Próceres y Riquezas volume II

[Rein]

Whilst the types of paper for volume I have been largely established, the types of paper for volume II are hardly known or inconsistent as I just showed in the "Hawks and softies " thread.

viewtopic.php?f=137&t=3830

It is obvious that the Zárate types of paper should play an important role but also other types of paper that may be used rather for commemoratives than definitives...

The matt imported paper introduced in 1961 with an orthogonal watermark and a symmetrical paper mesh - referred to as "alisado" or "blando" could have the code - in Dario Bardi's tradition - of MI8.

But also the coated papers need expansion - the Zárate coated papers of 1963 [TZ 1] and the 1965-1969 tizado varioloso [TZ2] ....

Any other suggestions???

[Rein]

What problems the lack of knowledge - or maybe the lack of coordination of what is known - leads to certain items be catalogues that may not even exist!

Sello MT/Ex-Petrovich Oficial 402a, GJ Oficial 773. Esquiador 100 Pesos azul, sobrecarga vertical, papel tizado.

Alguien tiene este sello? Existe realmente este sello? No es el periodo de oficiales en el cual mas me especializo, pero hasta donde yo pude ver, este sello parece ser un error historico de los catalogos. Lo que si existe, en su lugar, es un mate blando baboso, con un matiz bien distinto del mate importado "normal" (duro). Y por alguna razon, muchos confunden a este ultimo con un tizado. Siempre que (supuestamente) vi "este sello", tanto en colecciones como en venta de comerciantes, era el mate blando, y no tizado.

Si alguien tiene o cree tener este sello, agradeceriamos una buena foto del mismo. Recordemos que existen "dos o tres" sellos del esquiador Servicio Oficial. Uno es en papel tizado importado con sobrecarga horizontal. Dos es el mate importado con sobrecarga vertical. Este ultimo podemos separarlo en mate duro y mate blando, que tienen distintos matices y distintas posiciones de filigrana. Y ademas, el "supuesto", existente o no, tizado con sobrecarga vertical. Atencion que el mate importado no se emitio sin sobrecarga!

Es relativamente facil identificar al papel. Si es tizado, deberia ser igual (o casi igual) al sello con sobrecarga horizontal. O bien podria ser, quizas, tizado/satinado nacional, que entonces deberia tener un papel semejante al Oficial de Mar del Plata 300 Pesos.

Con respecto a la rareza del mate blando. En nuevo sin usar, es mas escaso que el mate duro, aunque no tanto como para justificar el precio que los catalogos asignan al "supuesto" tizado. En usado, la rareza (o no) parece ser muy semejante al mate duro.

And we again get confronted with these cursed terms of "blando" and "duro"! The basic mistake here is that it got referred to as if different positions of the watermark are important whereas it is the parallel watermark versus orthogonal watermark that counts! Both types of watermarks can have several positions in relation to the design of the stamp! So what is it in the case of this 100 pesos Bariloche???


rc2133

[Rein]

Hasta que le encontré la vuelta, a mí también me costaron bastante estos esquiadores; te paso mis apuntes para clasificar los 5 tipos básicos de Petrovich; el tema de la fluorescencia no lo encontré escrito en ningún lado, es cosecha propia revisando unos 100 sellos, así que tomalo sólo 95% seguro. Te adelanto que el tuyo, si tiene la fili horizontal y la goma clara, rayada en diagonal, no cabe duda que es el Pt 606E "tizado importado"; corroborá en todo caso con luz UV que sea neutro. No te puedo decir si holandés o inglés, veremos si alguien más lo puede discriminar con el dato de la falta de redondez del sol.

Para referencia:

Pt 606E - Tizado importado. NEUTRO. Fili RA horizontal. Eje de arrollamiento del papel, horizontal. Goma clara, suavemente rayada en diagonal.

Pt 606Ea - Mate nacional. NEUTRO. Fili RA horizontal, eje de arrollamiento vertical. La goma es característicamente amarillenta, brillante. El papel es el más amarillento.

Pt 606Eb - Tizado nacional. Fluorescente. Fili RA vertical. Eje horizontal. Goma clara, lisa. El color es más claro. Por lo menos dos tiradas con tonalidades levemente distintas (una azul claro, la otra celeste).

Pt 835 - Tizado nacional. Fluorescente. Fili CASA de MONEDA. Eje de enrollamiento horizontal. Tonalidad clara. Goma clara, lisa.

Pt 870A - Tizado nacional. Fluorescente. SIN Fili. Eje de enrollamiento vertical. Tiene un suave listado vertical, visible con luz rasante. Goma lisa, clara. El color es el más claro de la serie.

