It is the same size and has the same general layout as the most recent Yang PRC Catalogue 1949-2009, the 15th edition.
Anyone seen it yet and have any comments?
- Site Admin
- Posts: 125
- Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 7:14 pm
- Location: Rural Sussex, England
I like something with lots of pictures and detail, why they were issued, what the images mean, etc. But it must be in English because I don't read Chinese.
The catalogue parallels the Yang catalogue quite closely. I would have to say there are certain things I prefer in the Yang, but there are also many things I prefer in this SC catalogue.
I hesitate to comment on prices because the PRC market is so volatile. Prices for most everything I looked at were above the Yang values, significantly. But PRC values can change so fast, I am always suspect when I see them in print. And being in America, even with the Internet, I have little way of keeping up with daily/current prices. I use catalogue prices as more of a guide to what is more expensive than another, and how much so.
I have some specific comments I will be posting. But note that this company, like Yang, is also a retail stamp firm, so they are aware of current values. And being in Singapore, they are much closer to the China market than am I.
Yang and the CS catalogue agree on issue date, 1950.02.10, perforations, sheet composition and printer. Yang does not list the stamp size, which I find very useful when examining S/S's. CS does list stamp size.
CS adds number issued for each denomination.
CS's diagram for originals vs reprints is much clearer, larger and much improved.
CS shows the set images on the left, the text about the set on the right throughout the catalogue.
Both catalogues use same print font, which as I age becomes too small and too light. I find I use my magnifier more each day.
Both catalogues picture all stamps in full color.
CS stamp images are bigger, and to me, clearer.
Yang has 269 pages, CS has 271.
CS for whatever reason lists few varieties. The 8 fen Shanghai print of the R8 set (Peasants and Soldiers) is not listed. If you fail to list even such major varieties as this, not sure you can call yourself a specialist catalogue. Even the Scott lists the Shanghai 8 fen print variety.
But note the CS catalogue in this same set says 2.5 fen and 10 fen were printed by China Modern Printing Works, the rest of the set by People's Bank of China. Yang lacks printer info on many issues.
So understand that both catalogues have good points, both are lacking in some areas.
I will have more comments to make over time, but encourage anyone to comment, that is what a forum is for after all, discussion.