Standard sizes and perforations

[Rein]

As happens all over the world the printing houses started to minimize the number of sizes for stamps; line perforations got replaced by comb perforations as soon as the printing methods did allow. The production of a good perforation block got quite expensive as well. One block will now cost about 10.000 euro!

The Argentinean stamp sizes are not described in the catalogues, I will make a start here and eventually also give pictures to go with it.

Standard perforations since 1908 by the Casa de Moneda de la Nación:

A
C12 1/2: 13 1/2 16/14 typo (1908-), offset-litho (1916- ),
C13 1/2 17/14 typo (1908), offset-litho (1916- ),

B

a. C13 1/4 (1/4) 16/20 typo (1908-), offset (1916-)
b. C13 1/4 (1/4) 20/16 typo (1908-), offset (1916-)

C
C12 1/4: 12 3/4 24/18 offset (1928-1930)

The C perforation had been used only for 2 stamp issues; the base line indeed has 24 teeth, the sideways "needles" come up with 18 teeth:



the top tooth can be a little bit thicker:



Or quite a lot thicker!

[Rein]

The Bb perforation had been used quite frequently; the base line has 20 teeth, the sideways "needles" come up with 16 teeth:

The pins did occasionally [?] break off as can be seen splendidly!

[Rein]

For quite a long time this standardized size had been in use. There had been some revisions that went mostly unnoticed. I need the correct (official) sizes in mm to calculate the more or less exact perforation gauges...


D1 26.0x37.5 or 37.5x26.0mm
a C13 :13 1/4 (13.08:13.33) 17/25- offset-litho (1928-), photogravure on the Mailander (1939-)
b C13 1/4:13 (13.33:13.08) 25/16-, 25/17 offset-litho (1928-), photogravure on the Mailander (1939-1957)

D2 26.5x37.5mm or 37.5x26.5mm
a C13 1/2 :13 1/4 (13.58:13.33) 18/25b recess on the Giori (1955-? ), photogravure on the Mailander (1955-?),

offset-litho (1955-1977)

D3 26.5x39.0mm or 39.0x26.5mm
a C13 1/2 :13 1/4 (13.58:13.33) 18/26 photogravure on the Goebel (1968-1994)l
b C13 1/2 : 13 1/4 (13.58:13.33) 16/18, 26/19 photogravure on the Mailander (1971?)

[Rein]

For the 1955 PyR II definitives a new perforation size was introduced that is for the recess-printed 50c and 3P; for the 2 stamps in photogravure the old perforations were still in use - 80c, 2p Eva Perón Foundation - a size that was still in use for the PyR I offset-litho printed stamps. All later, post 1955, issued stamps had the new, somewhat wider size. But with the exception of the 2p Echeverria!



The watermarks are in both cases orthogonal watermarks with a symmetrical paper wire and the direction of paper vertical. Another special thing about the paper is that the wire side is at the front of the stamps - so the watermark itself is at the gum side! We do NOT have the watermark Multiple Sun+RA here but the watermark Multiple Sun+AЯ so a completely different watermark...... You can see the indents of the rhomboids [granulado] quite well and they are at the front whereas we were used to see them at the back!



Dario A. Bardi had mentioned in his chapter on the national papers the use of a "transposed" watermark [filigrana traspuesta or FT] in use for the PyR I since 1957. It is a pity that he didn't use pictures at all as that would have made his important work a lot more accessible.

[Rein]

It seems that the C perforation / size belongs to fiscal stamps:

[Rein]

Rein! Don't you dare to deal with revenue stamps!
It is already quite diffcult to classify them. Dealing with papers and perforations will drive me crazy...

Seriously: as far as I know papers and perfs are an inexplorated area in revenue stamps, so if you want...

Ernesto

Ernesto,

I wouldn't dare to touch the local fiscals, but I suppose that the national ones might have been printed in the same printing works as the postage stamps! So it is obvious to have a look at the papers and perforations as the postage stamps occasionally seem to have been printed on fiscal paper.....

GOOGLE:

Ernesto,

No me atrevería a tocar los fiscales locales, pero supongo que los nacionales podrían haber sido impresos en la imprenta mismo que los sellos! Así que es obvio para echar un vistazo a los papeles y las perforaciones, como los sellos de correos de vez en cuando parecen haber sido impreso en papel fiscal .....