Confronting Mello Teggia 1998 [above] with G.J. '09:

1148 [=606E] Tizado importado
1148A Mate Nacional
1448B Satinado nacional
1473 [=835] Tizado nacional, filigrana CdM
1495 [=870A] Tizado nacional, sin filigrana

there should be no problems! Forgetting that someone does not known what satinado means


rc2134

[Rein]

As to the Servico Oficial we find - in GJ'09:

772 Papel tizado - S.O. horizontal
773 Papel tizado - S.O.ascending
774 Papel mate importado - S.O. ascending

which is prety much the same as Mello Teggia said.

And here we got into troubles - as Jorge already had noticed!

[Rein]

Of the S.Oficial the first has an "eje de enrollamiento / direction of paper" horizontal and the "renglon de / line of AЯ" vertical;
the direction of paper relative to the shape of the stamp is m (parallel to the short side of the stamp], the watermark is orthogonal, the paper mesh is asymmetrical:




The second has an "eje de enrollamiento / direction of paper" horizontal as well with a "renglon de / line of AЯ" horizontal; the direction of paper relative to the shape of the stamp is m (parallel to the short side of the stamp], the watermark is parallel, the paper mesh is symmetrical:




Both stamps have a direction of printing B - the ink flowing upwards - which implies that the long axis of the stamp runs parallel to the circumference of the photogravure printing cylinder and the short axis of the stamp runs parallel to the axis of the printing cylinder.

Changes of the axis of the printing cylinder relative to the shape of the stamp did occur rather frequently in that period as the new 1968 Goebel reel-fed printing press got introduced. Both stamps had been printed on the 1938 Mailander sheet-fed press!

For the 1968 Goebel press the axis of the cylinder relative to the stamp shape was turned 90 degrees. Later printings had the direction of printing L = the ink flowing to the left!

No S.O. stamps had been printed on the Goebel!

[Rein]

Atencion que el mate importado no se emitio sin sobrecarga!

How come??? Any proof of that???

We have two types of imported paper so far with S.O. of which the second is the so-called "blando" or "alisado" [MI8].

It looks like there WAS NO papel tizado with an ascending S.O.!

Back to the unoverprinted 100 pesos! Indeed, we can use the term unoverprinted as these stamps had been overprinted by means of typography and not photogravure.... In the latter case it would have been a bicoloured stamp


rc2137

[Rein]

Pt 835 - Tizado nacional. Fluorescente. Fili CASA de MONEDA. Eje de enrollamiento horizontal. Tonalidad clara. Goma clara, lisa.

Pt 870A - Tizado nacional. Fluorescente. SIN Fili. Eje de enrollamiento vertical. Tiene un suave listado vertical, visible con luz rasante. Goma lisa, clara. El color es el más claro de la serie.

Judging from Nestor's scans the no watermark version has got a horizontal direction of paper "eje de enrollamiento" as well. The doctor blade [racleta] lines on the sheet margin run horizontally just as the hardly visbile lines in the CdM version AND the comb perforation .....

Seems to me that the above stamps have all been printed on the reel-fed Goebel press [first used in October 1968 for the coloured Balloon stamp of November 2nd, 1968], have a direction of printing of L - ink flowing to the left...

[Rein]

The 3 version let to explain all have been printed on the sheet-fed Mailander from 1961 onwards - issued 12.06.1961 according to J. Holler a.o.

Pt 606E - Tizado importado. NEUTRO. Fili RA horizontal. Eje de arrollamiento del papel, horizontal. Goma clara, suavemente rayada en diagonal.

Pt 606Ea - Mate nacional. NEUTRO. Fili RA horizontal, eje de arrollamiento vertical. La goma es característicamente amarillenta, brillante. El papel es el más amarillento.

Pt 606Eb - Tizado nacional. Fluorescente. Fili RA vertical. Eje horizontal. Goma clara, lisa. El color es más claro. Por lo menos dos tiradas con tonalidades levemente distintas (una azul claro, la otra celeste).

There is only one matt version!?

It has an "eje de enrollamiento / direction of paper" vertical and a renglon de / line of AЯ"" horizontal. The direction of paper relative to the shape of the stamp is M (parallel to the large side of the stamp], the watermark is orthogonal. It is not so clear, but the paper mesh may be asymmetrical. Both watermark and mesh point to the Zárate papers [ZA3]. Most plausible that we have GJ 1148A here [or 606Ea].






rc2139

[Rein]

Coated papers but which??? The imported one of 1961??? Hard to tell by the scarce readible postmarks... It has a horizontal direction of paper and the line of AЯ is vertical. An orthogonal watermark. The paper mesh is asymmetrical.






The direction of printing is still B - the ink flowing upwards. The coating is clean - no pockmarks.

It is most likely the "tizado importado" with a slighly elliptical shape of the suns, hence 1148 [or 606E]. However, the direction of paper and the line of AЯ do NOT coincide with Nestor's findings .....

