Ken, first let me say that this is an excellent presentation and outlines the problems we all face when determining color. I would suggest you consider joining the Great Britain Philatelic Society if you want to take this to a greater depth as they have some real experts on the subject. My own knowledge is very limited. I would need photos to give examples that might help alleviate some of your issues but I tried signing in with Google to your blog and it just cycled back. First the paper used regular river water as far as I am aware. The water would change in particulate content depending on the time of year. This was not addressed fully until the Wilding issue where you get both cream and whiter paper. The paper was then shipped to DLR where it was gummed and glazed. The early Harrison and Somerset printings were not glazed. Hence the poorer print quality. Color control and matching is a complex issue not the least of which is the retained reference stamps needed to be stored to Inland Revenue standards. If a replacement was required, then the initial reference stamps had to be destroyed first it seems (ref. Wiseman). Letterpress is a precise printing process. Wiseman in his Vol 1 of the De La Rue Years, shows a block of stamps where the righthand column of stamps is raised upwards and in a darker color. Getting the pressure correct and even across the entire 2 plates was definitely a challenge. Too heavy and you would pick up ink from the background, too light and you had a lighter shade. The paper was supplied by Turner throughout the period, including the 1911 printings and was considered of high quality. DLR introduced chalk surface coated paper in 1905, to improve print quality. The ink was therefore not absorbed as much by the paper. Over time they increased the thickness of this chalk surface which specialist can identify. This level of detail is way beyond me. You stated correctly that DLR did not pass on their ink formulae, so new formulae had to be developed. This led to quite a few variations. Using UV is opening a whole new issue. Paper gives off a phosphorescence alone, although it is usually quite weak. A strong UV lamp is needed. The chalk surface seems to reduce the response. The exposed paper found with stamps that have selvedge all fluoresce green to my UV but my lamp is not well filtered. Keep also in mind that the Inland Revenue required fugitive inks. The purple and green of the bicolored are doubly fugitive, especially the green. Any used stamp with faded colors due to soaking is essentially a space filler. The unified Victorian issue of 1883/4 is notorious for this and collecting quality used stamps of the green color is a real challenge. One other note before I close. I have controls ( 1/2d or 1d stamps with a selvedge with a letter and year number) which show a slowly deepening of the green color as time progressed, although I would not call it consistent. Ken, I did try to repeat your work but other than the stamps listed as fluorescent, I was unable to get any others to respond, other than to give different colors depending on how the ink responded to the poorly filtered UV I have.
Thank you so much for all this great information. I suspect the water purity accounts for the UV reactions I’m seeing. I’m not sure what the problem with my blog is. It’s working for me. Hmm. I’m sorry about that. Thanks for trying to duplicate my work.
Wow!!! That really makes me want to go through my duplicates, and also re-check the stamps that are already in my Scott album. That album doesn’t have spots for all the variations, but at least I could make notes of what is in there. I don’t think there is enough time or aspirin in the world for me to manage the color/ paper varieties like you have. What an amazing gift from John and thank you again for sharing your knowledge 🤗. I always learn so much 😊🎉
Hi Ken! Wow, this was a deep dive, almost to deep to come up for air! You are really causing me to look with totally different eyes at stamps. The colour shade differences are just so difficult and subjective as you said. Really almost impossible to master with confidence. Another video that needs to be watched many more times than one. Thanks! I love your videos, because I love learning new things.
Great video Ken! Thank you for doing the hard work and then sharing it with us. As an aside, I've found a great tool for 'seeing' watermarks and color variations; a Wi-Fi enabled LED bulb with variable color. With an app on my phone, I can change the light on my desktop across a wide spectrum. It's not a panacea, but it's been very helpful in many instances where contrast is a problem. Anyway, thanks again Ken!
Thanks Ken for yet another really informative upload. I couldn't agree with you more about the issues arising from subjectivity in this area of stamp identification, and listening to your calm, thorough, personal investigations certainly makes me feel a lot less frustrated! An area I have particularly struggled with over the years is with the identification of chalky paper. My collection is primarily GB and the Commonwealth, and so many issues (particularly KGVI) seem to have been printed on both 'ordinary' and 'chalky' paper. I'm reluctant to use the old-fashioned 'silver' test to check the paper type - have you made any videos in this area yourself as I'm sure they'd be very helpful!
