1906 pictorials

I have several imperforate pairs of the 1906 pictorials but I'm trying to figure out exactly what they are

Scott lists 7 of these (101b-113a), presumably as imperforate stamps

These are also shown in Saleski who adds several more to the Scott list
Saleski doesn't explicitly describe them as pairs (only as imperforate) but his illustrations are all of pairs.

But Saleski also describes imperforate proofs (P119-P131) and Manfred Beier's website shows a number of single "paper proofs" which are imperforate

So how do I figure out what mine are? stamps or proofs?
Some have gum and some don't if that helps

I also have what I take to be two die proofs in imperforate pairs:

1c in blue (as on Manfred's site as 101 die proof blue)
20c in a light red (maybe Manfred's 106 die proof 4)

However I don't see these listed in Saleski

Any help would be appreciated


  • The key is the gum for the 1906 imperforates.

    For imperforate plate proofs that are color trial proofs, they have no gum. It is rare to find a color trial proof with gum. These are the easy ones.

    For imperforates in issued colors with gum, they are imperforate stamps.

    For imperforates in issued colors without gum, I consider them plate proof color trials in issued colors. Usually, these are not well printed. Also, if you find inverted centers of imperf proofs (without gum), they are "true" inverted centers, and not "manufactured inverts" where the vignette fits perfectly in the frame even though the frame is not symmetrical.

    Hope that helps. It is not obvious, and I have had a bunch of conversations on the topic. Sellers will not necessarily document these stamps properly.

    People that collect imperforates usually like to collect pairs, as they are easily documented as imperforate (versus closely cropped perforated stamps), as some country's imperforates are very rare/expensive.

    I think pairs just look nice, and as imperfs, they won't separate!
  • Bryant

    I had assumed gum would be a legitimate stamp and no gum a probable proof but it's good to get it confirmed
Sign In or Register to comment.