Message Board

Time Period:   Username Search:
Order By: Keyword Search:
   Reset Filters


Page:1 2

Posted Apr 1, 15 21:13 by William Robinson (3wbrob)

ABN Archives

Ken and Bill -
Thanks for the info. I don't know who Rudy Roy is but will start with the library.
I have the set and I can't believe it is unique.

Posted Apr 1, 15 16:32 by Andrew Reid (andrewukusa1847)

PS - Gone to...

I think that we can agree that the former Ship's Surgeon of the Eleanor Lancaster went somewhere other than where the letter did. Hopefully some deeper digging might illustrate whether it was to "San Fran", to "England", or to "Disneyland". I don't love the cover any less, though I agree with Rick Mingee that San Francisco has a bit more going for it... Beats "Deceased", or if I recall correctly, a past cover of Richard's to a Mr. Barff who was eaten by cannibals.

Posted Apr 1, 15 16:01 by Richard Frajola (frajola)

No Mas

Stephen - Take a break on this subject. A hiatus. Whatever you want to call it ... (this means I will delete any posts from anybody)

No more for now, today and next week!

Posted Apr 1, 15 15:26 by Stephen Knapp (essayk)


Since I was only citing established facts on papermaking, I am not sure what you are thinking is unproven speculation. Please cite something in what I wrote so I can clarify it for you or draw in other evidence. Is the notion of rough and smooth sides in papermaking new to you? (Stamps are usually printed on the "smooth" side of paper.) It was a subject that took me by surprise when I was digging out ribbed paper some time ago. But as I got into it, it began to make sense.

As for April Fool's joke, RF- nope. But I trust you smiled when you suggested that. Or did it flow out of a cavernous disinterest?

Posted Apr 1, 15 14:58 by Richard Frajola (frajola)


I have often found it useful to define, or re-define. philatelic terms for a specific exhibit or article when I feel the existing nomenclature is defective or inadequate. I expect such revised definitions to surive no longer than that specific purpose.

In this case, unless this was all an April Fool's day joke that I do not understand, is the end of this discussion till my immune system returns to full strength. Thanks.

PS - I still think Andrew's cover is marked "Gone to England"

Posted Apr 1, 15 14:58 by Ken Lawrence (kenlawrence)


I don't think you can start by postulating what needs to be proven unless you intend to adduce persuasive evidence. I see no reason why a less dense section of paper must be recessed more on one side than on the other except perhaps owing to gravity, so I would need either to see proof or read a compelling argument in support of that proposition, not a mere deduction from unproven speculation, to be persuaded. (Am I the only Board member who cares?) Also, the surface characteristics of fine stationery usually owe more to the method of calendering than to the wet process. 

Posted Apr 1, 15 14:28 by Ken Lawrence (kenlawrence)

Laid Paper and Watermarks


If every point you wrote is correct, that has no effect on philatelic reality, which is different. Catalog-listed watermarked stamps and postal stationery refer to watermarks that were imparted by dandy rolls, which were invented originally to make it possible for mechanized paper manufacture to resemble fine hand-made stationery. The same is true of postal stationery cataloged as laid paper, whether or not it is watermarked. 

It is surely your privilege to define terms eccentrically, and to justify your choice by arguing that another magisterium (to use Steve Gould's term for differentiating between scientific and religious realms) prefers the definitions you like, but that is not a promising beginning if you hope to stimulate a philatelic dialogue, especially if it presumes that stamps universally recognized as watermarked really are not. 

Added: The De La Rue patent for the countersunk dandy roll explicitly was granted as a technique for making watermarked paper. 

Posted Apr 1, 15 12:58 by Stephen Knapp (essayk)

Laid paper and watermarks

On Mar 27 Ken Lawrence posted: " Laid paper is exactly the same as batonné paper, but the lines are more closely spaced, the distinction being one of tradition, not substance. All these features, as well as so-called stitch watermarks, are revealed in fluid as thinner parts of the paper, but true watermarks are intentionally impressed by a dandy roll."

