Thank you, I have to learn how to do that it looks much better.
99.999999999999999% chance it is neither. You ask whether it is 594 or 596 like there is no chance that it is one of the very very common ones worth a penny, that look just like it. People who know little to nothing about stamps almost always think their stamp is the most expensive variety. You would have much better luck winning a mega lottery than finding one. There are only a very very few of either of these stamps but there are maybe still billions of ones that look identical to them. I'd bet that none of the people here who have been collecting for many decades has one or probably has every even seen one.
It does seem that everyone has the rare stamps, and not the common ones.
Really, a collector must always presume when cataloging a stamp that it is the most common variety unless and until extraordinary evidence surfaces to suggest that it may be an extremely rare variety. Notice I never said "...evidence surfaces to prove that it is the extremely rare variety". When a collector has a strong reason to believe that the stamp being examined is an extremely rare variety, then the seller will have to send the stamp off to get it expertized.
Did you compare your stamp to a Scott #552? The #552 was printed with a flat plate press, while the #594 was printed on a rotary press. Do you know the difference between the two printing methods? As a beginner, it is wise to read the introduction to the catalog. You will learn alot that will help you as you expand your collection.
Also, make sure that you have good tools to use. With the #594, there is only a 1/2 mm difference between it and the #552. Perforations can also be misread. An inaccurate measuring device, or a device improperly used will fool you every time.
Read the catalog listings and notes pertaining to those items. Reading the notes in the Scott catalog will automatically eliminate the stamp as being #596. That stamp is known only with either a machine cancel or with a Bureau pre-cancel. Your stamp has neither.
It is good to ask questions so that you can learn to avoid identification mistakes in the future. When you start working on the Washington/Franklin stamps, you will undoubtedly run across some stamps that will make you believe that you have found more extremely rare varieties. Read the warnings in the Scott catalog regarding how many of those stamps have been faked.
Don't get scared by all this. Just be aware that, as a beginner, you will have to learn how to identify stamps. It is not always easy, and some stamps can be really problematic to identify. Members post all the time requesting help to identify stamps. Other, more seasoned members, seem to take pride in being the first to help out, so ask away. The rustling sound you'll be hearing will be that of catalog pages being flipped through trying to help you solve the mystery.
Also Tommy, if you are wanting to concentrate on things like the Washington-Franklins you might seek a used Scott specialized at a dealer's or on eBay. Any printing within the last ten or even twenty years will serve you well.
Hi Everyone;
What the heck is "white calibration", and how does one perform that?
Just wonderin'....
TuskenRaider
White balance calibration is usually done when the picture has a blue background that should be white.
Calibration can also be required if pictures have lines in them, a rainbow effect or the color if off
As to how you do it depends on your scanner & for some like my canon, it is not straightforward - your manufacturer should have information.
From there you may need to do a color adjustment. Once it is set, that's probably the end of issues.
A lot of the scans I see on SOR need this badly. The picture referred to above looks more like a photo than a scan but a digital camera may need white balance adjustment also.
I tape a black card on the white pad of the scanner door - that helps a lot & sets off the stamp better.
Having scanner issues - don't throw it out, it may just need calibration or a better software app like Vuescan.
Hi Everyone;
nl1947 said;
"Calibration can also be required if pictures have lines in them, a rainbow effect or the
color if off"
I didn't say anything about white balance calibration for Moiré effects
I used the word CALIBRATION as a broad term for adjustment be it whatever - so no need to get nitpicky or look into the issue
My guess: Scott #552 not dark enough for a #632 and perf's are wrong. I have been wrong before. Ray
"Also Tommy, if you are wanting to concentrate on things like the Washington-Franklins you might seek a used Scott specialized at a dealer's or on eBay."
I really need something good like the book you show youpiao. Are there others that are good too? Maybe some opinions on what others use and why so I can get a good base to pick from?
This one is pretty good as well but has more than just Wash/Franks.
This stamp has 11 perforations within 2cm, and measures 19.25mm x 22.5mm, is dark green, with no post mark. It is attached to a postcard from the tornado damage from 1924 in Lorraine Ohio. Here is a picture of it, any help identifying it would be greatly appreciated.
