Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
I've been laying out pages for my Iceland stamps and I've decided to follow the Facit order with Airmail and charity stamps in chronological order. This way, I better understand the historical context of the various charity stamps.
I was reviewing the Scott order, and it just feels disjointed. Since Scott lists so few airmail stamps for Iceland, I do not see the point of pulling them to the back of book. I know that for the US, as we only have a handful of charity stamps, this is not a big deal. However, for European countries, I need to make decision now, as there are a large number. My Finland collection has a large percentage charity.
Do you have any comments on how you arrange your country collections, or general worldwide? What is your philosophy on charity stamp (semi-postal) arrangement?
Regards,
Don
Login to Like
this post
I usually arrange them in the order of the catalog I'm using just to make it easier to do a wantlist. But, I agree - it is so much nicer when they are chronological and combined. I just don't see any benefit to separating them as per Scott, but there must be some logic behind the decision. As most issues were valid for domestic postage, I don't think usage would be a huge factor. Maybe that was a bow to the airmail collectors?
Login to Like
this post
One of the major inconsistencies with Scott is with listing regular postage, semi-postal, and air post stamps. With some countries the listings for these types of stamps are separate. With other countries, they are combined into sets, and finally with other countries the listings are a combination of the previous two scenarios. It's enough to make one set their hair (if they have any) on fire.
If you want to arrange the stamps per the catalog you are using, like Theresa said, it's much easier to keep an inventory list. If you are looking for presentation, then I think that falls back to how you prefer to arrange the stamps. How do you do it with other countries? Then you may want to consider doing it that way to be consistent with the rest of your collection. Just thoughts for you to consider...
Login to Like
this post
Theresa,
I think you have it! For the US, I will keep my Curtiss Jenny's away from my Washington and Franklins out of tradition. However for Scandinavia, I will collect by Facit and cross-reference Scott number in my notes.
Another thing - Scott will list surcharges well away from the stamp set referenced. Facit shows the surcharges within the set or near the referenced set. It's much easier. Since I haven't arranged pages before and am moving away from a Scott Specialty layout, this is my chance to make it my own.
Don
Login to Like
this post
"It's enough to make one set their hair (if they have any) on fire."
Alas, I have none!
Thanks for your comments. I do not feel like re-inventing the wheel. I'm using the Steiner pages as a basis for my own designs, so if I get into multiple countries, it is a consideration I need to make for consistency.
Login to Like
this post
"Scott will list surcharges well away from the stamp set referenced"
Well, that's another inconsistency. Sometimes, but not often, the surcharges are included with the regular set.
See why I want to buy Scott? I hope to win the Powerball tonight. That will go a long way towards that goal, and thus permitting me to keep what little hair I have left on my head!
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
I see no purpose in separating 'semi-postals' from the others if you are collecting all the stamps of the period.
I suspect there was once a certain snobbery among cataloguists about 'semi-postals' (the name itself is dismissive), many of which were produced merely to extract more money from the purchaser, such money not always verifiably directed to the named fund (or the fund a cover for private wealth accumulation). This was the case in Nazi Germany.
On the other hand some collectors separate 'official' stamps from their chronological run, as do many dealers.
Login to Like
this post
Facit separates the official stamps, as you said. Coming from a US-centric collecting style, I originally separated everything, but I'm finding that the "story" is more cohesive by collecting by the time period. I have to remember that this is for my own enjoyment, first.
It's an interesting topic.
Login to Like
this post
The whole idea of separating "normal" postage stamps, stamps with surcharge ("semipostals") and airmail is strange and unlogical, but I could have accepted this choice by the Scott editors if they had been consistent in its application. Now there are some surcharged stamps that are in the normal area, as well as airmail stamps that have "airmail" printed on them. What is the point of a separate category if you do not put all the stamps that fit in it, in it?
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Originally I was doing that, however, I hit a snag with someone (I want to say Denmark or Belgium) stuff I'd been working on.
How do you organize if you're looking at say regular stamps that start in 1922...
then hit a batch of Postals from 21-30 and say some air mails from 1924-1927? Then hit another batch of regulars from 1925..
So your organization is:
Standard: 1921, Postal: 1921-1930, Standard: 1922, Standard: 1923, Standard: 1924-39, Air Mail: 1924-1927, Standard: 1925?
So if you get a 1926 air mail stamp, you have to go back before your 1925 collection?
I agree with Jansmom... Scott is horrendous at id'ing semi-postals vs. postage stamps and they just never seemingly bothered to correct their 'out of sequence' ones.
Login to Like
this post
12:13:44pm
All my collections are chronological.
Login to Like
this post
Being a Scott US only National snob up until a couple of years ago or so, I did not know any different from the Scott system. When I dove into World Wide with a monster 2 volume Minkus album and picked up a Minkus World catalog,I was pleased, I really like the chronological Minkus layout. I had looked at Scott Internationals and Specialties, but prefer the Minkus for WW mainly because of the layout.
