Specialization??? Hell or heaven?

[Rein]

I have to disagree with Gonzalo here, although most of Rein posts have a level of technical detail that I don't use in my collection, it is always useful to learn more about my stamps, and to know that the knowledge is right here in case I need it tomorrow.
When I started in this forum, Rubiera's posts about PyR I were really shocking for me: I could not believe such a degree of detail to classify stamps and papers. I would have never thought about asking him to stop because I could not understand him. Would you?

Up to what level do we need to specialize in our collections? Or do we prefer not to at all? Is that possible??

What would make us resign from specialization? Money? A bad eyesight? Lack of accessible information???

¿Hasta qué nivel tenemos que se especializan en nuestras colecciones? ¿O preferimos de ninguina manera? ¿Es eso posible??

Lo que nos haría renunciar a la especialización? ¿Dinero? Una mala visión? La falta de información accesible???

[sinfiligrana]

Specialization=Fun

Regards
Alejandro

[Sarcosis]

Specialization=Fun

Regards
Alejandro

I agreeeeeeee
Comparto plenamente!!!

[Rein]

Stamp Collecting is fun! Agreed!

But citing Nestor Pavan:

"La Filatelia comienza donde termina el catálogo".

And that is where specialization seems to come in!

A stamp collector will take an example of an assumed unique stamp and mounts that stamp in his pre-printed album and looks it up in a long list of numbers and places a cross in front of its number .... And so it goes on until the list is completely crossed out...

That is collecting and a collector can only be happy when his/her collection is complete!

A philatelist realizes that the collection will never be complete simply by reason of its impossibility to be complete.... A philatelic collection is infinite, endless!

[Sarcosis]

...That is collecting and a collector can only be happy when his/her collection is complete!...

So we will never be happy????

Thats because of money or new discoverings...

Thanks Rein, now I realized that happiness to me is just a dream!!!

Regards
Sergio

Por lo tanto, nunca seremos felices
Eso es por el dinero o descubrimientos nuevos
Gracias Rein, ahora me di cuenta de que la felicidad para mí es sólo un sueño!

[Rein]

Realizing that there is no sense in wanting to be complete is not preventing you to be happy!

I feel great having found yet another miraculous characteristic in the 10c Rivadavia and I can sense that is not the end of it!

Should I know for sure that I had seen it all, I would be terribly unhappy

[Rein]

A more or less simplified catalogue like Mello Teggia may give you the illusion that when you have all the 3002 stamps of Argentina in your collection you are complete. Having just 2984 of them, it is only a matter of time and money to reach that goal. Fulfill that wish and you are ready and done with...

Should you have had that ambition, you were bound to meet a lot of obstacles due to fact that Mello Teggia is not a simplified pur sang catalogue at all. There is a lot of hidden specialization in it, that leads to numerous questions in this Foro. Questions that can not be simply answered by a yes or no or a literature reference. It is that type of hidden specialization I meant to tackle in this thread in the first place....


rc2107

[zeus25971]

Even without entering into a deep study of the printing method of the stamp, there are several items that can be collected, new, used, different colors ( shades of a color)), from where has been sent, when has been sent, envelopes with different uses, repetitive errors, "españoles (flying specs), etc. So if you decide to do it you can have hundreds of a single stamp "selected" by different criterions.

Now, I.M.H.O. what makes a collection Interesting to see, is to select and define a few criterions and create a collection from there. Even the way you present it, is part of your collection. I disagree with you when you say that the ones who has one of each are "collectors" and "not philatelists"......

Regards
Luis

Aun sin entrar en un estudio profund de los metodos de impresion de una estampilla, hay muchas formas de coleccionar, nuevo usado, diferentes tonos de una misma estampilla, desde donde fueron enviadas, cuando fueron enviadas, sobres con diferentes usos ( tarifas ), errores repetitivos ( variedades), errores ocasionales ( mosquitos), etc. ASi que si uno lo decide puede juntar cientos de una misma estampilla, seleccionadas por diferentes criterios.
En mi humilde opinion lo que hace una coleccion interesante de ver es justamente el que se hayan seleccionado unos pocos criterios y a partir de ahi desarrollar una coleccion "consistente". Si uno se pone a pensar hasta la forma que uno presenta su coleccion es importante.

Disiento con ud cuando dice que los que coleccionan una de cada son coleccionistas y no filatelistas

[stamps9407]

...the ones who has one of each are "collectors" and "not philatelists"......

I was unable to find this phrase (written), any way it is not about agree or disagree, it is about to read the dictionary

From http://dictionary.cambridge.org/diction ... hilatelist
philatelist noun /fɪˈlæt.əl.ɪst//-ˈlæt ̬-/ n [C]
a person who collects or studies stamps and postal history

From http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/philatelist
phi·lat·e·ly  /fɪˈlætli/ Show Spelled[fi-lat-l-ee] –noun
1. the collecting of stamps and other postal matter as a hobby or an investment.
2. the study of postage stamps, revenue stamps, stamped envelopes, postmarks, postal cards, covers, and similar material relating to postal or fiscal history.

[Rein]

A dictionary - an internet one or a printed one - is not the sole answer...

