Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Please don't provide comparisons to lighter fluid or other forms of watermark detection devices. For this post, I am only interested in the commercial brands of watermark fluid.
Thanks.
Login to Like
this post
Hi Michael, I prefer G&K. But i have not tried Clarity Watermark Fluid.
Richard
Login to Like
this post
I have two open bottles, one is Harco safety and the other is Prinze super safe. Both are at least ten years old. I can't say I have a preference because I don't use either one that often, mostly when I am checking a Washington/Franklin.
Vince
Login to Like
this post
I'm a tad late to this thread, but can attest to "clarity" doing the job just fine for my Great Britain stamps.
Eric
Login to Like
this post
Eric, you might be late, but you're the first to say that you use Clarity.
My follow-up question is that it can be very difficult to see the watermarks on British Commonwealth stamps from the 1970s and 1980s. Does Clarity work good on those, or is that watermark still hard to see?
Login to Like
this post
I've used G&K and Clarity. I have found that Clarity is more expensive and appears to have inferior contrast to the G&K brand, but it may be a bit "gentler". I never bought another bottle of Clarity and have stuck with the G&K.
-Doug
Login to Like
this post
I've watermarked thousands of stamps with clarity. I've been happy with it, but can't give you a comparison evaluation.
I have many examples of watermarked stamps on my blogsite if you wish to take a look.
http://bigblue1840-1940.blogspot.com/2016/03/ClassicalStampsofSudan.html
http://bigblue1840-1940.blogspot.com/2013/11/BrazilWatermarks1918-1941Stamps.html
(Watermarking the eleven different watermarks for the Brazil 1918-41 issues.)
I have a chemistry background, and chose clarity at least in part for safety issues.
4 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Nice web site!
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Wow, I need to keep up with these threads. Late to respond again, egads. Michael you asked how Clarity works with British Commonwealth stamps from 1970s 1980s. Alas, I don't know, as all my British Commonwealth stamps are pre-1970. So not only am I late to respond, I have nothing to add. Complete wash.
Cheers!
Eric
Login to Like
this post
"So not only am I late to respond, I have nothing to add. "
That's what makes this site so great. Anyone can contribute to the discussion, even when they have nothing to contribute to the discussion.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
I have never used watermark fluid, so I have to ask "What are they". I don't mean in what they do, but rather what they are as in are they an alcohol or metho based product.
How do they affect the stamps?
I had a batch of stamps that I cleaned up (floated off hinges etc) and some of them seemed funny - a bit see through, curled up a bit - nothing I have not seen before, but seemed uncommonly frequent for a single batch.
I wandered if there was any affects from past use of any watermark fluid. A lot of older stamps had pencil marks on the back with numbers. Nothing that matched any of my catalogues, but I figured they aligned to a 'Scott' type or something. So I figured someone might have used a type of fluid on them.
Login to Like
this post
Most watermark fluids are "light Naptha", hence the reason why quite a few collectors just buy "Ronson" lighter fluid. In most cases it does not harm or affect the stamp in any way, including gum, which is why it is used. There are rare cases of stamps being printed with solvent based inks, which would theoretically cause the ink to run, but I have personally never seen it.
The pencil numbers on the backs you spoke of may be catalog numbers from a different source. Michel, Stanley Gibbons and Minkus all use different numbers.
Login to Like
this post
When photogravure printing became the norm for stamp printing in the 1970s, the older watermark fluid would often cause the inks on the phgotogravure atamps to run. Thus the development of the "Safe" Watermark fluid. One used the older watermark fluid for engraved stamps, and the new version for photogravure stamps.
Labels on the bottles would indicate "Not for Photogravure Stamps", "Safe for all Stamps", and such. You can still find these bottles in box lots and on eBay. I still use my glass watermark bottle as I find it better than the new plastic bottles as far as no loss of fluid through evaporation through the plastic. Mine is the blue label Harco Safety Philatelic Watermark Fluid, with the added text, "Safe for all photogravure stamps." The bottle is over 40 years old, and the plastic cap with insulator still works like new. When the bottle is empty, I refill it with fluid from a newly bought plastic bottle.
Those using the new watermark fluid on engraved stamps often complained that the watermarks did not appears as well with the new fluid. For a time, collectors used both types of watermark fluids for the different types of stamps until the old fluid was discontinued.
In the 1980s, an attempt was made to come up with a watermark fluid that worked on all stamps, and would display watermarks as good as the old fluid. I bought a bottle of this new version, and it worked well. Unfortunately the fluid gave off a horrible odor like that of a skunk. It drifted through the room and house. I guess because of all the complaints about the odor, it was discontinued.
I don't recall any other new type of watermark fluid coming onto the market until Clarity. I have never used Clarity.
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
This is what I use now, so much easier to use. A friend goes to Arizona and brings back 1 gallon cans of pure Light Naptha. It has no smell like lighter fluid, and since I only watermark older US and Hungarian stamps, the photogravure safety issue is not a problem for me.
Login to Like
this post
This has been interesting. Thanks for all the responses.
Login to Like
this post
I know many of you like to experiment with different brands of philatelic products. Has anyone tried different watermark fluids to see how they perform against each other? I am interested to see if Clarity Watermark Fluid works any better than the other commercial brands, such as Prinz.
