1d Roo Broken Coastline

Not the best scan but is the broken coastline above the roos back a known variety? I dont own a acsc catalogue, it doesnt appear to be damage,

thanks

I have the ACSC catalogs, and don't immediately see that broken coast. There is another website that you could probably spend several hours looking for that one, though. Check here:

https://www.stampboards.com/viewtopic.php?t=87758

Thank you Partime, I've found it
page 3
CL49

So if im reading it right its plate c position 49, unshaded box, so its a constant printing flaw but not listed in Acsc as its not a constant variety?

It IS a constant printing flaw/variety, but ACSC does not have the time/inclination to list everything in their catalogs. They usually only list the more interesting ones.

ACSC shot themselves in the foot when they set their catalogue numbering rules. Currently:

• 1. Varieties are listed in order of their position on a sheet.


• 2. The same variety across different issues is given the same catalogue number suffix, e.g. the "(4)d" in "74(4)d".

In editing terms, the results are horrific. Let's say that the "saddle on emu" variety in plate 1, position 1, has not been identified. All of a sudden it pops up. This means that every stamp variety listed for Plate 1 for BW71 to BW82 has to be renumbered. (With the exception of BW75 which used a different Die III)

This in itself would be a deterrent, let alone the fact that the KGV volume of ACSC would need to be 4 or 5 times its current (large) size to accomodate the currently identified varieties. I used to have a 1956 printing of ACSC and it was only about 15mm thick and included all Commonwealth stamps issued by Australia. Now, the KGV volume of ACSC (which does not include the Kangaroo issues BW 1 to 58 and is about as thick as my 1956 all-issues ACSC) is almost twice as thick as that.

Partime:

That is a very kind interpretation. I think that BW has just lost interest in various ways in keeping current with varieties because of the work that would entail. Small (I hestitate to use the word "minor/major" as as that has connotations of importance.) varieties can be important, particularly when they define a particular Die. but are they interesting otherwise? Some small varieties are interesting because they represent steps in the life of a stamp. Some large varieties are interesting simply in that you wonder how they could ever have passed quality control checks. Some small/medium varieties, such as dented frame under the centre value tablet in KGV sidefaces, can be interested as they prompt questions such as why that area seems paricularly vulnerable.

ACSC seems to put a lot of importance on a stamps position in a sheet. But is this really interesting to most people. I tend to think not. When it comes to value, ACSC-identified have their nominal value whether small or large. Selling a small non-ACSC-listed variety at a comparable price can be a major task.