I will stick with the Scott for US as they are staying in the National for as long as I own them.
Login to Like
this post
All the discussion about a pure chronological order makes me wonder about the term, "Back of the Book" (or BOB). Is that term an invention of a Scott-centric world? Could BOB have emerged as a concept if catalogs and albums all ran from 1 to n in pure chronological order? Inquiring minds want to know!
-Steve
Login to Like
this post
11:56:33am
" ... When I dove into World Wide with a monster 2 volume Minkus album and picked up a Minkus World catalog,I was pleased, ..."
The Minkus Supreme and Master Global albums are much better for world wide collectors, and I still use my 1972 Minkus world wide catalogs despite their age. Often stamps that are impossible to find in a Scott are easily located in the Minkus and have more simple information as to what the stamp is about.
Remember it is your album, so put the stamps where you want them.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
12:42:56pm
Even the 1st three airmails in Scott are listed out of date order. Instead they are listed in denomination order. C3 was the 1st stamp issued May 13, 1918, C2 was next on July 15, 1918 and C1 was issued December 15, 1918. I know that these stamps had different catalog numbers prior to the reorganization where they started using prefixes. They were probably in date order at that time. I have to look at one of my older catalogs when I get home.
Login to Like
this post
The Scott catalog numbering system is not designed to be chronological.
Login to Like
this post
10:34:27pm
" ..... The Scott catalog numbering system is not designed to be chronological...... "
" .... chrono (delete c-h-r-o-n-o ) logical..." ????
Login to Like
this post
Dear Forum,
I've been laying out pages for my Iceland stamps and I've decided to follow the Facit order with Airmail and charity stamps in chronological order. This way, I better understand the historical context of the various charity stamps.
I was reviewing the Scott order, and it just feels disjointed. Since Scott lists so few airmail stamps for Iceland, I do not see the point of pulling them to the back of book. I know that for the US, as we only have a handful of charity stamps, this is not a big deal. However, for European countries, I need to make decision now, as there are a large number. My Finland collection has a large percentage charity.
Do you have any comments on how you arrange your country collections, or general worldwide? What is your philosophy on charity stamp (semi-postal) arrangement?
Regards,
Don
Login to Like
this post
re: Arranging semi-postal/charity stamps within main country collection
I usually arrange them in the order of the catalog I'm using just to make it easier to do a wantlist. But, I agree - it is so much nicer when they are chronological and combined. I just don't see any benefit to separating them as per Scott, but there must be some logic behind the decision. As most issues were valid for domestic postage, I don't think usage would be a huge factor. Maybe that was a bow to the airmail collectors?
Login to Like
this post
10:09:31am
re: Arranging semi-postal/charity stamps within main country collection
One of the major inconsistencies with Scott is with listing regular postage, semi-postal, and air post stamps. With some countries the listings for these types of stamps are separate. With other countries, they are combined into sets, and finally with other countries the listings are a combination of the previous two scenarios. It's enough to make one set their hair (if they have any) on fire.
If you want to arrange the stamps per the catalog you are using, like Theresa said, it's much easier to keep an inventory list. If you are looking for presentation, then I think that falls back to how you prefer to arrange the stamps. How do you do it with other countries? Then you may want to consider doing it that way to be consistent with the rest of your collection. Just thoughts for you to consider...
Login to Like
this post
re: Arranging semi-postal/charity stamps within main country collection
Theresa,
I think you have it! For the US, I will keep my Curtiss Jenny's away from my Washington and Franklins out of tradition. However for Scandinavia, I will collect by Facit and cross-reference Scott number in my notes.
Another thing - Scott will list surcharges well away from the stamp set referenced. Facit shows the surcharges within the set or near the referenced set. It's much easier. Since I haven't arranged pages before and am moving away from a Scott Specialty layout, this is my chance to make it my own.
Don
Login to Like
this post
re: Arranging semi-postal/charity stamps within main country collection
"It's enough to make one set their hair (if they have any) on fire."
Alas, I have none!
Thanks for your comments. I do not feel like re-inventing the wheel. I'm using the Steiner pages as a basis for my own designs, so if I get into multiple countries, it is a consideration I need to make for consistency.
Login to Like
this post
10:23:39am
re: Arranging semi-postal/charity stamps within main country collection
"Scott will list surcharges well away from the stamp set referenced"
Well, that's another inconsistency. Sometimes, but not often, the surcharges are included with the regular set.
See why I want to buy Scott? I hope to win the Powerball tonight. That will go a long way towards that goal, and thus permitting me to keep what little hair I have left on my head!
2 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
re: Arranging semi-postal/charity stamps within main country collection
I see no purpose in separating 'semi-postals' from the others if you are collecting all the stamps of the period.