Based on his comments on this topic, Ken, and philatelists in general, are making a distinction between laid paper and watermarked paper on the basis of appearance of form rather than process of manufacture. That sidesteps the historical development of the phenomena in question, conflates two distinct processes, and is decidedly unscientific in my opinion. Specifically, insofar as laid lines and watermarks are concerned, a Dandy Roll ONLY produces emulations and not true marks of either kind. Appearance has nothing to do with it. The distinction arises from the "sidedness" of paper and the point of origin for these marks. In the taxonomic distinction I wish to make, the designation "true" is reserved for whatever is historically prior.

Synopsis -

Historically paper is formed as fibers in a slurry settle onto a mesh/mold formed with particular properties. Prior to machine made paper, fine wires of uniform gauge were interlaced and mounted in a deckle to produce fine mesh wove paper. Wires of different gauges were variously lapped or interlaced to create all manner of different striations for laid papers. For the first two decades after the advent of mechanization (effectively 1803), the construction of the Fourdrinier wire determined whether the paper product was laid or wove. In either case, the discrimination was based on the construction of the mesh/mold and the way the fibers settled onto it. Here it is taxonomically significant to observe that the earliest laid lines are formed in a sheet of paper from below the sheet by the deposition of fibers onto the wire, whether made by hand or machine, and by right of priority this process produces "true laid paper."

With the invention of the Dandy roll (c. 1825) for machine made paper, which impresses various surface characteristics onto a forming sheet from above, the appearance and structural function of laid paper could be emulated to a large degree, but not precisely duplicated. The critical difference between true laid paper and its Dandy roll emulation ("pseudo-laid") derives from the fact that the striations in true laid paper are formed from below the sheet, while the Dandy roll emulation is applied from above. Given that the two sides of a sheet of machine made paper are designated as "rough" and "smooth," due to the fact that in sheet formation the upper surface is treated to "finishing" processes and the lower surface resting on the mesh/mold is not, the "sided-ness" of paper creates categories of taxonomic interest. Whereas the lines in true laid paper enter the rough side from below the sheet, the Dandy Roll emulation of laid lines is impressed into the paper's smooth side, from above. Although the general APPEARANCE of the lines is the same when held to the light, under magnification the sided-ness distinction is at least theoretically observable. If we are able to devise a test to account for whether an observed set of lines originated on the rough side or the smooth side of a sheet, then we can distinguish true laid paper from pseudo-laid paper.

This same kind of distinction exists for watermarked papers. By the principle of historical priority, "true" watermarks are formed from below the sheet, Dandy Roll emulations from above. In papermaking of the late 19th century the survival of the stitch watermark is of some instructive interest. Stitch watermarks were formed in a web of paper as fibers in the slurry settled upon the material used to splice together the ends of a Fourdrinier wire into a continuous band. These marks are therefore true watermarks, and were formed always on the rough side of the paper web.

In my examination of the experimental papers of 1886-87 for the 2c red brown, I will attempt to observe the kinds of distinctions and discriminations I have alluded to here. If anyone knows of a test for distinguishing whether a mark came into paper from above or below during its formation as a sheet I would appreciate hearing about it.

Posted Mar 31, 15 22:23 by David Snow (dwsnow)

Gone to California

I think this was the cover I was thinking of, circa 1849-50, marked "Gone to California", indicating that the addressee had left for the Gold Rush.

Cheever & Towle local post, Boston (#37L1) tied by red oval "Towle's City Dispatch Post, 7 State St., 2 cents".

From the Edgar Kuphal Collection sale by Siegel, Sale 925, lot 1473. Cheever & Towle's usual method of cancelling its stamps (if at all) was to apply a small "X" in manuscript, sometimes with an extra dash or two. This is the only recorded cover with the adhesive cancelled and tied by the red oval company marking.

Image and description courtesy of Robert A. Siegel Auction Galleries, Inc.

By the way, it was easy locating this cover on the Siegel site - I did a Power Search, entered the keywords "gone to" and poof! this cover popped up. Thank you, Scott Trepel and John Zuckerman, for developing such a powerful and efficient search engine for your auction records. A boon for philately, especially with the high resolution images.


