Stamp Watermarks - what are they and how to see them best?

crosscrescent · Post by **crosscrescent** » 22 Apr 2007 14:53

Can anyone tell me the various ways of looking at watermarks other than soaking them in water (which I think does not really work with some stamps and you can't do these with mint ones)

Morley Bright (which is so cumbersome to press here and there and you can't do these with bigger stamps or miniature sheets and looking at the stamp at different angles in the light.

I was told you could use cigarette lighter fluid but wonder whethe this damages the stamps.

Heard there are some other electronic devices but the prices are probably rather high for the casual or general collector. Thanks.

Post by **admin** » 22 Apr 2007 15:23

A small black plastic tray, and lighter fluid always works for me.

crosscrescent · Post by **crosscrescent** » 22 Apr 2007 15:39

Thanks for the response Glen. I take it the lighter fluid does not harm the stamps (mint or otherwise)?

Another question though, is there any device that can detect watermarks of stamps on cover. Saw a document with some old Straits Settlements stamps for sale (these are fiscally used with all those huge red-orange marks) and wonder how you detect watermarks on these.

Post by **admin** » 22 Apr 2007 15:44

The non flammable one is essential tho!

In 99.99999% of cases it is fine. Certainly with modern issues. You can buy special watermark fluid which is expensive and works only as well in my experience.

On cover they "lift" the stamps usually with Lindner stamp wetting fluid, and hinge them back into place.

crosscrescent · Post by **crosscrescent** » 22 Apr 2007 16:12

Thanks, Glen, for the reassurance. My daughter says the lighter fluid is really cheap here. However, I don't think the seller of that document would want me to lift those stamps off the document just to satisfy my curiority.

Cheers

Post by **admin** » 22 Apr 2007 16:53

Andrew, that is what EVERY expert body does if you submit a cover where the stamp watermark needs to be vertified.

crosscrescent · Post by **crosscrescent** » 22 Apr 2007 16:56

Thanks Glen

Now to hunt for that special fluid and the non-flammable lighter fluid (not sure whether I can find the first one here and didn't know you have a non-flammable lighter fluid - I don't smoke I suppose.)

Post by **admin** » 22 Apr 2007 17:11

Anything with Benzine explodes near flames. Not a good idea for stamps. Or humans.

crosscrescent · Post by **crosscrescent** » 22 Apr 2007 22:38

Just wondering Glen,

If there is non-flammable lighter liquid, then how does it light up? And if it is non-flammable and not meant to light up, then why have it as lighter liquid in the first place. Sorry if I sound so unknowledgeable but believe me I am asking this is all earnestness. Thanks Glen.

Cheers

jobi01 · Post by **jobi01** » 23 Apr 2007 01:42

The ultimte all purpose watermark detector, works on or off cover, singles to sheets:

The X-Ray Machine

But make sure your machine uses "soft rays" rather than "rigid beams" that are useful for determining chemical composition.

jobi01 · Post by **jobi01** » 23 Apr 2007 01:46

HEALTH ADVISORY!

Use of lighter fluid or benzene can lead to cancer, blidness, liver and kidney failure and a whole lot more

Watermark fluid specifically created for the purpose is highly recommended

However, if you choose to save a buck in the short term, make sure you work in a well ventilated area.

RickStead · Post by **RickStead** » 23 Apr 2007 09:11

Even with the right equipment and chemicals, it is sometimes very difficult to discern detail in a watermark, such as whether it is inverted or not.

crosscrescent · Post by **crosscrescent** » 23 Apr 2007 13:41

Maybe the best way to solve all these problems is to get the post offices in the world to agree to print the exact design of the watermark used so that poor sighted ding dongs like me can avoid getting cancer, liver problems, accidental burning, nausea, high blood pressure, watery eyes, headaches and potential heart failure. Gosh didn't know watermark detecting can be so harzadous to your health.

Cheers anyway

Post by **GlenStephens** » 23 Apr 2007 14:46

Well I should be dead long ago if it caused an issue.

Yes a well venilated area is good advice.

ghopper02 · Post by **ghopper02** » 06 May 2007 18:43

I've found a way to see most watermarks without spending anything extra - I use my scanner.
I purchased a Safe Signoscope but it still allows me to examine only a stamp or two at a time. It does work great for the hard ones, but for checking out a couple dozen stamps at once NOTHING beats a flat-bed scanner.

Here are a few scans & how I setup the scanner to get them.

