tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6190925726844102948.post6263423641866986609..comments2024-03-23T04:12:08.762-07:00Comments on Big Blue 1840-1940: The Big Blue Checklist-How it is doneJimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02024632082262694589noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6190925726844102948.post-12792526282835952072013-09-22T14:04:40.403-07:002013-09-22T14:04:40.403-07:00I think you have it somewhat right.
Scott back in...I think you have it somewhat right.<br /><br />Scott back in the 19th century was a stamp dealer, but by the time the Big Blue was published, they were a catalogue and album dealer, so they didn't have a personal stake in the spaces they put in the album.<br /><br />But I did hear mentioned that they tried to put in spaces for stamps that, in fact, seem to be available- perhaps by checking the stock of dealers- or perhaps dealers told them. That might explain why some quite cheap stamps from certain countries were left out- the stamps themselves were cheap, but were not readily available.Jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02024632082262694589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6190925726844102948.post-25667800526052851562013-09-22T12:50:53.355-07:002013-09-22T12:50:53.355-07:00I'm just reading blogs as I try to decide how ...I'm just reading blogs as I try to decide how to house my own 1840-1940 collection. This is mostly a comment on part of Drew's comment above and sorry if this point has been discussed elsewhere: I'm guessing that many of Scott's editorial choices were driven by their own ability to find and inventory stamp issues for retail sale. It makes sense to assume that they knew that the albums would be creating future demand for those stamps/issues that were included and that they would try to tilt that demand in their favor through their editorial decisions.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6190925726844102948.post-79680225300665912492012-02-20T17:36:39.630-08:002012-02-20T17:36:39.630-08:00Drew,
If Scott/Amos came out with an updated Big ...Drew,<br /><br />If Scott/Amos came out with an updated Big Blue, it would be best if it was designed from scratch for all the reasons you outlined. I wish I could be sanguine about a significant revision, but realistically I don't see it happening. For one thing, there has been no significant content changes since 1969- 53 years ago! ;-)<br /><br />So Big Blue- it is what it is. ;-)Jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02024632082262694589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6190925726844102948.post-61023218228610517152012-02-20T15:00:01.712-08:002012-02-20T15:00:01.712-08:00Jim,
This is an extraordinary service you're...Jim, <br /><br />This is an extraordinary service you're providing to collectors -- and they don't have to be collectors who use Big Blue since anyone who collects can benefit from knowing about alternative, less and more expensive alternatives. Even a user of a blank album -- and perhaps them the most -- can use these excellent checklists to determine what the "proper" sequencing of stamps should be.<br /><br />In a printed album, there are always oddities such as odd sequencing of stamps. This is partly due, I think, to the publisher's efforts to issue new pages (supplements) as quickly as possible for collectors to buy to update their albums. It's done quickly because collectors want the new pages quickly and because Scott (Amos Press now) needs the income, I suppose. Unfortunately, this means a publisher has to make stamp sequencing decisions on the fly without knowing exactly what stamps will be issued later. <br /><br />Extensive series of stamps end up becoming located out of sequence in different years. This make chronological sense, but I would imagine most collectors would prefer that all stamps in a series be mounted together -- even if they were issued over many years. Scott issues newly arranged pages later which incorporate both the older and newly-issued stamps. So, even today, there are sequencing decisions.<br /><br />From their original Big Brown inclusive album, Scott settled on a "representative" selection in a single volume Scott "Junior" Album which included all stamps from the first 100 years, so 1840-1940. This is the 35,000 of 90,000 (or so) you mention. These pages had to be redesigned by Scott and editors had to make not always good decisions about what to include and what to exclude. The album became the modern Scott International Vol 1. <br /><br />In this version, Scott wisely excluded rare and expensive stamps. But I think they went overboard in doing so on the assumption I assume that the Scott Junior was truly to be a "junior" album for the general worldwide collector of all ages. This is where the problems for modern worldwide collectors originated. <br /><br />The Steiner albums available online are a modern version of the Big Brown with every stamp given a space. So, using some printing of Big Blue is likely to be the default for most general collectors.<br /><br />But why the oddities of sequencing and colors and so on? Why so many affordable stamps omitted? There must have been discussions by Scott album editors back in the 1920s or 1930s when the prepared the earliest edition of the simplified Scott "Junior" or Big Blue but who knows what they said? <br /><br /> It's too bad Scott / Amos Press doesn't have the resources to go back and redesign the entire album to reflect what we know now, including more complete sets when affordable, more clarity about colors (reflecting current Scott terminology), and other changes. But, what a task that might be for them! And would they get back their investment? <br /><br />Since we're "stuck" with Big Blue, most of us will benefit from your great checklists to guide us to choosing the best stamps. It would be nice to imagine a better alternative, though. Perhaps Scott has its pages digitized in such a way that this would be possible? Perhaps Scott could cross-migrate the Speciality (country) album pages into the International Big Blue series in such a way that a little more completeness was possible without expanding new editions of Big Blue too much. 35,000 out of 90,000 seems a little on the skimpy side to me. But without that happening, we have to live with "what stamps goes here?" and "why in the world did they leave out that stamp?" kinds of questions, I suppose.DrewMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08082601555760640397noreply@blogger.com