[Rein]

Very interesting post about the stamp sizes... I will try to go on with it when i have some time for philately.

Realmente interesante post sobre los tamaños de las estampillas; voy a tratar de continuarlo un poco cuando tenga algo de tiempo para la filatelia.

[Rein]

B

a. C13 1/4 (1/4) 16/20 typo (1908-), offset (1916-)
b. C13 1/4 (1/4) 20/16 typo (1908-), offset (1916-)

This standard size seems to have a lot of complexity as we are dealing here with 2 different directions the comb may move! And we have to take into consideration the introduction of the 1931 Goebel reel-fed press for typography!

to be continued ....,

GOOGLE:

Este tamaño estándar parece haber una gran cantidad de complejidad a medida que estamos tratando aquí con 2 diferentes direcciones puede mover el peine! Y tenemos que tener en cuenta la introducción de la 1931 Goebel prensa de tipografía con bobina!

[Rein]

After ignoring this topic for a very long time (try 15 years), and receiving a Stanley Gibbons transparent strip to measure watermarks, I have made some measurements of the 10c Rivadavia Red:

Small, slightly irregular holes:

Type I horizontal.



Type I vertical as if it was 13.5, which it isn't.



Type I vertical measured correctly, looks like 13.1, and not 13.



Type II horizontal



Type II vertical



Medium, regular holes:

Type II horizontal



Type II vertical



After these measurements, I now realize why I am unable to separate the two vertical perforations with the naked eye:

1. The 13 perforation is from the irregular grid with small holes, and the measurement is not exactly 13.5 or 13.
2. The difference between 13.1 and 13.4 is VERY small.

I wonder if the other stamps from the first batch (October 1, 1935) are also found with the 'almost 13' vertical perforation?

[Rein]

I find the following after looking at some 5c lithograped:

The perforation comb used during the first printing, from October 1, 1935; with small and irregular holes, result in variables measurements of the vertical perforation between 13.1 and 13.4. I only find one vertical row with 13.1 perforation, and it is a row with a skipped perf hole. Here I show three illustrative blocks.

The first block is from the row with a perf skip, perforation 13.15, and it should be the same row as that for the 10c Rivadavia Red type I block shown previously.





The second block measures 13.3





The third block measures 13.4





Judging by the rare frequency with which I find the 13.1 perforation, I am guessing that it is only found in one column of the sheet. All of the 5c lithographed (5c1E1) look like they were perforated with this comb; and not with the later comb that measures exactly 13.5 by 13.5.

[Rein]

In order to estimate the perforation gauge as Tony Rubiera tried to do - and quite precise ! - you need to know the "official" size of the stamps! This happened to be

24.0x30.5mm

Once you know that size it is a matter of counting the number of teeth both horizontally and vertically. In the previous posting I had done so: 16 horizontal, 20 vertical!

Now a simple mathematical exercise:

X : 20mm = 16 : 24mm => X = 32/24 = 4/3 = 13.333333333333 [in short 13.33 or rounded off to 13 1/4!]

X : 20mm = 20 : 30.5mm > X = 40:30.5 = 13.147 [also rounded off to 13 1/4!] Tony came up with the S.G. gauge to 13.15 which is as accurate as can be!

The 5c Mariano Moreno he measured were all in offset-litho and we can be sure that all offset-litho stamps have 13.33:13.15!

to be continued ....

GOOGLE:

Para estimar el indicador de la perforación como Tony Rubiera tratado de hacer - y precisa bastante! - Lo que necesita saber el tamaño "oficial" de los sellos! Este resultó ser

24.0x30.5mm

Una vez que sepas que el tamaño es una cuestión de contar el número de dientes tanto horizontales como verticales. En la publicación anterior había hecho: 16 horizontal, vertical 20!

Ahora, un simple ejercicio matemático:

X: 20 mm = 16: 24 mm => X = 32/24 = 4 / 3 = 13,333333333333 [en una palabra o 13,33 redondeado a 13 1 / 4!]