A pleasure to make them. I did a section on chalky paper in the other KEVII video: ua-cam.com/video/85dZ_HdQbrc/v-deo.htmlsi=qOsC87vcbUY8NkxG&t=1100 I don't prefer the silver test either. And, once you see it, it's much easier to see. Good luck
Wow - very interesting deep dive into this series Ken! Look forward to checking my own of these - I have a ton of these from box lots and am happy to learn that there so many varieties!
Ken, Wiseman, who was definitely an expert, stated that setting the presses up required a great deal of skill but was dependent on individual. Thus, one press roller may in effect have had a slightly higher pressure than another giving potentially 2 different shades. The 10/- appears to be DLR because of the uniform perfs. The 1/2d 1d design types have an ill defined halo around the crown for DLR. The stamps produced by Harrison have a solid outline of the halo. I hope I have done this right. I set up AlansStampBlog on the same system you have ie blogspot. I have posted a link to a basic presentation I gave to the local stamp club on the subject. The backs of used stamps are of no value I believe. All my mint stamps are fairly consistent and certainly do not show the colorations you display. Most probably ink absorbed from the backs of envelopes when the stamps were being removed.
I found your presentation. Thank you for sharing. I think you are right about the 10/-, but I hadn't heard of this perf difference before. I also agree with your individual-dependent printing understanding. Thank you for all this.
You've just reminded me that I have my pre-Elizabethan stamp waiting to be sorted and I stuck on Edward VII two months ago. I'm not a fantic about shades at this level - I'm too small potato in that area yet.
What a great video on colour shades. I totally agree with you that it is subjective. That is the main reason for me not pursuing it at the moment. I just stick with collecting stamps by their intended colour. Maybe for me the best way would be to show different shades without properly cataloging them. Anyways, this sparked some interest to revisit my GB collection.
I do. I'm eager to make an episode about them, but I want to get a copy of the Stanley Gibbons catalog with King Charles first so I can be sure I've got the whole set.
These are so difficult that I decided to buy them all mint from Stanley Gibbons. I hope that they have a good reference collection and, at least, they guarantee their stamps "for life" when you purchase from them.
I like and collect this series, but I rely on the pared down Scott catalog... I find the range of colors and papers too arbitrary to concentrate on... and any individual stamp might not be the exact shade with which it was printed. I enjoy collecting these more on postcards and by postmark. I will add that I appreciate your effort and dedication... you are well on your way to writing a paper on these; dated stamps and examples on cover would be of use.
It's one of those cases where Scott may be more right than SG. On the other hand, I was just sorting some Canadian stamps, and Scott doesn't even list the possibility of a hi-bright paper type. Probably because you have to have a UV light to see it.
I'm not an expert in these, but I did find this good explanation for a visible light approach. www.stampcommunity.org/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=73673#:~:text=How%20do%20you%20tell%20the%20difference%20between,paper%20types%20on%20used%20stamps%3F&text=The%20image%20on%20an%20AOP,UV%2C%20the%20coating%20looks%20grainier. I think there are only three of these that are troublesome. The 1p Crimson, the 2p Myrtle Green and the 10p Orange Brown. I also suspect, but haven't confirmed, that for the paper variety, the phosphorescent effect happens on the back of the stamp as well. Did you need help with how to see phosphoresces?
Ken, first let me say that this is an excellent presentation and outlines the problems we all face when determining color. I would suggest you consider joining the Great Britain Philatelic Society if you want to take this to a greater depth as they have some real experts on the subject. My own knowledge is very limited.
I would need photos to give examples that might help alleviate some of your issues but I tried signing in with Google to your blog and it just cycled back.
First the paper used regular river water as far as I am aware. The water would change in particulate content depending on the time of year. This was not addressed fully until the Wilding issue where you get both cream and whiter paper. The paper was then shipped to DLR where it was gummed and glazed. The early Harrison and Somerset printings were not glazed. Hence the poorer print quality.
Color control and matching is a complex issue not the least of which is the retained reference stamps needed to be stored to Inland Revenue standards. If a replacement was required, then the initial reference stamps had to be destroyed first it seems (ref. Wiseman). Letterpress is a precise printing process. Wiseman in his Vol 1 of the De La Rue Years, shows a block of stamps where the righthand column of stamps is raised upwards and in a darker color. Getting the pressure correct and even across the entire 2 plates was definitely a challenge. Too heavy and you would pick up ink from the background, too light and you had a lighter shade.