Posted Mar 31, 15 22:04 by John Barwis (jbarwis)

Andrew's mystery cover


I made a mistake: had not seen the back-stamped Sydney arrival date . The 10 July arrival obviates conveyance by the "Ann Mary".

Barque "Bermondsey" arrived on 10 July, but she sailed from Greenock so is an unlikely candidate.

Barque "Mary Ann" arrived on 9 July, departed Plymouth 16 March.

Ship "Asiatic" arrived on 10 July, departed Plymouth 16 March.

Barque "Phoenician" arrived on 11 July, departed London 12 March. She could have given her mails to the Sydney Harbor pilot boat on the 10th. I think this is the best bet. She was listed as having entered outwards for Sydney at the Customs House in London on 28 February.

Posted Mar 31, 15 21:51 by Rick Mingee (ramingee)

"Gone to..." Cover


The story is way better if the surgeon went to San Francisco instead of England. SF has cooler postal history, I'm just sayin'


Posted Mar 31, 15 21:47 by Bill Weiss (weiss111)

Albert C.

Albert is alive and well according to a report I received within the last few months, but has completely dropped out of philately.

And what a shame, as he was the #1 expert (or close to it!) in several different areas of U.S. philately, including Possessions, Newspaper Stamps and Private Coils. And he was no slouch in many other areas (like Classic U.S.) as well.

Posted Mar 31, 15 21:09 by John Barwis (jbarwis)

Eleanor Lancasrer


There was no packet service to Australia in February 1852, so Overland Mail via Calcutta would simply have added an extra step: a private ship from Calcutta to Sydney. But traffic was more frequent between London and Sydney, so GPO London simply put the letter on the next private ship departing for Sydney. The adhesive had already been applied so the sender forfeited the extra 4d.

The Eleanor Lancaster's surgeon had evidently quit his job and gone to San Francisco sometime between his arrival in Sydney in April, and when the Ann Mary arrived with his letter in June.

It's doubtful he ever received his letter. If he did it was carried out of the mail.

Posted Mar 31, 15 21:07 by Ken Lawrence (kenlawrence)

ABN Archives

If you want only the sale references, APRL has the catalogs. If you are looking for the stamps, Rudy Roy might know who has them. I believe Albert Chang was the agent for many of the leading buyers at those sales, but I don't know if anyone here is still in communication with him.

Posted Mar 31, 15 21:01 by William Robinson (3wbrob)

ABN Archival Specimen Stamps

Could someone help me track these down?
Cuba #233-52 overprinted Specimen and punched. I beleive these and load of other ABN archive items were sold around 1990 by various auction houses over a period of a couple of years. My on-line searches came up empty for sales results for these.
Any ideas would be much appreciated.


Posted Mar 31, 15 20:42 by Andrew Reid (andrewukusa1847)

Reverse of the "Gone to..." Cover

Here is the reverse of the "Gone to..." cover to the surgeon aboard the "Eleanor Lancaster".

The Sydney marking is July 10, 1852. I'm a little puzzled --- wouldn't a letter via Private Ship have been an Eight Pence (8d) rate? This cover is endorsed "Per Overland Mail via Southampton and Calcutta" which I would expect on a One Shilling rate.



Posted Mar 31, 15 19:12 by Ken Lawrence (kenlawrence)

Official Foreign Air Mail Guide (and much more)

In several articles I have mentioned that the most valuable source of World War II international air mail rates, routes, service frequency, changes, suspensions, and restorations to and from the United States is the monthly Official Foreign Air Mail Guide magazine.  Much of the information is not included in the POD's Postal Bulletins, nor in monthly supplements to the Official Postal Guide, nor in any other government publication, nor in the Wawrukiewicz/Beecher books. 

I was never able to find it on line. APRL has a copy of one issue only. Eventually I was able to buy a photo copy of the years 1940 to 1946, but it was expensive.