X: 20 mm = 20: 30.5mm X> = 40:30.5 = 13.147 [también redondea a 13 1 / 4!] Tony se acercó con el calibrador de SG a 13,15, que es tan exacta como puede ser!

El 5c Mariano Moreno midió estaban todos en litografía offset y podemos estar seguros de que todos los sellos de litografía offset han 13.33:13.15!

Continúa ....

[Rein]

Most suggestions (in the literature) of what could point to another gauge for several stamps - 13 1/4:13 1/2 (instead of 13 1/4:13 or 13 1/4) - deal with the size of the stamp design. It seems to me that this is not quite reliable!

As I have pointed out in the previous posting, the gauge has to do with the stamp size - heart-to-heart from the top row of holes to the bottom row of holes!

And indeed we have 30.5mm for the offset-litho printed stamps that usually have a comb that moved from left to right or vice versa!

But for the 13 1/4:13 1/2 perforation we need to look at the stamps in typography printed on the Goebel reel-fed press! The average height of those stamps is NOT 30.5mm but 30.0mm We have to re-read Leopoldo Tenorio Casal!

X : 20mm = 20 : 30mm => X = 40/30 = 4/3 = 13.33333333 [or rounded off 13.33 or 13 1/4]. There is NO 13 1/2 or even close as that would have need a height of even less than 30mm!

So where do the 13 1/2 or 13 come from???? The midway for 13 and 13 1/4 is 13.125 and that is so close to 13.147 that we can easily make that error! And the midway for 13 1/3 and 13 1/2 is 13.375 and that is so close to 13.333!

to be continued ...

GOOGLE:

La mayoría de sugerencias (en la literatura) de lo que podría apuntar a otro indicador para varios sellos - 13 1 / 4: 13 1 / 2 (en lugar de 13 1 / 4: 13 o 13 1 / 4) - ver con el tamaño de la estampilla diseño. Me parece que esto no es muy fiable!

Como he señalado en la publicación anterior, el indicador tiene que ver con el tamaño del sello - de corazón a corazón de la fila superior de agujeros para la fila inferior de los agujeros!

Y, de hecho tenemos 30.5mm de los sellos impresados en offset, que por lo general tienen un peine que se movían de izquierda a derecha o viceversa!

Sin embargo, para la perforación 13 1 / 4: 13 1 / 2 tenemos que mirar a los sellos impresados en tipografía con la prensa Goebel con bobina! La altura media de los sellos no es 30.5mm pero 30.0mm Tenemos que volver a leer Leopoldo Casal Tenorio!

X: 20 mm = 20: 30 mm => X = 40/30 = 4 / 3 = 13,33333333 [o redondeado 13,33 o 13 1 / 4]. NO hay 13 1 / 2 o incluso más cerca que habría necesidad de una altura de hasta menos de 30 mm!

Entonces, ¿dónde el 13 1 / 2 o 13 vienen???? La mitad de 13 y 13 1 / 4 es 13,125 y que está tan cerca de 13.147 que fácilmente puede hacer el error! Y la mitad de 13 1 / 3 y 13 1 / 2 es 13,375 y que está tan cerca de 13,333!

Continúa ....

[Rein]

SInce 1935 only 2 stamps in typogrphy had been printed both on the reel-fed Goebel and on a sheet-fed typography press:

the 10c Rivadavia in red in type II and the 40c José de San Martin.

The main difference - to be measured - is the height of the stamp provided there are NO correction teeth! The reel-fed stamps have a height of 30.0mm, the sheet-fed stamps have a height of 30.5mm:



The right hand stamp also has a watermark turned 90 degrees:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2124

[Rein]

A few examples of the height of the stamp influenced by the correction teeth!

[Rein]

The 10c Rivadavia red in typography has its first type printed sheet-fed in sheets of 20x10. The well-known 2nd type has to be split up in at least 3 versions:

- the sheet-fed version of 17.12.1935
- the reel-fed version of 01.06.1936
- the sheet-fed version of september 1938

The latter may turn out to be quite problematic as no-one has paid any attention to it and because of the fact that it had been soon replaced by the 10c chestnut!

Just as with the 40c JSM the 10c Rivadavia red in typography shows the different heights: