!

Greetings

Post by **ozstamps** » 30 Jan 2008 05:06

Josto screw up any Roo stamp tightly into a ball in your hand, and flatten it out, and I guarantee you'll see 10 (or more) identical and rare "Flaws" you just created where the creases are worst. Why? As the ink cracks and some of it then falls off. Simple physics. 8)

As to the NWPI 9d Roo below - at SAME size as the stamp I can barely even see your cute red circles -- much less any alleged "Plate Flaws".

Blow up ANYTHING 20 times and you can see all kinds of things impossible to see with the naked eye.

...

josto · Post by **josto** » 30 Jan 2008 05:50

Ok!

There is this one stamp with the heavy creases! But the others don`t have such creases! And I think not every "interesting" flaw has to be clearly visible by the naked eye! But I think maybe it`ll be better to stop asking these questions on the board! I`m pretty new to the matter "Australien stamps" and I`m pretty fascinated but I don`t want anyone to snigger at me!

Greetings

ghopper02 · Post by **ghopper02** » 30 Jan 2008 08:53

I've seen a lot of questions re: flaws on the Roos, but I haven't seen much discussion of plating studies...

There is the thread on 3d olives, Die I -vs- Die II at http://www.stampboards.com/viewtopic.php?t=2709
but that's it.

Surely someone's plated these guys!
If not, it appears that there are plenty of flaws to use in such a study

...

- Doug

TheBear · Post by **TheBear** » 30 Jan 2008 09:16

Hi Josto,

Sorry I don't have any answers for you, but I think you are probably starting with a hard area of Australian Stamps looking at the Roos. It seems from what I have read previously that people take months/years to understand the various flaws and how to spot them, etc.

I have no real experience in them myself - I have had a few attempts over the years to get into looking for flaws in these issues - but never dedicated any real time to it.

Someone here may have better advice, but initially it might be worthwhile buying some sort of specialist catalogue dealing with Roos (something from Brusden White perhaps?) so you can firstly identify previously catalogued flaws.

Could probably start with an old catalogue that would make it cheaper, because at this stage you are more interested in identifying potential flaws rather than the value of such.

Kev · Post by **Kev** » 30 Jan 2008 10:29

josto wrote:Ok!

There is this one stamp with the heavy creases! But the others don`t have such creases! And I think not every "interesting" flaw has to be clearly visible by the naked eye! But I think maybe it`ll be better to stop asking these questions on the board! I`m pretty new to the matter "Australien stamps" and I`m pretty fascinated but I don`t want anyone to snigger at me!

Greetings

Over 20 years ago whilst living in New Zealand for a year I used to go to weekend stamp days.

Back then one dealer - Richard Wooders told my wife that if a flaw could not be seen by the naked eye it was not worth the trouble.

Maybe that has changed but by 20 times???!

Cheers,
Kev.

Trent · Post by **Trent** » 30 Jan 2008 12:45

josto

good on you for asking.

sorry you got such a grumpy answer.

Kaygeevee · Post by **Kaygeevee** » 30 Jan 2008 15:27

Hi ghopper02

Yes there have been some plating studies done on the Roo's ie ½d, 1d, 2d, 2½d, and the 9d. and these books are still available to those who keen on plating there Roo's.

josto.

Can I suggest that you continue collecting your Roo's. If you visually divide the stamp along the top into.
Top left corner to midway between crown, call it A
Midway between Crown to Crown, call it B
Right of Crown to midway to Top right corner call it C
Midway to top right corner to Right Corner call it D
Now do a similar thing down the side but call them 1,2,3,4.

So a flaw in the top left corner occurs in A1 or a flaw in the bottom right corner occurs in D4
Now get a 64 page stock book and use a page for A1 the next page for A2 etc. you may need more than one stock book ?

If you get between 3-5 stamps with the same flaw then you be reasonably certain that it is a constant flaw.

The next thing is to find Sheets or positional blocks of the stamp to check if the flaw is there, and that is hard for the Roo's.

I know a couple of collectors who have been working together for over 20 years trying to plate the 5/-, 10/- £1 and £2 roo's.

Wishing you all the best in your collecting

David

Trent · Post by **Trent** » 30 Jan 2008 15:56

wonderful constructive comments!!!

waroff49 · Post by **waroff49** » 30 Jan 2008 23:59

Josto, just keep asking your questions.

From my reading on the subject of flaws, nearly every stamp on every sheet has some sort of flaw, this is how plating is done.

Some of these flaws are so insignificant that they don't rate a mention apart from those interested in plating ( generally those which have to be magnified to see), some become significant and desirable ( some of these actually get listed e.g. KGV dieII)

Some flaws are transient- that means they only happen 1 or 2 in all the sheets of stamps that were printed. Some flaws are the effects of glue on the paper, dust on the paper, ink not at the right temperature and consistancy, etc.