Now the International Postal Museum website has posted four years of it as PDF files. This is a subscription service operated by Edward B. Proud, which includes an amazing number of postal history documentary sources not available elsewhere. I find it cumbersome to use, perhaps because my computer is old and slow, but I salute Ted for his achievement, which benefits all of us, and the price is modest.

Posted Mar 31, 15 16:57 by John Barwis (jbarwis)

1852 cover to Sydney


I think your cover from London left Deal on 24 February 1852 aboard the 202 ton private ship "Ann Mary". She arrived at Sydney on 22 June.

The 480 ton barque "Eleanor Lancaster" had arrived at Sydney on 16 April 1852 from Newcastle NSW, carrying 67 Chinese laborers. She departed Sydney on 31 July 1852 for "China and Amoy".

Posted Mar 31, 15 16:35 by Ken Lawrence (kenlawrence)

Laid and Watermarked


Yes, the same process at the same time. But some unwatermarked laid paper is identical to watermarked varieties, the only difference being the added emblems and/or monograms. That's the reason we apply separate terms.

For example, the inventor of the patent lines envelope sold plain stationery versions that were identical to the Nesbitt stamped envelopes with patent lines except that the Nesbitt versions added a printed embossed stamp and a USPOD watermark monogram. Both envelopes have batonné lines, which postal stationery collectors call laid paper.

Posted Mar 31, 15 16:34 by Ian Gibson-Smith (igswvdc)

Mail Bag Locks

I am going through a pile of correspondence and documents to the Postmaster of Berkeley Springs, VA in 1852. The shown letter is from the PM of Sir John's Run and talks of a broken padlock and the sending of keys back and forth. My question is how mail bags were handled? I assume that mail was delivered by the B&O Railroad to the Postmaster at Sir John’s Run but am trying to learn how it was handled from that point on for distribution to other Post Offices. The text is as follows:

“..Your favor is at hand enclosing Key which I herewith return you and also the key to the padlock with I have substituted until I can receive a new one which I have ordered and returned the pieces of the old one according to instructions. You can send the padlock key under cover by the Carrier and have it returned in like manner which can obviate the necessity of exposing yours to being lost in transit and I can make the Route Agent open the mail received from them before leaving the train….”



Posted Mar 31, 15 14:00 by Stephen Knapp (essayk)

Laid paper vs. watermarked

"The terms laid paper and wove paper serve different philatelic categories than do the terms watermarked and unwatermarked. One would have thought these points would be agreed by all, but the urge to quibble sometimes frustrates sensibility."

I am going to have to prod Ken a bit here. The concepts you are apparently presupposing as intrinsically discreet seem to fall together in these stamps. We have laid lines and watermark figures which appear together on some of these stamps but are indistinguishable in appearance. As a matter of convention, you wish to call one set "laid lines" and one "watermarks" while positing that both may have been applied at the same time from different places on the Dandy roll. Presumably the paper was machine made. Am I getting that right?

Posted Mar 31, 15 9:22 by Richard Frajola (frajola)

Gone to

Andrew - is it a docket that summarizes the content of the letter? - or a summary docket for a pile of letters assorted by recipient as having been written after the sender had gone to England ...

Posted Mar 31, 15 9:11 by Andrew Reid (andrewukusa1847)

Gone to "where"?

Richard -

You may have a point. I always read it as San Fran because the ship it is addressed to plied the Sydney-San Francisco route, but I think that there is a 'd' at the end of the manuscript... and I might also, thinking more about it. wonder whether "San Fran" was a contemporary slang or not. More likely England. Would take more research. No indications of this being a piece of mail that was returned, other than possibly the "gone to".


Posted Mar 31, 15 8:07 by Richard Frajola (frajola)

Gone to England ??

Andrew - I see "Gone to England" ....

Posted Mar 31, 15 4:47 by Charles E. Cwiakala ([email protected])

U.S. Covers in Italian Auction ...

Ken G., Bob R.   ...