[Rein]

This one is defintively a Zárate paper! It has a vertical direction of paper and the line of AЯ is horizontal. An orthogonal watermark. The paper grid is asymmetrical. This combination of properties (vertical + horizontal) is not according to any of the above mentioned Pt 606E types!!!




The direction of printing is B - the ink flowing upwards. The coating is pockmarked.The tizado varioloso (TV) started in 1966 and is a typical Zárate product!



rc2141

[Rein]

The Casa de Moneda watermark is a completely different story although the paper properties are similar. It has a horizontal direction of paper; the paper grid is asymmetrical.




The direction of printing has changed from B to L - the ink flowing leftwards instead of upwards -due to the change towards the 1968 reel-fed Goebel press.



The coating is clean - no pockmarks.

I have not seen any stamps without a watermark - the type that would have been the last to occur. Judging from a picture in an earlier post hereby Nestor, the direction of printing is L - look at the doctor's blade lines [racleta] ....

[jorgec]

And we again get confronted with these cursed terms of "blando" and "duro"! The basic mistake here is that it got referred to as if different positions of the watermark are important whereas it is the parallel watermark versus orthogonal watermark that counts! Both types of watermarks can have several positions in relation to the design of the stamp!

I think the terms "blando" and "duro" are beyond the watermark position. They are two very different papers. Very different in the sense that it is extremely easy to distinguish one from the other, disregarding the watermark.

Atencion que el mate importado no se emitio sin sobrecarga!

How come??? Any proof of that???

Proof ??? This is not math, neither physics, neither astronomy. It is philately, how could possibly be any proof that some stamp doesn't exist.

Do you have any proof that the stamp with, say CM watermark, wasn't overprinted for "Servicio Oficial"? Do you have any proof that this stamp doesn't doesnt' exist, say in green color?

I hope you see the point. You can't have a "proof" about these kind of things. When we say, in philately, that something doesn't exist; what technically we mean, is that it is "not known". We don't have any proof, we can't have any proof.

[Rein]

And we again get confronted with these cursed terms of "blando" and "duro"! The basic mistake here is that it got referred to as if different positions of the watermark are important whereas it is the parallel watermark versus orthogonal watermark that counts! Both types of watermarks can have several positions in relation to the design of the stamp!

I think the terms "blando" and "duro" are beyond the watermark position. They are two very different papers. Very different in the sense that it is extremely easy to distinguish one from the other, disregarding the watermark.

Atencion que el mate importado no se emitio sin sobrecarga!

How come??? Any proof of that???

Proof ??? This is not math, neither physics, neither astronomy. It is philately, how could possibly be any proof that some stamp doesn't exist.

Do you have any proof that the stamp with, say CM watermark, wasn't overprinted for "Servicio Oficial"? Do you have any proof that this stamp doesn't doesnt' exist, say in green color?

I hope you see the point. You can't have a "proof" about these kind of things. When we say, in philately, that something doesn't exist; what technically we mean, is that it is "not known". We don't have any proof, we can't have any proof.

Jorge,

you are right in saying that philately is not maths, so OK, we do not require a proof....

The terms "blando"and "duro" do not tell us a thing if you do not say anything about the type of watermark involved. It is like saying the paper is "thick" or "thin". Useless descriptions unless complemented.... You can NOT disregard the watermark!

[Rein]

Jorge,

why don't you get into the merits of these postings of mine? At least I seem to agree with you that there is NO tizado!? It is up to the catalogue makers that enlist them to show us they really exist.... They should proof THEIR statement

[jorgec]

The terms "blando"and "duro" do not tell us a thing if you do not say anything about the type of watermark involved. It is like saying the paper is "thick" or "thin". Useless descriptions unless complemented.... You can NOT disregard the watermark!

I didn't say that the watermark should be disregarded. I said that, even disregarding the watermark, the papers are still completely different.

I agree that "blando" and "duro" might be not the better names. But once again, it would be a semantic issue. When I am saying that this stamp exists on both "duro" and "blando", most people involved in the topic know what I am talking about. They know that I didn't mean these words literally, but to actually two types of paper denominated with these terms. They are used as names, and not as adjectives. This is quite common in philately.

why don't you get into the merits of these postings of mine? At least I seem to agree with you that there is NO tizado!?

Rein,

I'm glad you agree with me. And of course that there is merit in your posting. I would say that there is merit in all of your postings. The problem with your postings is not really what you say, but how you say it.

Come on Rein, that thread about the "isolation" of the officials was really needed? And if you happen to believe it would be better to not have a separate sub-forum (which is a perfectly valid opinion), was there any need to be so ironic and sarcastic? Don't you think there was, at least, some merit in the admins opening that sub-forum?

What I am trying to say, honestly and as friendly as possibly, is that once you would find merits in other's people postings, then probably they would also find the merit in yours.