Some flaws show different characteristics with the printing- cracks developing and enlarging on the plates, wear an tear on the plates over a long period of time and several printings.

You also have to understand the historical and printing conditions in Australia, at that period of time.

By today's standards they were pretty primitive. There were problems with obtaining paper and ink and the printers themselves were not always the most desirable (shortage of manpower during the war years.)

Also the climatic conditions in Australia were very different from those in most of Europe which meant that things that worked for the printers in Europe didn't necessarily transfer to the colonies.

Back to your question..... the ½d green has a printing life of two and a bit years but 153 million were printed. The penny red, had a shorter life but had many printings with over 1 billion produced.
Plenty of time for wear and errors. Considering each sheet had 120 stamps/240, not every fine detail is listed as a flaw.

All the information given above is also relevant, especially the ability to find more than one occurance of a particular flaw.

josto · Post by **josto** » 06 Feb 2008 21:59

Hi!

I`ve got a question about this 6d blue roo. It has 1st watermark and is cancelled Newcastle Oct 1913. It has a broken inner and outer frame at the left side of the stamp. Is that a constant flaw? I made a detailed scan.

Greetings

Clive · Post by **Clive** » 06 Feb 2008 22:40

Hi Josto,

Well, it could - could - be a Die 2a, in which case that's one helluva nice stamp to own, but the frame break looks to be a little too low (it should be nine mm down from TLC, almost directly opposite the kangaroo's right eyebrow).

So I suspect this is 'just' another odds and sods scratch/flaw, and the stamp is a Die 2, a nice Die 2, but that's all. Perhaps someone else has a view?

Clive

kris · Post by **kris** » 06 Feb 2008 22:44

great answers from Kaygeevee and waroff - good work. Ill say thanks for Josto and all us others learning about such matters. this is great practical advice - advice which is a great benefit to us upstarts!

David, the stock book way of keeping and sorting flaws sounds like an excellent method. as I get more into looking for varieties/flaws on the roos and kgvs I will definetley put that one into practice.

Josto - I could be totally wrong but I think the broken frame on the 6d may be more indicative of the die than a flaw? again, I could be wrong on this one. Do you have a copy of an ACSC?

kris · Post by **kris** » 06 Feb 2008 23:18

ok, Ill join in with a question while this threads going.

These are my first attempts at identifying Roo varieties so feel free to correct me if Im wrong or point out anything I may have missed. thanks in advance

stamp 1 - Im pretty sure is "K35g - Flaw off NSW diagonal" (according to my old ACSC) that edition only lists the flaw on the 3rd watermark so I assume thats what it is

second stamp - I think, the "Heavy Coastline" variety (what it lacks in bottom right corner it makes up for in extra ink!)

Retreived Photobucket image from link provided in this post and restored image to imgur as below (2017 07 31):

kris · Post by **kris** » 06 Feb 2008 23:29

while we're at it...

I cant see these two listed in my ACSC (gotta get un updated one soon!) so slap my wrists if these are "nothings" but the areas that interest me are;

on the 6d, mark under IA of AUSTRALIA (in my ACSC there is a similar flaw listed for the 2d but not the 6d?)

on the 2d, marks/scratches on centre of left frame (one extending not quite to the coastline).

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj304/kestamps/var.jpg

thanks for any help...

josto · Post by **josto** » 07 Feb 2008 06:52

Hi!

Thanks for your opinions! Perhaps someone else has an idea of the 6d blue roo!?

Greetings

Kaygeevee · Post by **Kaygeevee** » 07 Feb 2008 07:30

Hi josto,

As Clive has stated I'm afraid this is not a 6d Die 2A sub. cliché the flaw is to low on your stamp.

Below is an enlarged scan of the 6d sub. cliché area.

I hope that this will be of some help.

Best regards David.

Kaygeevee · Post by **Kaygeevee** » 07 Feb 2008 07:51

Hi kris,

I looks like your 2/- is the flaw listed in the ACSC, but it is now listed as 37 f in the 2004 edition.

As for the 2d the flaw is not listed as a constant flaw in Greg Pope's book on the 2d Roo's.

As for the 2½d I will not pass a comment at this time as my monitor packed up yesterday ( it was one of the large one's like a TV) and "she who must be obeyed" said "get a larger one", so now we have one of those wide screen didgee thingees. Now a Roo stamp is nearly square and the KGV 1d shades on this board don't appear as I remember them 2 days ago Ahhhha.

Hope that this is of some help.

Best regards David.

kris · Post by **kris** » 07 Feb 2008 08:26

much appreciated David - hope your screen dilemnas are worked out soon!

Clive · Post by **Clive** » 07 Feb 2008 10:01

Kris,

That 2 1/2d sure looks like 'heavy coastline', which is ACSC 9(2)(e) if first watermark and 10(2)(e) in second (although ACSC shows 2nd Wmk as 9.2.e which I think could be a mistake).

Shame about that blunt BRC, it's otherwise a gorgeous stamp, one of the best I've seen.

Clive

kris · Post by **kris** » 07 Feb 2008 10:47

cheers Clive, thanks for the verification re Heavy Coastline

as you say, is a pity about the BRC - will hopefully find a fully intact example one day. IMHO the 2 1/2d in general is a very striking stamp.

any ideas if the other two stamps (6d and 2d) are anything constant?

Clive · Post by **Clive** » 07 Feb 2008 14:22

Hi Kris,

That weird-looking flaw in the 6d. I agree, at first glance it does look like the flaw listed as 7j in the ACSC for the Die 1 2d (third watermark). Yet, on closer look, the 7j actually shows two distinct and separate flaws, one between the foot of the L and the foot of the I, and another between the I and the A. Your 6d doesn't have that first flaw, so maybe it isn't 7j or equivalent.

As for the Die 1 2d, I can't find anything in the ACSC, but it sure is a pronounced flaw. Perhaps someone who has greater expertise than me (not hard) could help.

Clive

kris · Post by **kris** » 07 Feb 2008 16:03

thanks again for your help Clive - the experience and input of everyone here is greatly appreciated. will keep them in the "too find out" section of the collection.

does anyone out there happen to have any info on when the next ACSC Kangaroo edition might be due? I desperately need to up-date my info on the subject, but to be honest, Im not overly keen on paying the full cover price when much of the info is running out of date.

Dont get me wrong, I realise the effort involved in researching and presenting the material makes the RRP value upon release, but with listed price info etc being out of date I think the $100+ retail is a bit out of date also. will be in the line with cash in hand when a new one hits the shelves though!

josto · Post by **josto** » 07 Feb 2008 20:52

Hi!

Talking about the 2 1/2d blue roo stamp with heavy coastline, what do you think about this one, which is narrow crown watermark? I think it could also be such a flaw!? The coastline is very heavy! Unfortunately it is not completely mint and it has some bad perfs but I think it is a nice item! Does anyone know the value of this flaw with NWPI overprint?

Greetings

kris · Post by **kris** » 07 Feb 2008 22:00

nice find Josto

it must be Heavy Coastline day - now if only we could find one with all its perfs!

Clive · Post by **Clive** » 08 Feb 2008 01:15

Hi Josto,

Re that 2 1/2d overprinted N W Pacific Islands. You said it was "narrow crown" watermark. As far as my notes tell me, it comes in what we usually term first and second watermarks, but not the 'narrow', which is third watermark. I may be wrong about this, as I rely on my writing-up.

If it's first watermark, value is greater used than mint. Probably no more than a few dollars for a mint copy.

If it's second watermark, I'd speak to Glen!!!!!!!

Clive

josto · Post by **josto** » 02 Apr 2008 22:51

Hi Kaygeevee!

Thanks for the picture of the substituted cliche on 6d roo! Does this sub cliche always appear like this, I mean is there always a break in the inner thin frame line and in the outer frame line or are there varints with only a break in the inner frame line?

Greetings

josto

Clive · Post by **Clive** » 02 Apr 2008 23:14

Josto,

The frame line break is, I think, more pronounced on the Die 2a 6d. I can't say that with any authority because I've only ever had three in my hands (I've got second and a third watermark copies). On the Die 2a 1d reds, and the 2d greys, the frame line break is much less distinct, to the point of sometimes being hard to pick up.

Clive

Post by **GlenStephens** » 02 Apr 2008 23:20

Josto, a Heavy Coastline for sure.

Some are lighter than that one - like Kris, which is also OK.

It is 1st Wmk, type A setting.

Kaygeevee · Post by **Kaygeevee** » 03 Apr 2008 06:15

Hi josto,

You are correct in thinking that the 6d Roo sub-cliché does vary, in some examples the thick outer frame is complete and in others it is like that in the post above (Feb. 7 6.30am).
but the thin inner frame is always broken.

From the first Wmk. there were two major flaws on the plate.

1. ACSC 17e. Known as the 2nd Retouched E of PENCE, this is from Plate 1, on the Right Pane stamp No. 60 known as 1R60 in the ACSC. both types of break are known for this stamp, this is confirmed by the outer line Wmk. on the stamp. (looking at the back of the stamp the line is on the left and/or bottom).