There appears to be difficulty in locating the LASER INVEST (Italy) WebSite offering U.S. 19th century covers in their 18th April 2015 public auction (Lot Nos. 786-822). A direct link is:

Chuck Cwiakala

Posted Mar 30, 15 22:09 by Andrew Reid (andrewukusa1847)

Gone to San Fran (1852)

This February 24, 1852 cover from London to the Ship's Surgeon aboard the Barque "Eleanor Lancaster" in Sydney, New South Wales attracted a "Gone to San Fran" manuscript notation as the addressee had sailed for California. Of historical note, the "Eleanor Lancaster" was the first ship from Australia to reach California after news of the discovery of gold... she was abandoned by her crew and did not go back into service for a bit!!!


Posted Mar 30, 15 17:20 by Michael Peich (mpeich)

19c Baseball themed covers


I am new to the forum, and looking forward to reading cover discussion.

At present I am doing research on 19th century covers depicting baseball scenes, equipment, players, etc. I would like to either borrow scans of baseball covers, or purchase covers for use in an illustrated publication on the subject. I have attached one from my collection.

If you have any 19c baseball covers, please contact me at my home email: [email protected]

Thank you for taking the time to read this, and I hope to hear from some of you.

Cheers, Mike Peich


Posted Mar 30, 15 16:58 by David Snow (dwsnow)

C.C. Carpenter

Richard: Thanks for your kind words and information on our man C.C. Carpenter. That is great how the recipient of the cover that you posted identified the sender (our man) in the docketing, tying the stamp in the process. What a great cover.

I found C.C. Carpenter of Golden City, Arapahoe County, Kansas Territory listed in the 1860 Federal census - here is link. 

So our man Carpenter was about 26 years of age when my 1861 cover was sent to him. So it appears that he had tried his hand at mining - any self-respecting healthy young man within striking distance of the goldfields would have picked up stakes and gone for it. Why not? Later on, surviving that rugged experience, he settled down and became a Deputy Clerk of the Court and eventually a respected Arapahoe County Court Judge, as my online research about him revealed.

To me this is the allure of postal history - researching the senders or recipients of these long-ago personal artifacts, and peering into the vanished world of their time.

I seem to recall once seeing a cover from the gold rush era endorsed "Left and Gone to the Gold Fields", or words to that effect, by the receiving post office. What a great notation.

Posted Mar 30, 15 16:22 by Ken Lawrence (kenlawrence)

Two-ocean Prexie

The 40¢ air mail rate from the United States to Chile could not have yielded a solo Prexie cover.

The rate is not scarce, nor are pairs of 20¢ stamps prepaying it, but this cover originated at APO 7 San Francisco, an army post office near the Philippine battlefront, having moved forward from Leyte as the front advanced. It therefore traveled by air to San Francisco, then down one coast or the other to South America, depending on the day it departed San Francisco. Paradoxically, service was usually faster via Miami. Departed March 5, 1945; arrived March 18.


Posted Mar 30, 15 15:24 by Ken Lawrence (kenlawrence)

Presidential series covers

I'm not enthusiastic about single usage, but I understand why it's a fun game for collectors of a series that included several denominations with no practical need.

Nevertheless, solo or not, the scarcest Prexies on ordinary mail (as distinct from souvenir covers) are the $2, $5, and 10¢ coil. If registry tags are counted as covers, the 10¢ coil is the scarcest of all. (According to Rustad, the next tier down in scarcity are solo 14¢, 19¢, and 22¢ uses, such as the recent eBay superstar.)

Here is one I like, with the 10¢ coil paying the special delivery fee in 1939, the year it was issued. Considering the Sunset Limited envelope, I deduce that the sender was on a rail tour, probably from California to New Orleans on the Sunset, then north to Chicago on the Panama Limited, then back west on one of the northern route passenger trains. The letter was posted at an Iowa railroad center, probably among the few places where a vending machine might have dispensed this coil (much as the early private vending coils are often found on post cards mailed at small Midwest rail towns).

Obviously speculation, but unusual Prexie era postal history.


Posted Mar 30, 15 14:41 by Richard Frajola (frajola)

CC Carpenter

David S - A very nice cover and rare use overland from CA to CO!