I suspect there was once a certain snobbery among cataloguists about 'semi-postals' (the name itself is dismissive), many of which were produced merely to extract more money from the purchaser, such money not always verifiably directed to the named fund (or the fund a cover for private wealth accumulation). This was the case in Nazi Germany.
On the other hand some collectors separate 'official' stamps from their chronological run, as do many dealers.
Login to Like
this post
re: Arranging semi-postal/charity stamps within main country collection
Facit separates the official stamps, as you said. Coming from a US-centric collecting style, I originally separated everything, but I'm finding that the "story" is more cohesive by collecting by the time period. I have to remember that this is for my own enjoyment, first.
It's an interesting topic.
Login to Like
this post
Approvals
re: Arranging semi-postal/charity stamps within main country collection
The whole idea of separating "normal" postage stamps, stamps with surcharge ("semipostals") and airmail is strange and unlogical, but I could have accepted this choice by the Scott editors if they had been consistent in its application. Now there are some surcharged stamps that are in the normal area, as well as airmail stamps that have "airmail" printed on them. What is the point of a separate category if you do not put all the stamps that fit in it, in it?
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Arranging semi-postal/charity stamps within main country collection
Originally I was doing that, however, I hit a snag with someone (I want to say Denmark or Belgium) stuff I'd been working on.
How do you organize if you're looking at say regular stamps that start in 1922...
then hit a batch of Postals from 21-30 and say some air mails from 1924-1927? Then hit another batch of regulars from 1925..
So your organization is:
Standard: 1921, Postal: 1921-1930, Standard: 1922, Standard: 1923, Standard: 1924-39, Air Mail: 1924-1927, Standard: 1925?
So if you get a 1926 air mail stamp, you have to go back before your 1925 collection?
I agree with Jansmom... Scott is horrendous at id'ing semi-postals vs. postage stamps and they just never seemingly bothered to correct their 'out of sequence' ones.
Login to Like
this post
A Service Dog gives a person with a disability independence. Never approach, distract or pet a working dog, especially when (s)he is in harness. Never be afraid to ask questions to the handler (parent).
11 Feb 2015
12:13:44pm
re: Arranging semi-postal/charity stamps within main country collection
All my collections are chronological.
Login to Like
this post
re: Arranging semi-postal/charity stamps within main country collection
Being a Scott US only National snob up until a couple of years ago or so, I did not know any different from the Scott system. When I dove into World Wide with a monster 2 volume Minkus album and picked up a Minkus World catalog,I was pleased, I really like the chronological Minkus layout. I had looked at Scott Internationals and Specialties, but prefer the Minkus for WW mainly because of the layout.
I will stick with the Scott for US as they are staying in the National for as long as I own them.
Login to Like
this post
re: Arranging semi-postal/charity stamps within main country collection
All the discussion about a pure chronological order makes me wonder about the term, "Back of the Book" (or BOB). Is that term an invention of a Scott-centric world? Could BOB have emerged as a concept if catalogs and albums all ran from 1 to n in pure chronological order? Inquiring minds want to know!
-Steve
Login to Like
this post
Silence in the face of adversity is the father of complicity and collusion, the first cousins of conspiracy..
15 Feb 2015
11:56:33am
re: Arranging semi-postal/charity stamps within main country collection
" ... When I dove into World Wide with a monster 2 volume Minkus album and picked up a Minkus World catalog,I was pleased, ..."
The Minkus Supreme and Master Global albums are much better for world wide collectors, and I still use my 1972 Minkus world wide catalogs despite their age. Often stamps that are impossible to find in a Scott are easily located in the Minkus and have more simple information as to what the stamp is about.
Remember it is your album, so put the stamps where you want them.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Immediate Past President - West Essex Philatelic Society www.wepsonline.org
16 Feb 2015
12:42:56pm
re: Arranging semi-postal/charity stamps within main country collection
Even the 1st three airmails in Scott are listed out of date order. Instead they are listed in denomination order. C3 was the 1st stamp issued May 13, 1918, C2 was next on July 15, 1918 and C1 was issued December 15, 1918. I know that these stamps had different catalog numbers prior to the reorganization where they started using prefixes. They were probably in date order at that time. I have to look at one of my older catalogs when I get home.
Login to Like
this post
02:06:28pm
re: Arranging semi-postal/charity stamps within main country collection
The Scott catalog numbering system is not designed to be chronological.
Login to Like
this post
Silence in the face of adversity is the father of complicity and collusion, the first cousins of conspiracy..
18 Feb 2015
10:34:27pm
re: Arranging semi-postal/charity stamps within main country collection
" ..... The Scott catalog numbering system is not designed to be chronological...... "
" .... chrono (delete c-h-r-o-n-o ) logical..." ????
Login to Like
this post