Whereas a philatelist is a stamp collector, a stamp collector is not [yet] a philatelist....

Luis does not agree with me, but a philateist has gone beyond the phase of just collecting OR - as Nestor put it - philately starts where the catalogue ends - and a stamp collector may not get beyond the phase of using the catalogue as the sole guide for his/her collection.

This gets him /her often in trouble as the catalogues are not clear enough and/or overestimate a certain aspect of a stamp that is not really worth much more. Freaking out for the "double impressions" of offset-litho stamps that are just the result of a vibration during printing, is a real Argentinean tradition that you will not find elsewhere - plenty of countries having lots of offset-litho printed stamps like in the Netherlands where no stamp collector [let alone philatelists] has ever bothered to look for double impressions ....

[stamps9407]

So to be consistent to yourself this post title shall be

Philatelist??? Hell or heaven?

, any ways who cares I am happy collecting stamps, the only difference is now I have a different name for my hobby

[Rein]

So to be consistent to yourself this post title shall be

Philatelist??? Hell or heaven?

, any ways who cares I am happy collecting stamps, the only difference is now I have a different name for my hobby

No, as I had not really started what I wanted to begin!

And of course I had to satisfy you by answering the sidelines .....

[Rein]

Two major forms of specialization in the postage stamps of Argentina have to do with perforations and types of paper or watermarks.

Using a perforation gauge is hardly considered a specialist tool for a stamp collector.... The results are pretty accurate and reliable as long as the gauges are rather discrete.

A few examples of Argentinean stamps will make that clear:

The 1882 Sobrecitos in typography have 12 1/2:12 1/2 or 14 1/4: 14 1/4. No problems in mismeasuring! Also the 1892 and 1899 definitives have 11 1/2:11 1/2, 12 1/4:12 1/4 or 11 1/2:12 1/4 [or vice versa] .... The 1908 and onwards small size defintives have 13 1/2:12 1/2 or 13 1/2: 13 1/2, again no problems!





But, why only using the same main catalogue numbers for these 2 or 3 different variants????? Not even using sub-numbers???

This will occur later on with the 10c Rivadavia in red that will get an "a" and a "b" for the tipo II !!

Where there is no differentiation in numbering the stamp collector may feel free to ignore this specialization of perforation. But what about 370a and 370b????

Luckily the catalogue gives the same prices for both variants, but how to distinguish these 2???

Here the "simplified" catalogue of Mello Teggia fails to accompany the stamp collector on his/her potential way to philately!

[Rein]

How to distinguish 370a and 370b????

The 10c Rivadavia red in typography has its first type printed sheet-fed in sheets of 20x10.

01.10.1935 sheet-fed, 1st plate [only 1 printing]; the stamp measuring 24.0x30.5mm, the design 21.0x27.0mm. Known as tipo I with comb perforation 13.333:13.147 [13 1/2:13 in M.T.].

The well-known 2nd type has to be split up in at least 3 versions:

- the sheet-fed version of 17.12.1935;

2nd plate [2 printings]; the stamp measuring 24.0x30.5mm, the design 20.6x26.7mm. Known as tipo II with comb perforation 13.333:13.147 [13 1/2:13 in M.T.]

- the reel-fed version of 01.06.1936;

11 printings; the stamp measuring 24.0x30.0mm, the design 20.0x26.5mm. Known as tipo II with comb perforation 13.333:13.333 [13 1/2 in M.T.]


- the sheet-fed version of september 1938;

3rd plate [2 printings]; no further details but for the fact that according to Tenorio Casal the word "Bernardino" is back to the length of the 1st plate.... 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!

Differences in height - 30.5mm sheet-fed, 30.0mm reel-fed AND differences in perforation - vertical 13.147 [sheet-fed] or 13.333 [reel-fed]:




Both 13.147 and 13.333 would - when rounded off to the nearest quarter - give 13.250, hence there is NO sense for a stamp collector to make that difference when using a simple perforation gauge! And NO sense in assigning 2 subnumbers for these stamps in a simplified catalogue!

It would make sense to point out to the differences in height though!



rc2117

[Rein]

Another aspect of specialization that can drive stamp collectors mad in Argentinean stamps is the overattention for types of paper or rather the utmost inconsistent way it is presented!

It starts with the so-called sol chico and sol grande watermarks of the 1892 definitives! The sol chico being no watermark but a controll mark is one of Argentina's stubbornest myths.... The catalogues do list both variants of paper and assigning an "A' for the controll mark and a "B' for the watermark. So, no separate numbers!

All the stamps I have seen so far with the direction of paper (eje de enrollamiento) vertical show a nice smiling sun. The stamps that have the direction of paper horizontally, however, show no watermarks at all. Or maybe something that might be interpreted as a watermark. The small sun "watermark" is no watermark but an impressed controll mark [like the Swiss cross in ovals from the same period] and can easily disappear inused stamps!

Early smilies from Argentina:







Which one is the "small" one? It may seem obvious. But quite often you have only a small portion of the Sun in your stamp.





In the 1892 series the pseudo watermark is occasionally rather good to be scanned!