Scarface flaw!

Material relating to the philately of the reign of Edward VIII.
Post Reply
Robinr
Posts: 155
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 6:00 pm

Scarface flaw!

Post by Robinr »

Image

Dear All,

I have just found this flaw on stamp R20/5 on pane 10 stop.

It looks pretty dramatic and certainly worthy of noting for show. BUT... is it constant?

If anybody has a sheet, or lower left quarter sheet, or any piece that covers this area, please take a careful look and see whether you have it as well.

Cheers,

Robin R.
earsathome
Posts: 217
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:00 pm

Transfer from previous board: original post 1438

Post by earsathome »

Image

Hi Robin,
Nice one but not constant I think. If it were it would have been catalogued by now.
Scan shows a block of the 10stop with no scarface!
Cheers
Ron.
Harvey
Posts: 57
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 6:00 pm

Transfer from previous board: original post 1441

Post by Harvey »

Ron,
Just because a variety is clear and naked-eye visible - and constant - doesn't mean it's going to make it into the standard, or specialised, catalogues. I have been trying to get somewhere around 50 constant varieties on the KGV 1935 SJ booklets into the catalogue for the past few years, but the catalogue editor - who is a member of the study group which published the varieties in its own magazine - has totally ignored them!
earsathome
Posts: 217
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:00 pm

Transfer from previous board: original post 1443

Post by earsathome »

Harvey,
That seems odd - I would have thought that most catalogue editors would be only too pleased to get additional information.

Should I ask which catalogue - we are not talking S.G. are we?
Why would he/she publish them in their own magazine but not in the catalogue - seems barmy.

The only time I found anything that I felt could be added to the catalogue was when I came across a pane of UB3 (1d/4d) centre band with phosphor missing on 1st and 3rd vertical rows, which was a variation on the two listed in SG Spec Vol 3 (eighth edition).

I sent it to the editor who examined and returned it with a note that it would be included in the next edition of the catalogue (which I have not seen)

I know some catalogue editors tend to be a bit jealous of their research but it seems strange that he/she should ignore such a wealth of information which could be made more widely available.

Perhaps there will be a change of editors in the future and the next one will be all over you like a rash."grin"

Regards.
Ron,
Robinr
Posts: 155
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 6:00 pm

Transfer from previous board: original post 1445

Post by Robinr »

Dear Ron and Harvey,

I think Harvey is right, just because a flaw is published, with evidence, does not mean a catalogue editor will take it in. I suspect there is editorial policy and financial restraints involved more than the catalogue buying public would realize.

For example, could you imagine all those subtle colour shades in the four kings book? As for errors, they have to be illustrated and that takes up space, which adds pages, which might not be possible for various reasons.

This is the value of the GBPS Journal. In fact, a supplement or special (dedicated) edition on all KGV varieties, including the colour variants, would be a perfect way to dramatize the difference - and show why those catalogues don't do it.

Alternatively, write a book... ;>)

Cheers, Robin R.
Mike Jackson
Site Admin
Posts: 107
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 6:00 pm

Transfer from previous board: original post 1447

Post by Mike Jackson »

QEII commemoratives in the SG Specialised often (always?) have a list of Minor Constant Flaws which are not considered major enough to have a catalogue letter of their own. Years ago I tried to get similar lists of minor flaws included for KGV Downey Heads, and I shall be trying again in due course! In my articles and exhibits of Downeys I often point out (the obvious?!) that even very tiny flaws can be of great use in plate identification.
Robinr
Posts: 155
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 6:00 pm

Transfer from previous board: original post 1448

Post by Robinr »

Totally agree! Those minor flaws can be so very helpful in many ways. I found that some major "unknown location" flaws on the 1937 Coronation stamp that could be found on floating blocks, could be placed to cylinder by them. And those unidentified quarter sheets can be numbered easily as well. And those "unknown" major flaws on KEVIII will certainly come to identification light in this way.

Mike, you sidestepped the mention of a special edition of the Journal... like a colour review of the Downey heads? With six issues a year, is it an inappropriat idea to dedicate one each year?

Just a thought. Cheers, Robin R.
Mike Jackson
Site Admin
Posts: 107
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 6:00 pm

Transfer from previous board: original post 1449

Post by Mike Jackson »

Robin, nothing wrong with your idea, but it sounds like a lot of work! In any case, as far as Downeys are concerned, (and like you!) I've been working for years on your alternative suggestion – a book.
Post Reply