(Modified by Moderator on 2015-09-07 21:10:57)
re: Need help with identifying whether this unused stamp is a scott# 594 or 596
Thank you, I have to learn how to do that it looks much better.
re: Need help with identifying whether this unused stamp is a scott# 594 or 596
99.999999999999999% chance it is neither. You ask whether it is 594 or 596 like there is no chance that it is one of the very very common ones worth a penny, that look just like it. People who know little to nothing about stamps almost always think their stamp is the most expensive variety. You would have much better luck winning a mega lottery than finding one. There are only a very very few of either of these stamps but there are maybe still billions of ones that look identical to them. I'd bet that none of the people here who have been collecting for many decades has one or probably has every even seen one.
re: Need help with identifying whether this unused stamp is a scott# 594 or 596
It does seem that everyone has the rare stamps, and not the common ones.
Really, a collector must always presume when cataloging a stamp that it is the most common variety unless and until extraordinary evidence surfaces to suggest that it may be an extremely rare variety. Notice I never said "...evidence surfaces to prove that it is the extremely rare variety". When a collector has a strong reason to believe that the stamp being examined is an extremely rare variety, then the seller will have to send the stamp off to get it expertized.
Did you compare your stamp to a Scott #552? The #552 was printed with a flat plate press, while the #594 was printed on a rotary press. Do you know the difference between the two printing methods? As a beginner, it is wise to read the introduction to the catalog. You will learn alot that will help you as you expand your collection.
Also, make sure that you have good tools to use. With the #594, there is only a 1/2 mm difference between it and the #552. Perforations can also be misread. An inaccurate measuring device, or a device improperly used will fool you every time.
Read the catalog listings and notes pertaining to those items. Reading the notes in the Scott catalog will automatically eliminate the stamp as being #596. That stamp is known only with either a machine cancel or with a Bureau pre-cancel. Your stamp has neither.
It is good to ask questions so that you can learn to avoid identification mistakes in the future. When you start working on the Washington/Franklin stamps, you will undoubtedly run across some stamps that will make you believe that you have found more extremely rare varieties. Read the warnings in the Scott catalog regarding how many of those stamps have been faked.
Don't get scared by all this. Just be aware that, as a beginner, you will have to learn how to identify stamps. It is not always easy, and some stamps can be really problematic to identify. Members post all the time requesting help to identify stamps. Other, more seasoned members, seem to take pride in being the first to help out, so ask away. The rustling sound you'll be hearing will be that of catalog pages being flipped through trying to help you solve the mystery.
re: Need help with identifying whether this unused stamp is a scott# 594 or 596
Also Tommy, if you are wanting to concentrate on things like the Washington-Franklins you might seek a used Scott specialized at a dealer's or on eBay. Any printing within the last ten or even twenty years will serve you well.
re: Need help with identifying whether this unused stamp is a scott# 594 or 596
Hi Everyone;
What the heck is "white calibration", and how does one perform that?
Just wonderin'....
TuskenRaider
re: Need help with identifying whether this unused stamp is a scott# 594 or 596
White balance calibration is usually done when the picture has a blue background that should be white.
Calibration can also be required if pictures have lines in them, a rainbow effect or the color if off
As to how you do it depends on your scanner & for some like my canon, it is not straightforward - your manufacturer should have information.
From there you may need to do a color adjustment. Once it is set, that's probably the end of issues.
A lot of the scans I see on SOR need this badly. The picture referred to above looks more like a photo than a scan but a digital camera may need white balance adjustment also.
I tape a black card on the white pad of the scanner door - that helps a lot & sets off the stamp better.
Having scanner issues - don't throw it out, it may just need calibration or a better software app like Vuescan.
re: Need help with identifying whether this unused stamp is a scott# 594 or 596
Hi Everyone;
nl1947 said;
"Calibration can also be required if pictures have lines in them, a rainbow effect or the
color if off"
re: Need help with identifying whether this unused stamp is a scott# 594 or 596
I didn't say anything about white balance calibration for Moiré effects
I used the word CALIBRATION as a broad term for adjustment be it whatever - so no need to get nitpicky or look into the issue
re: Need help with identifying whether this unused stamp is a scott# 594 or 596
My guess: Scott #552 not dark enough for a #632 and perf's are wrong. I have been wrong before. Ray
re: Need help with identifying whether this unused stamp is a scott# 594 or 596
"Also Tommy, if you are wanting to concentrate on things like the Washington-Franklins you might seek a used Scott specialized at a dealer's or on eBay."
re: Need help with identifying whether this unused stamp is a scott# 594 or 596
I really need something good like the book you show youpiao. Are there others that are good too? Maybe some opinions on what others use and why so I can get a good base to pick from?
re: Need help with identifying whether this unused stamp is a scott# 594 or 596
This one is pretty good as well but has more than just Wash/Franks.