Lay the stamps face-up on the scanner glass - if the scanner lid isn't black on the underside, cover the stamps with a sheet of black paper. You must adjust the White & Black points - best to prescan & then select just the stamps - set the black & white points so they just bracket the image data in the histogram. This basic setup yields the image below (a block of New Zealand Sc#247 and singles of Malta Sc#196 & Mexico Sc#307)

You can enhance this image somewhat by blurring the image slightly (I do this in the scanner software - you can also do the same thing in image editing software like Photoshop).

Another enhancement that can help (although this takes a bit of messing with to get right) is to move the Black & White points closer together. Depending on which portion of the image data you bracket, the watermark will stand out better.

You can also enhance this last method by blurring it.

Another trick that I've found works sometimes better than using a black background is to place the stamps face-up on the scanner bed and then cover them with a sheet of glass. Leave the scanner lid OPEN WHILE SCANNING. I know it sounds odd, but it yields good results on occasion. I've found it to help with some of the New Zealand watermarks. Below is a scan without the lid.

Two additional points:
1) If you want to just classify the watermark & don't need a permanent record, you don't have to save the file - you can spend the entire time in "Preview" mode on your scanner software.
2) If you want to scan large batches - place the stamps in clear plastic pages. You can easily scan both back & front!

Cheers,
Doug

Post by **ozstamps** » 06 May 2007 18:50

Wow -- what a great tutorial ... never heard of that method .. seems to work fine!

ghopper02 · Post by **ghopper02** » 06 May 2007 18:53

Thanks!

I've mentioned this to several other collectors & it was new to them also - thought it merited mentioning here.

I don't like using lighter fluid or anything else like that on stamps - I'd rather use some "non-invasive" method.

-Doug

crosscrescent · Post by **crosscrescent** » 06 May 2007 21:55

Doug, thanks a million for pointing out something we scanner-users can do - beats all the other life-threatening liquids or pocket-shrinking methods so far.

scurralous · Post by **scurralous** » 07 May 2007 03:30

This link may be of some help :-
http://www.pgacon.com/tips_on_scanning.htm#Scanning%20Watermarks

ebay_dealer · Post by **ebay_dealer** » 07 May 2007 07:01

I just keep sniffing the lighter fluid,it is so addictive.... but it does work a treat on wmks. I normally ban my kids from playing with matches when I use it as I would hate to burn any of the stamps.

sandgroper · Post by **sandgroper** » 07 May 2007 17:27

Great posts by ghopper02 and Scurralous. Those nuggets of information are just invaluable

wannabgeek · Post by **wannabgeek** » 11 Jul 2007 09:29

I would like to know what is the normal position for watermarks. I have looked on a site that shows you different watermarks and from what I can tell this Tasmanian watermark is upside down? Am I correct and does this make it an 'inverted' watermark as shouldn't it be with the crown at the top and the v at the bottom? Also does this add to the stamps value at all?
Cheers Skie

Front of stamp

watermark

and another just in case it is hard to see in the first image

Also Kevin Morgan the little liftout you put in Julys SN re roo's with the pics of watermarks is a really good idea. Do you plan to do the same with KGV's and variety watermarks?

doug2222usa · Post by **doug2222usa** » 11 Jul 2007 09:48

BENZENE is dangerous.

BENZINE, sometimes called naphtha or petroleum ether, is not good for you either, but somewhat less toxic. My opinion, neither one should be used as watermark fluid.

======================from a website:
Benzene exposure has serious health effects. Breathing high levels of benzene can result in death, while low levels can cause drowsiness, dizziness, rapid heart rate, headaches, tremors, confusion, and unconsciousness. Eating or drinking foods containing high levels of benzene can cause vomiting, irritation of the stomach, dizziness, sleepiness, convulsions, rapid heart rate, and death.

The major effects of benzene are chronic (long-term) exposure through the blood. Benzene damages the bone marrow and can cause a decrease in red blood cells, leading to anemia. It can also cause excessive bleeding and depress the immune system, increasing the chance of infection.

ghopper02 · Post by **ghopper02** » 11 Jul 2007 10:22

I'd agree - it does appear to be an "inverted" watermark.
Whether it's also reversed or not is tough to tell though - especially with this since the crown & V are the same left to right as right to left...

ghopper02 · Post by **ghopper02** » 11 Jul 2007 13:43

Just got back home - the "V" in the "V over Crown" watermark is double lined on one side & not on the other so you can tell the difference. If reversed, it would read as it does from the front of the stamp with the double line side to the left.

Your stamp has the watermark inverted but not reversed - if you turn it upside down, the double line side of the "V" is on the right side.

clanmackay · Post by **clanmackay** » 11 Jul 2007 14:59

With each era, the watermark fluid of choice changes.