Please don't provide comparisons to lighter fluid or other forms of watermark detection devices. For this post, I am only interested in the commercial brands of watermark fluid.
Thanks.
Login to Like
this post
re: Watermark Fluid
Hi Michael, I prefer G&K. But i have not tried Clarity Watermark Fluid.
Richard
Login to Like
this post
re: Watermark Fluid
I have two open bottles, one is Harco safety and the other is Prinze super safe. Both are at least ten years old. I can't say I have a preference because I don't use either one that often, mostly when I am checking a Washington/Franklin.
Vince
Login to Like
this post
re: Watermark Fluid
I'm a tad late to this thread, but can attest to "clarity" doing the job just fine for my Great Britain stamps.
Eric
Login to Like
this post
re: Watermark Fluid
Eric, you might be late, but you're the first to say that you use Clarity.
My follow-up question is that it can be very difficult to see the watermarks on British Commonwealth stamps from the 1970s and 1980s. Does Clarity work good on those, or is that watermark still hard to see?
Login to Like
this post
re: Watermark Fluid
I've used G&K and Clarity. I have found that Clarity is more expensive and appears to have inferior contrast to the G&K brand, but it may be a bit "gentler". I never bought another bottle of Clarity and have stuck with the G&K.
-Doug
Login to Like
this post
re: Watermark Fluid
I've watermarked thousands of stamps with clarity. I've been happy with it, but can't give you a comparison evaluation.
I have many examples of watermarked stamps on my blogsite if you wish to take a look.
http://bigblue1840-1940.blogspot.com/2016/03/ClassicalStampsofSudan.html
http://bigblue1840-1940.blogspot.com/2013/11/BrazilWatermarks1918-1941Stamps.html
(Watermarking the eleven different watermarks for the Brazil 1918-41 issues.)
I have a chemistry background, and chose clarity at least in part for safety issues.
4 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Watermark Fluid
Wow, I need to keep up with these threads. Late to respond again, egads. Michael you asked how Clarity works with British Commonwealth stamps from 1970s 1980s. Alas, I don't know, as all my British Commonwealth stamps are pre-1970. So not only am I late to respond, I have nothing to add. Complete wash.
Cheers!
Eric
Login to Like
this post
re: Watermark Fluid
"So not only am I late to respond, I have nothing to add. "
That's what makes this site so great. Anyone can contribute to the discussion, even when they have nothing to contribute to the discussion.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Watermark Fluid
I have never used watermark fluid, so I have to ask "What are they". I don't mean in what they do, but rather what they are as in are they an alcohol or metho based product.
How do they affect the stamps?
I had a batch of stamps that I cleaned up (floated off hinges etc) and some of them seemed funny - a bit see through, curled up a bit - nothing I have not seen before, but seemed uncommonly frequent for a single batch.
I wandered if there was any affects from past use of any watermark fluid. A lot of older stamps had pencil marks on the back with numbers. Nothing that matched any of my catalogues, but I figured they aligned to a 'Scott' type or something. So I figured someone might have used a type of fluid on them.
Login to Like
this post
re: Watermark Fluid
Most watermark fluids are "light Naptha", hence the reason why quite a few collectors just buy "Ronson" lighter fluid. In most cases it does not harm or affect the stamp in any way, including gum, which is why it is used. There are rare cases of stamps being printed with solvent based inks, which would theoretically cause the ink to run, but I have personally never seen it.
The pencil numbers on the backs you spoke of may be catalog numbers from a different source. Michel, Stanley Gibbons and Minkus all use different numbers.
Login to Like
this post
re: Watermark Fluid
When photogravure printing became the norm for stamp printing in the 1970s, the older watermark fluid would often cause the inks on the phgotogravure atamps to run. Thus the development of the "Safe" Watermark fluid. One used the older watermark fluid for engraved stamps, and the new version for photogravure stamps.
Labels on the bottles would indicate "Not for Photogravure Stamps", "Safe for all Stamps", and such. You can still find these bottles in box lots and on eBay. I still use my glass watermark bottle as I find it better than the new plastic bottles as far as no loss of fluid through evaporation through the plastic. Mine is the blue label Harco Safety Philatelic Watermark Fluid, with the added text, "Safe for all photogravure stamps." The bottle is over 40 years old, and the plastic cap with insulator still works like new. When the bottle is empty, I refill it with fluid from a newly bought plastic bottle.
Those using the new watermark fluid on engraved stamps often complained that the watermarks did not appears as well with the new fluid. For a time, collectors used both types of watermark fluids for the different types of stamps until the old fluid was discontinued.
In the 1980s, an attempt was made to come up with a watermark fluid that worked on all stamps, and would display watermarks as good as the old fluid. I bought a bottle of this new version, and it worked well. Unfortunately the fluid gave off a horrible odor like that of a skunk. It drifted through the room and house. I guess because of all the complaints about the odor, it was discontinued.
I don't recall any other new type of watermark fluid coming onto the market until Clarity. I have never used Clarity.
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Watermark Fluid
This is what I use now, so much easier to use. A friend goes to Arizona and brings back 1 gallon cans of pure Light Naptha. It has no smell like lighter fluid, and since I only watermark older US and Hungarian stamps, the photogravure safety issue is not a problem for me.
Login to Like
this post
re: Watermark Fluid
This has been interesting. Thanks for all the responses.
Login to Like
this post