Your Carpenter was an interesting guy. Below is a letter from him in 1860 when he was at Blue River Diggings, Utah T (now Colorado, near Breckinridge). I think he was still in Colordao the following year. Probably a lot of letters delivered to him in a chunk and also likely that the were turned over to an express in Denver serving the mines ...


Posted Mar 30, 15 14:40 by Chip Gliedman (cgliedman)

Watch Your Mailboxes

A pretty new book was sitting in mine this morning. Written by two guys with funny-sounding names about some old pieces of paper. Very much looking forward to digging into it.

Posted Mar 30, 15 14:31 by David Snow (dwsnow)

Forwarded letter

This 1861 cover from California to Colorado with a "Forwarded" handstamp and Denver City receiving postmark is odd in that it has neither a forwarding address nor a due marking. At that time postal regulations required forwarded first class letter mail to be charged with additional postage at the normal rate, to be collected upon delivery. 

It wasn't until the postal regulation effective July 1, 1866 that the forwarding of first class letters was authorized at no additional charge.

Here is an example of a forwarded letter from 1861 in which 3c postage due was properly charged - Cover ID 19311.

The only explanation I can think of why this cover has no forwarding address nor a postage due marking on it might be because it was possibly lumped together with other forwarded letters for this judge and sent to him under separate cover, since he may have been traveling at that time. Does that seem plausible? Full description: Cover ID 22675.

Comments would be appreciated - thank you in advance.


Posted Mar 30, 15 7:23 by Tim O'Connor (drtimo)

3rd Spellman Symposium

On the Thursday, April 30, before Philatelic Show at Boxborough, the Museum is hosting a symposium about 20th Century Postal History. It's at Regis College and free! There's more info at the Cardinal Spellman Museum website, speakers, topics, etc. Rumor has it that the snow will be melted by then. Tim

Posted Mar 29, 15 23:15 by Gregory Shoults (coilcollector)

Bob Rufe

Congrats Bob on winning the grand! See you at Philatelic Show.

Posted Mar 29, 15 16:06 by Ken Lawrence (kenlawrence)

Laid Paper and Watermarks

These are related but separate features of paper. It is true that the original Fourdrinier machine (1807) mimicked hand papermaking when tasked with creating laid paper; its default product was wove paper. The Dickinson cylinder-mould machine (1809) offered a choice between laid and wove results. The dandy roll was invented (1825) to improve those results. Watermark designs were imparted originally by adding wire arrangements to the basic dandy roll configuration. De la Rue patented the countersunk watermark (1869), which in effect imparted the desired emblem or monogram by nullifying the effect of the dandy roll. Those are the ways that they are related. 

Nevertheless, philatelic classification is not identical to papermaking vocabulary (as post office and philatelic meanings of terms sometimes differ). The terms laid paper and wove paper serve different philatelic categories than do the terms watermarked and unwatermarked. One would have thought these points would be agreed by all, but the urge to quibble sometimes frustrates sensibility.

Posted Mar 29, 15 14:26 by John Barwis (jbarwis)

Special Handling


You'll enjoy Boxborough - a great show in a beautiful part of the country.

Posted Mar 29, 15 13:55 by Bob Rufe (bob rufe)

St. Louis Expo

Thanks Mark & John for the kind words. My purpose in attending the St. Louis show is to help Scott Ward with the marvelous Youth Area, but must agree with Drews' observations that the other elements of the Expo seem to get better and better.

For the Special Handling project, the story of the long-missing unique set of trial color proofs will be told in the next month or so in the NY Collectors Club journal.

I had expected to vie for a Grand at Boxborough with my competitive USSS colleagues, but alas, will be have to be content with Court of Honor.

Still missing is any lead on the whereabouts of a COLONIAS overprint on any of the Special Handling stamps which is thought to exist, but for which I have never heard a confirmation.

Bob Rufe - [email protected]

Posted Mar 29, 15 11:13 by Farley Katz (navalon)

Fibers suspended


Right, fibers are suspended; not dissolved. My mistake.