It was first Benzene. Benzene is teratogenic ("monster-making") -- it can cause mutated babies. It also has highly toxic fumes.

It was supplanted by carbon tetrachloride, but that proved too bad for you, too.

We can get "custom" watermark fluid in the States, like that stuff that comes in the clear bottle with the white label (can't think of the name), but its problem (and that of its ilk) is that it evaporates way too quickly.

Some lighter fluid is badly distilled, and contains heavier petroleum byproducts. Over time, in subsequent dips, the stamp will develop a greasy sheen that is very difficult to remove.

The fluid of choice for the pros in this country? Ronsonol lighter fluid. Pure, light, cheap, attractive (and easy to find on a cluttered desk!) bright yellow bottle, and works a charm. Some watermarks show up in full saturation. Some only show up during the evaporation process, which, rather than being a fraction of a second, lasts minutes. That's its only drawback: you find yourself holding it by tongs and waving it around to get it to dry faster.

Is it good for you? Probably not. I feel good when I inhale the fumes. I don't know if this is because it's a comforting reminder of the joys of philately, or its action as a drug! It's similar to opening a pack of fresh Magic: The Gathering cards or a new tube of tennis balls and inhaling the aroma. Or the proverbial "new car smell". All of those are petroleum outgassings, so there you go.

One other neat thing about watermark fluid, but maybe especially Ronsonol: it brings out the design of light yellow stamps beautifully. I had a piece of torn paper that I would not have even considered philatelic were it not for the cancel. I dipped it, and, voila: a design. Still no goddamn idea what it was, though. Took it to a meeting, and a real expert identified it as a corner of a piece of Hyderabad postal stationary. Again, there you go.

COLIN · Post by **COLIN** » 16 Nov 2007 19:47

Hi All

I use normal Benzine, but i do not use a black tray. what i use is a pair of welding helmet glass clear and dark. dark on the bottom and clear on top. this holds the stamps flat and holds the fluid in a sandwich between the two pieces of glass. and does not evaporate.

the trick here is to make sure that the two pieces of glass lap properlay.

apptec · Post by **apptec** » 16 Nov 2007 20:06

Hi All,

Great Idea with the scanner, works a treat here.

And the lighter fluid, we are not talking drinking this stuff, so a well ventilated area, and a small amount of fluid, everything should be OK.
And Colin's idea of the welding glasses, wow wish i had of thought of that. Get idea Col. I'm going to try it this weekend.

mobbor · Post by **mobbor** » 17 Nov 2007 07:37

This is a generalisation, but I believe with practice & perseverence it should be possible to distinguish most watermarks (even on piece or cover) with the aide of nothing more than a strong-ish light.

Australian George V are easy; roos are a little more complicated because of the 3 different single watermark designs.

jobi01 · Post by **jobi01** » 17 Nov 2007 09:29

I have found the Ott light makes a great light source for examing postal cards. The cheap light boxes sold in craft stores are useful only as paper weights. A good bright light source covered by white Lexan works well also. When the light box is larger than the item being examined use cardboard to mask the perimeter light (not only easier on the eyes but makes focusing on the watermark easier too).

David Smitham · Post by **David Smitham** » 24 Jan 2008 12:43

Greetings!

Other than the likes of watermark fluid which still can be difficult to detect watermarks on thick chalk coated papers (eg some of the spiral CA watermarks) ordinary daylight can also be used!!

It sounds strange but it can and does work!

Essentially a watermark is a thinner piece of the paper upon which a design is printed on one side and is gummed on the other. Sometimes a chalk surface coating is applied to the paper before the design is printed thus making the "thinner" (ie watermark) area very difficult to see because there is not such a great difference in paper thickness where the watermark is versus where it is not.

By holding the surface of the stamp obliquely to a light/daylight and looking at the surface one an see the slight indentation in the paper where the watermark is. Providing that you know what the watermark type is one can then work out whether it is inverted etc.

This method I found useful on the likes of some British Antarctic Territory 1971 decimal stamps.

One advantage is that it does not harm one's lungs but may damage one's sight through prolonged concentration!

Thank you.

David.

Post by **ozstamps** » 24 Jan 2008 12:54

David .. I agree the obligue daylight method works for me too. Take a bit of practice tho.

For mint issues from 70s and 80s like BAT, Falklands and Pitcairn it is about the only way.

Highlander · Post by **Highlander** » 25 Jan 2008 21:03

What's daylight?

Living in the North of Scotland this time of year with blizzards all day yesterday and torential rain all night and day today it's a good job I have my OTT light or I would have a big pile of stuff to check come May when the sun occassionaly visits.