The paper was supplied by Turner throughout the period, including the 1911 printings and was considered of high quality. DLR introduced chalk surface coated paper in 1905, to improve print quality. The ink was therefore not absorbed as much by the paper. Over time they increased the thickness of this chalk surface which specialist can identify. This level of detail is way beyond me. You stated correctly that DLR did not pass on their ink formulae, so new formulae had to be developed. This led to quite a few variations.
Using UV is opening a whole new issue. Paper gives off a phosphorescence alone, although it is usually quite weak. A strong UV lamp is needed. The chalk surface seems to reduce the response. The exposed paper found with stamps that have selvedge all fluoresce green to my UV but my lamp is not well filtered.
Keep also in mind that the Inland Revenue required fugitive inks. The purple and green of the bicolored are doubly fugitive, especially the green. Any used stamp with faded colors due to soaking is essentially a space filler. The unified Victorian issue of 1883/4 is notorious for this and collecting quality used stamps of the green color is a real challenge.
One other note before I close. I have controls ( 1/2d or 1d stamps with a selvedge with a letter and year number) which show a slowly deepening of the green color as time progressed, although I would not call it consistent.
Ken, I did try to repeat your work but other than the stamps listed as fluorescent, I was unable to get any others to respond, other than to give different colors depending on how the ink responded to the poorly filtered UV I have.
Thank you so much for all this great information. I suspect the water purity accounts for the UV reactions I’m seeing. I’m not sure what the problem with my blog is. It’s working for me. Hmm. I’m sorry about that. Thanks for trying to duplicate my work.
Wow!!! That really makes me want to go through my duplicates, and also re-check the stamps that are already in my Scott album. That album doesn’t have spots for all the variations, but at least I could make notes of what is in there. I don’t think there is enough time or aspirin in the world for me to manage the color/ paper varieties like you have. What an amazing gift from John and thank you again for sharing your knowledge 🤗. I always learn so much 😊🎉
It was a bit maniacal, I agree
Hi Ken! Wow, this was a deep dive, almost to deep to come up for air! You are really causing me to look with totally different eyes at stamps. The colour shade differences are just so difficult and subjective as you said. Really almost impossible to master with confidence. Another video that needs to be watched many more times than one. Thanks! I love your videos, because I love learning new things.
These really are impossibly difficult to get right
Excellently researched. Wonderfully presented. Keep.it.up Ken.
Thanks, will do!
Great video! Thanks! I enjoy these varieties!
I'm so glad. Keep watching
Great video Ken! Thank you for doing the hard work and then sharing it with us.
As an aside, I've found a great tool for 'seeing' watermarks and color variations; a Wi-Fi enabled LED bulb with variable color. With an app on my phone, I can change the light on my desktop across a wide spectrum. It's not a panacea, but it's been very helpful in many instances where contrast is a problem. Anyway, thanks again Ken!
I have one of those for lighting my videos. I'll give it a try. Thank you!
Thanks Ken for yet another really informative upload. I couldn't agree with you more about the issues arising from subjectivity in this area of stamp identification, and listening to your calm, thorough, personal investigations certainly makes me feel a lot less frustrated! An area I have particularly struggled with over the years is with the identification of chalky paper. My collection is primarily GB and the Commonwealth, and so many issues (particularly KGVI) seem to have been printed on both 'ordinary' and 'chalky' paper. I'm reluctant to use the old-fashioned 'silver' test to check the paper type - have you made any videos in this area yourself as I'm sure they'd be very helpful!
A pleasure to make them. I did a section on chalky paper in the other KEVII video:
ua-cam.com/video/85dZ_HdQbrc/v-deo.htmlsi=qOsC87vcbUY8NkxG&t=1100
I don't prefer the silver test either. And, once you see it, it's much easier to see. Good luck
@@KensStampCollection Thanks for that Ken - I'll certainly be saving that link to a playlist for future reference!
Wow - very interesting deep dive into this series Ken! Look forward to checking my own of these - I have a ton of these from box lots and am happy to learn that there so many varieties!
I'd love to hear what you find
Thanks Ken. Captivating and thoroughly enlightening study. Looking forward to seeing more. Regards, Reg. South Africa.
