South Africa Bi-lingual pair ID

Hello Fellows, here is another question about my Bi-lingual South
African pairs. Trying to identify my used pair of the Scott # 44 ( I
think). I ran across this quandry. For the non Scott users it is the
2'6p of the bi-lingual pairs. As Scott indicates, the photogravure
issue, 1930-45 "the shading below the country name is solid OR shows
signs of wear". So far everything is good. Then I came across
another copy that has an additional line of inking below the country
name. The stamp that shows this is the underlying stamp in the
photo. Scott also says that "the engraved pictorials are much more
finely executed and show details much more clearly than the
photogravure". On the underlying stamp, the shading below the country
name is solid, not composed of fine lines as indicated in the
description for the engraved stamps, but the actual image has less
detail than the one I suspect to be the photogravure. From what I can
tell, the pair is the more detailed of the two. The pair is the non
hyphen issue, so it is earlier. Does that make sense? Any help
please.
Thanks!
Wolf-==-


http://www.southslope.net/~paradimes/2_6photo.jpg

Top Recess two white lines under name 1927
bottom rotogravure one white line 1932
1949 fully screened roto fuzzy definition

My query some time back, was given a link to a wonderful site
south africa the pictorial definitives
but I cannot find the link.

HTH


wrote in message ...
Hello Fellows, here is another question about my Bi-lingual South
African pairs. Trying to identify my used pair of the Scott # 44 ( I
think). I ran across this quandry. For the non Scott users it is the
2'6p of the bi-lingual pairs. As Scott indicates, the photogravure
issue, 1930-45 "the shading below the country name is solid OR shows
signs of wear". So far everything is good. Then I came across
another copy that has an additional line of inking below the country
name. The stamp that shows this is the underlying stamp in the
photo. Scott also says that "the engraved pictorials are much more
finely executed and show details much more clearly than the
photogravure". On the underlying stamp, the shading below the country
name is solid, not composed of fine lines as indicated in the
description for the engraved stamps, but the actual image has less
detail than the one I suspect to be the photogravure. From what I can
tell, the pair is the more detailed of the two. The pair is the non
hyphen issue, so it is earlier. Does that make sense? Any help
please.
Thanks!
Wolf-==-


http://www.southslope.net/~paradimes/2_6photo.jpg

Thank you very much Ryan
this time it goes into the database.

"Ryan Davenport"
Here's the link you were looking for, Rodney.
http://www.rjbw.net/SA1926-54.html
Ryan

rodney wrote:
Top Recess two white lines under name 1927
bottom rotogravure one white line 1932
1949 fully screened roto fuzzy definition

My query some time back, was given a link to a wonderful site
south africa the pictorial definitives
but I cannot find the link.

HTH


wrote in message ...
Hello Fellows, here is another question about my Bi-lingual South
African pairs. Trying to identify my used pair of the Scott # 44 ( I
think). I ran across this quandry. For the non Scott users it is the
2'6p of the bi-lingual pairs. As Scott indicates, the photogravure
issue, 1930-45 "the shading below the country name is solid OR shows
signs of wear". So far everything is good. Then I came across
another copy that has an additional line of inking below the country
name. The stamp that shows this is the underlying stamp in the
photo. Scott also says that "the engraved pictorials are much more
finely executed and show details much more clearly than the
photogravure". On the underlying stamp, the shading below the country
name is solid, not composed of fine lines as indicated in the
description for the engraved stamps, but the actual image has less
detail than the one I suspect to be the photogravure. From what I can
tell, the pair is the more detailed of the two. The pair is the non
hyphen issue, so it is earlier. Does that make sense? Any help
please.
Thanks!
Wolf-==-

http://www.southslope.net/~paradimes/2_6photo.jpg

Here's the link you were looking for, Rodney.

http://www.rjbw.net/SA1926-54.html

Ryan

Rod,

how about:

http://www.stampboards.com/viewtopic...=+South+Africa

groetjes, Rein

Op Wed, 17 Mar 2010 05:01:14 +0100 schreef rodney iprimus.com.au
"pookiethai"@NOSPAM:



Top Recess two white lines under name 1927
bottom rotogravure one white line 1932
1949 fully screened roto fuzzy definition

My query some time back, was given a link to a wonderful site
south africa the pictorial definitives
but I cannot find the link.

HTH


wrote in message
....
Hello Fellows, here is another question about my Bi-lingual South
African pairs. Trying to identify my used pair of the Scott # 44 ( I
think). I ran across this quandry. For the non Scott users it is the
2'6p of the bi-lingual pairs. As Scott indicates, the photogravure
issue, 1930-45 "the shading below the country name is solid OR shows
signs of wear". So far everything is good. Then I came across
another copy that has an additional line of inking below the country
name. The stamp that shows this is the underlying stamp in the
photo. Scott also says that "the engraved pictorials are much more
finely executed and show details much more clearly than the
photogravure". On the underlying stamp, the shading below the country
name is solid, not composed of fine lines as indicated in the
description for the engraved stamps, but the actual image has less
detail than the one I suspect to be the photogravure. From what I can
tell, the pair is the more detailed of the two. The pair is the non
hyphen issue, so it is earlier. Does that make sense? Any help
please.
Thanks!
Wolf-==-


http://www.southslope.net/~paradimes/2_6photo.jpg





--
Gemaakt met Opera's revolutionaire e-mailprogramma:
http://www.opera.com/mail/

Thank you Rein,
hope you are keeping well.
any more microdots?
rodney

"Rein"
Rod,

how about:

http://www.stampboards.com/viewtopic...=+South+Africa

groetjes, Rein

On Mar 17, 7:09*am, "rodney" pookiethai@NOSPAM iprimus.com.au wrote:
Thank you Rein,
hope you are keeping well.
any more microdots?
rodney

"Rein"
Rod,

how about:

http://www.stampboards.com/viewtopic...=+South+Africa

groetjes, Rein

Wow, thanks all, that is really helpful. Looks like I'm going to be
spending a bit more time with my few dozen examples that have been
neglected so long. Like Colin says, this has got to be one of the
more confusing and difficult series to identify that were ever
printed, by any country. Makes the US Wash/Franklins a piece of
cake. So I guess I'm going to have to go to eBay and find some
misidentified issues. Could be some opportunity there. Knowledge is
power!!! Cheers all and thanks for the links.
Wolf-==-