Posted with the full approval of the Scottish Tourist Board

Post by **ozstamps** » 25 Jan 2008 21:06

Ha! well we are having a bit of a heatwave here in Australia.

Probably why the UK-Oz migration pattern has always been in ONE direction. ;0

doug2222usa · Post by **doug2222usa** » 25 Jan 2008 21:31

Right now 11 degrees in Columbus, I think that's minus 12 Centipede or whatever the heck you use.

Post by **ozstamps** » 25 Jan 2008 22:39

2 degrees Centipede is 4 degrees Frankenstein isn't it?

waroff49 · Post by **waroff49** » 25 Jan 2008 22:59

Like everything else, you need good books for knowledge and a good watermark detector for watermarks. I use a SG Detectamark when visual methods fail. Costly but so are catalogues, good albums, good stockbooks. A proper detection of a w/m may change $1 to $1,000, price paid for in one stamp.

cakehead · Post by **cakehead** » 03 Feb 2008 15:44

Will take a selection of RSA 1st Rep defins to the office Monday

If they show up, I'll become a believer

Post by **GlenStephens** » 14 Aug 2008 01:34

waroff49 wrote:Like everything else, you need good books for knowledge and a good watermark detector for watermarks.

I use a SG Detectamark when visual methods fail. Costly but so are catalogues, good albums, good stockbooks.

A proper detection of a w/m may change $1 to $1,000, price paid for in one stamp.

Agree 100% Bill.

I just listed up a few of these beauties here at $30 off as a "Father's Day" special for anyone looking to hint at a USEFUL gift!
.

http://www.stampboards.com/viewtopic.php?p=353766

Faust · Post by **Faust** » 26 Sep 2008 18:54

Hi folks,

Is there somebody in this board who can explain, how to detect a watermark from a stamp on a cover, leaving the cover intact?

Frederik

ewen s · Post by **ewen s** » 26 Sep 2008 18:56

Hi Frederick,

I would have no idea but there are some Stampboarders who can tell the watermark just from a scan. You could try posting a picture if you are enquiring about a specific item?

Cheers,

Ewen

Faust · Post by **Faust** » 26 Sep 2008 19:24

Ewen,

Thanks for your advice, I will try, I added a copy of a stamp.
From the cancel date it must be a 1 or 2nd WMK. Myself I don´t see any WMK.

Frederik

The Pom · Post by **The Pom** » 26 Sep 2008 20:46

You can often see the wmk on stamps on cover by holding them up to the light at an oblique angle (as you would look for phosphor bands).

Either that, or a bright light from behind.

Cheers
Chris

Post by **gavin-h** » 26 Sep 2008 20:47

From the date 1915 on the postmark, would this narrow down the possibilities

Faust · Post by **Faust** » 26 Sep 2008 21:20

Thanks Chris,

I tryed it out with a bright light from behind and it is a second WMK.

Frederik

petri · Post by **petri** » 28 Sep 2008 01:43

There is also watermark detector which you can use without taking stamp out of cover, at least "Morley Bright Roll-a-tector". I have never used it so I can´t tell anything more, but I have heard (or read) of it.

Post by **ozstamps** » 28 Sep 2008 01:58

Faust wrote:Ewen,

Thanks for your advice, I will try, I added a copy of a stamp.
From the cancel date it must be a 1 or 2nd WMK. Myself I don´t see any WMK.

Frederik

Dead easy .. second watermark.

First wmk does not have perfs like this.

.

Faust · Post by **Faust** » 28 Sep 2008 02:05

Thanks guys for your advices.

Frederik

josto · Post by **josto** » 30 Sep 2008 06:54

Hi!

How about this one? Any hints for the watermark. Looking at the date it could be 1st or 2nd watermark.

By the way, could anyone of you put some light on the way this letter took!?

Thanks

iomoon · Post by **iomoon** » 30 Sep 2008 08:31

Looks like it was sent from Perth as registered mail on June 24th, 1915. Arrived in Kellerberrin on the 25th after travelling up route 94.

Sat at Kellerberrin for a month. Was returned to Perth on the 24th of July. Arrived in Perth on the 26th of July where it got its Dead Letter Office cancel. Handed over to the Land Title Office on the 28th of July.

STAMPBOARDS - Postage Stamp Chat Board and Stamp Forum

Stamp Watermarks - what are they and how to see them best?

Stamp Watermarks - what are they and how to see them best?

scanning etc

NOTE: Benzine and Benzene are two very different chemicals

watermark detecting

Can't soak stamps, the water froze in the bowl

watermarks on a scanner

How to detect a watermark from a stamp on a cover?

Picture added

Re: Picture added

Who is online