I appreciate that,--thank you!
Ken, Wiseman, who was definitely an expert, stated that setting the presses up required a great deal of skill but was dependent on individual. Thus, one press roller may in effect have had a slightly higher pressure than another giving potentially 2 different shades.
The 10/- appears to be DLR because of the uniform perfs.
The 1/2d 1d design types have an ill defined halo around the crown for DLR. The stamps produced by Harrison have a solid outline of the halo.
I hope I have done this right. I set up AlansStampBlog on the same system you have ie blogspot. I have posted a link to a basic presentation I gave to the local stamp club on the subject.
The backs of used stamps are of no value I believe. All my mint stamps are fairly consistent and certainly do not show the colorations you display. Most probably ink absorbed from the backs of envelopes when the stamps were being removed.
I found your presentation. Thank you for sharing. I think you are right about the 10/-, but I hadn't heard of this perf difference before. I also agree with your individual-dependent printing understanding. Thank you for all this.
You've just reminded me that I have my pre-Elizabethan stamp waiting to be sorted and I stuck on Edward VII two months ago. I'm not a fantic about shades at this level - I'm too small potato in that area yet.
We're all small potatoes with these stamps. It's the undervalued stamps series between QE and KGV. People like those sets, but ignore this one.
@@KensStampCollection He was an important king. He liked to have fun and he gave us three piece suit we know today :)
What a great video on colour shades. I totally agree with you that it is subjective. That is the main reason for me not pursuing it at the moment. I just stick with collecting stamps by their intended colour. Maybe for me the best way would be to show different shades without properly cataloging them. Anyways, this sparked some interest to revisit my GB collection.
Oh, I hope you dive into them. The designs are nice.
Brilliant episode, Ken. Do you collect the GB Queen Elizabeth Wildings?
I do. I'm eager to make an episode about them, but I want to get a copy of the Stanley Gibbons catalog with King Charles first so I can be sure I've got the whole set.
These are so difficult that I decided to buy them all mint from Stanley Gibbons. I hope that they have a good reference collection and, at least, they guarantee their stamps "for life" when you purchase from them.
I forgot to add a huge Thank You for making this super interesting video.
It’s hard to imagine anyone better at getting these right
Im always keeping them for later without sorting. 😢
You should reach out the British Library. I believe they possess archives from De La Rue.
A great thought. Somehow it seemed to me that they were too prestigious for me to reach out to.
@@KensStampCollection Graham Beck from exploring stamps has a few videos from their collection. They seem very friendly and inviting.
I remember those. You are so right
I like and collect this series, but I rely on the pared down Scott catalog... I find the range of colors and papers too arbitrary to concentrate on... and any individual stamp might not be the exact shade with which it was printed. I enjoy collecting these more on postcards and by postmark. I will add that I appreciate your effort and dedication... you are well on your way to writing a paper on these; dated stamps and examples on cover would be of use.
It's one of those cases where Scott may be more right than SG. On the other hand, I was just sorting some Canadian stamps, and Scott doesn't even list the possibility of a hi-bright paper type. Probably because you have to have a UV light to see it.
hi , do y know how to identify aop machin stamps, not sure how to, can you please help me with that , thank you
I'm not an expert in these, but I did find this good explanation for a visible light approach.
www.stampcommunity.org/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=73673#:~:text=How%20do%20you%20tell%20the%20difference%20between,paper%20types%20on%20used%20stamps%3F&text=The%20image%20on%20an%20AOP,UV%2C%20the%20coating%20looks%20grainier.
I think there are only three of these that are troublesome. The 1p Crimson, the 2p Myrtle Green and the 10p Orange Brown. I also suspect, but haven't confirmed, that for the paper variety, the phosphorescent effect happens on the back of the stamp as well. Did you need help with how to see phosphoresces?
@KensStampCollection thank you for that ; to see it , I got a uv lamp , also have a signoscope t2
@KensStampCollection just checked the link , many thanks, very helpful
Hey Ken, 👋👋👋👍👍👍💪💪💪😝
Hey there!
Stamp collectors nightmare
Really! And some are just normal shade variations, not worthy of catalog numbers. What a pain.
you need to identify which ones are worth big bucks..
I think I've identified the most valuable ones. Still, nothing in this set is really big bucks. Nobody's retiring off these stamps.