Need Some Help with Some Machins

Phil, Are you familiar with the Adminware site? I haven’t found the time yet to delve into Machins and haven’t thoroughly checked the site out but, from what I have seen, it contains a lot of useful information for identifying them. I hope this helps!

Phil, I can commiserate. First I had to deal with Scott moving all the Machins out of the normal listing (which turned out to be good thing in the long run), but then Scott does a terrible job of describing the differences (did Amos ever hear of the phrase a picture is worth a thousand words?!?). My frustration was sufficient that I tossed all my Machins into archive and left my Windsor Machin album on the shelf untouched for well over a decade.

Why can't Scott make a simple denomination/perf/type table like Unitrade does for the Canadian definitives?

There are some resources online that I have seen that had pretty decent side-by-side pics for direct comparisons. Alas, I didn't bookmark them because I wasn't active into Machins.

I'm hoping @salmantino can chime in when he gets back online, as he seems to have good info in this area. And if he doesn't have it ready to post, he probably knows where to get the info...

Phil ,khj ,

Unless they collect US stamps, European collectors will rarely use Scott. I collect UK and Ireland and some related territories. I use the Stanley Gibbons Specialised catalogues and Hibernian Handbook.

Note: this side of the pond, we call these security perforations or elliptical perforations.

I must guess what Scott means by 1993 – 1997 and 1997 – 2004 versions.

Soon after the introduction of these elliptical perforations, the contract for printing Machin sheets was granted to Joh. Enschedé of Haarlem, Netherlands. This company used a yellow-fluorescing phosphor. This phosphor comes in different types. Also, because the paper absorbed the phosphor ink Enschedé applied varnish bars below the phosphor. The width of these changed as well.

In July 1996, Enschedé started applying a blue-fluorescing phosphor. This comes in long-wave and short-wave reactions and specialists will even discern between very dull, dull, bright, and very bright reactions, blue and violet-blue reactions.

Considering the low level of specialisation of Scott and Steiner, one guess would be that 1997 should be 1996; i.e., the 1993 – 1997 (1996) ones are the yellow phosphor stamps and the 1997 (1996) – 2004 stamps are the blue phosphor ones.

There, however, is another change that took shape around this time and could also explain the break in 1997. Harrison (soon De La Rue) regained the contract. They used chemically etched cylinders and introduced electro-mechanically engraved cylinders (EME). That would be another guess. As I understand, Enschedé used EME cylinders. So, it is a change in 1997 for Harisson, but not for Machins.


Yellow and blue phosphor Machins with elliptical perforations (short-wave uv)

For Machins, the Stanley Gibbons’ Concise Catalogue is unsatisfactory and the Specialised does not come close to being specialised. “Deegam” and “Connoisseurs” are the most widely used ones.

khj , @salmantino , Before I posted I came across a few statements on other forums putting Scott down for their lack to attention to the different varieties of Machins.
But I am using the Steiner pages right now and they copy Scott so, if I want those holes filled correctly I need to know just what Scott is talking about. I'll save all those other Machin projects for another time.




Here is what Scott states. @salmantino , Those 2 you posted, I agree they are different varieties. But reading Scott's description and going by their criteria, I'd say those 2 stamps are the same. I'm not disagreeing. I just need to know what Scott means by "nostril is incomplete" and "nostril is complete and defined by 2 lines" because every nostril I look at looks the same.

angore , The issues I'm asking about are listed as the Queen Elizabeth II of 1993-1997 and the Queen Elizabeth II Type of 1970 Redrawn of 1997-2004. The only difference Scott specifies are what the image I posted says.

You can usually tell the EME difference by the hair detail and the top of the crown details. Adminware has a good explanation and images.

OK, thanks guys. I'll look at those references and rethink this.

And for now maybe I'll just put all my Machins on blank pages sorted by face value.

khj ,

That Adminware picture is quite misleading. They are not the acid-edged and EME, but Enschedé and EME heads. 

This is the Enschedé head (note the nostril)



These are the Harrison EME and the B2 acid-etched heads. The Enschedé head was based on the B2-head.

I found an interesting Machin blog, which I wasn’t familiar with, while prowling around the internet this evening.

Machin Mania