Posted Mar 29, 15 10:28 by John Barwis (jbarwis)



One pedantic but hopefully not too obnoxious correction. Fibers were not dissolved, but suspended. It was a mixture, not a solution.

Posted Mar 29, 15 9:44 by Richard Drews (bear427)

St. Louis Expo

The show has had record attendance for the first 2 days and a very strong auction, especially for Betty Nettle's St. Louis material and Jim Czyl's Cinderellas. The exhibits were very strong and the judges did some very thoughtful work to sort it all out. The banquet went very well. They switched to a 6:15 start, right after the close of the show and had a buffett that included chicken, salmon and brisket with barbeque sauce. Several dealers attended and high praise for the food came from Stanley and Eric-best in 10 years. Self service went smoothly and the festivities were done by 8:00. The exhibit area was then opened up and over 60 people went down to the the show floor and discussed the exhibits. We all had a great time with good friends. Well worth a visit.


Posted Mar 29, 15 9:43 by Farley Katz (navalon)

Laid vs. Watermarked in Machine-made paper

The creation of laid lines and watermarks in machine-made paper is somewhat different from than in the case of handmade paper. In a Fourdrinier machine, the paper is formed on an endless belt of woven wire. If left alone, that would (I believe) produce a wove texture. However, starting in 1825 a "dandy roll" was used which was surfaced with wire mesh and sometimes (beginning in 1839) a watermark design. The dandy roll would be responsible for the final texture and "watermark" of the paper. Depending on the nature of the wire mesh on the dandy roll, the paper would have a laid appearance or a wove appearance. Thus both the "laid lines" (if used) and the watermark were impressed together in one operation. In this respect at least, hand made paper and machine made paper are similar. See Williams, Fundamentals, pp. 45-48; Gaskell, New Introduction to Bibliography, pp. 216-220.

Posted Mar 29, 15 9:03 by Roland Cipolla (roncipolla)


Bob, Tim and Ed........congrats.  Jobs well done, as always.

Posted Mar 29, 15 8:29 by Roland Cipolla (roncipolla)

Watermark Definition

From Wikipedia........."Watermark"

"A watermark is an identifying image or pattern in paper that appears as various shades of lightness/darkness when viewed by transmitted light (or when viewed by reflected light, atop a dark background), caused by thickness or density variations in the paper."

Farley explains it perfectly.  The honeycomb pattern is a watermark.

BTW, if the paper had been made by the Honey Bee Paper Company no one would question the comb is a watermark, would they?

Posted Mar 29, 15 7:42 by John Barwis (jbarwis)

St. Louis REsults

I have not seen Ed's or Tim's exhibits, but know Bob Rufe's fabulous Special Handling exhibit well. It's good to see him capture the grand award. Well done Bob!

Posted Mar 29, 15 7:26 by Mark Schwartz (schwamoo)

St. Louis Stamp Expo

Congratulations to the Grand Award winner, Bob Rufe, for his "U.S. Special Handling, 1925-1959: the Stamps and the Service; to the Reserve Grand winner, Ed Andrews, for his "Hitler Youth - the Generations of Lost Innocence"; and to the Single Frame Grand winner, Tim Wait, for his "2c Blue Liberty Tax Stamp 1875-1883.

Posted Mar 28, 15 18:04 by Ray Porter (rporter314)

Laid vs Watermarked

OK .... is the honeycombed pattern a watermark on wove paper or laid paper with a pattern instead of parallel lines?

Posted Mar 28, 15 16:34 by Ken Lawrence (kenlawrence)


By that reasoning there's no difference between a condom and a toy balloon, between a signature and a doodle. Depriving a useful term of its meaning is sophistry of the worst sort; the difference between pettifogging and logically explaining. 

Posted Mar 28, 15 12:34 by Stephen Knapp (essayk)

Honeycomb watermark

Here is a fresh pic of the "honeycomb" watermark.


Posted Mar 28, 15 11:58 by Ken Lawrence (kenlawrence)


Thank you, John B and Bill C. Makes me feel my age. The last time I read that passage was probably in the 1980s.

Page:1 2