2. ACSC 17g. Known as Defective second E. Its position on the sheet is unknown at this stage. also we do not know if this sub-cliché comes in the two states.

Background to 2 above.

In the late 80' I purchased a pair of 6d Roo's with sub-cliché flaw from the UK. The sub-cliché should have been on the right hand stamp ie 1R60, you can imagine my surprise when I found it on the left hand stamp, so this pair could not be from the bottom right corner of the sheet ( it may have a Wmk line through the top perfs?). I didn't do anything with it for years.

When I eventually looked into it I found that the Cat. stated First Wmk. had the Defective second E, but 2nd & 3rd Wmk. didn't list it? so what happened to the flaw.

I spoke to Dr. G. Kellow and he was intrigued, and due to his researches over the years he has found in the records that J.B.Cooke had 5 clichés made (at this time the Kangaroo Die was in the Die 2A state) 2 (or was it 1) were used for printing the envelopes, 1 replaced 1R60 we think/sure 1 replaced Defective E (if not why are there none recorded for 2nd & 3rd Wmk) and 5th cliché was stored in the vault.

There is a block of 30 6d Roos that we have been trying to track down for about 15 years, Dr. Kellow thinks he may have found the owner so maybe he'll be able to plate this flaw at last.

I do not want to wake up "she who must be obeyed" trying to find my books/notes but I think the numbers above are correct.

Best regards David.

DCP23 · Post by **DCP23** » 03 Apr 2008 06:41

ozstamps wrote:
josto wrote:

You said that the cancelled Nauru is a fiscal.

I just had a discussion with a PNG collector about that cancellation and he mentioned that there were such postally used cancels!

Well you better tell that genius he has a lot to learn about NWPI.

Always 105% FISCAL from the radio station there, for Telegram use.

Get him to join stamboards and learn something new. 8)

Glen

Glen, when you use the word 'fiscal' I believe you actually mean 'non-postal'. A telegraph cancel is non-postal, but not fiscal, because 'fiscal' means 'dealing with TAXES'.

Post by **GlenStephens** » 03 Apr 2008 11:20

DCP23 - yes members had that same discussion on another thread here!

mobbor · Post by **mobbor** » 04 Apr 2008 18:51

Hi Josto
Pleased to see you've got some roo experts looking now.
But does this mean you've run out of George V questions?

josto · Post by **josto** » 03 Jul 2008 00:13

Kaygeevee wrote:Hi josto,

As Clive has stated I'm afraid this is not a 6d Die 2A sub. cliché the flaw is to low on your stamp.

Below is an enlarged scan of the 6d sub. cliché area.

I hope that this will be of some help.

Best regards David.

Hi!

I`ve got this 1913 first wmk 6d blue roo mlh. What do you think about this one? Could this one be possibly a "substituted cliche" Die IIA?

Greetings

josto

josto · Post by **josto** » 03 Jul 2008 02:01

Perhaps I should open a new thread on roo dies!? Are there more people with interesting questions about that?

Post by **admin** » 03 Jul 2008 02:21

josto -- you need the OUTER frame break for the Die 2A!

librarianc · Post by **librarianc** » 01 Aug 2008 01:11

I have one of the 9d Roo's that Josto used at the beginning of this thread, narrow crown watermark, with the same break under the second N of NINE and it caught my eye without using the magnifier........but based on the original reply to that question, I'm moving on to another one about the same stamp.

This is a rough stamp and I'm aware of that......this is a question to educate myself on what to look for on other stamps:

Is this upper right corner retouched?

Thanks for the help.

John A

Post by **GlenStephens** » 01 Aug 2008 03:48

John the reotuched upper right corner ACSC 27h is VERY strong in Cat photo, and what you have sadly, is not it!

librarianc · Post by **librarianc** » 01 Aug 2008 07:25

Thanks, Glen. I don't often expect to find the varieties, but I'm going to ask if I'm unsure.
On this one, I didn't see any of the horizontal retouches as from the catalogue image, but the other 9d images in ACSC seemed to show a pretty smooth vertical frame line up to the corner, not as bowed out as this one.

I figure this is absolutely the best place to ask!

Thanks for your reply!

John A

josto · Post by **josto** » 02 Aug 2008 22:49

Hi!

Does anyone know about this flaw! A few month ago I found a 4d roo with an inking flaw at western australia coast that I thought to be a kind of flyspeck but now I found a second one with the same flaw! Does anyone know this flaw? Is it a kind of constant flaw?

Thanks

Postage Stamp Chat Board & Stamp Forum

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

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

Who is online