Hi, I am back in Sydney. For those who follow my travels I have completed my assignment in Hong Kong, sadly I might add as I am in love with the place and lifestyle etc. :-) Anyway that will never die but your interest in my blog will if I do not write more often. So here I am again. And while in Hong Kong a few days ago, I picked up a few copies of this lovely MS. Hope you like it. Yes a quiz. prize of course is a copy. just email me at cddstamps@gmail.com with your mailing address , must include that please, with answer to this two part question.. I am trying to make it hard as so many of you seem to get the answers so quickly ....... 1) who considered the Great Wall to be a monument to fear ???? and 2) who said this..... . "We look for the Great Wall of China. Although we can see things as small as airport runways, the Great Wall seems to be made largely of materials that have the same color as the surrounding soil. Despite persistent stories that it can be seen from the moon, the Great Wall is almost invisible from only 180 miles up!"

Hello, something different tonight. First I hope you like these stamps. Very attractive, as butterflies tend to be. Australia Post has the usual write up about butterflies, and a mention that there are at least seven butterfly species found on the Cocos Islands and four of these are featured. If you want to know they are the Varied Eggfly Hypolimnas bolina; the Australian Painted Lady Vanessa kershawi; the Common Crow Euploea corinna; and the Meadow Argus Junonia villida. I bet you are thinking will he do a quiz. :-) ok name the other three and if I can get to the Post Office on Monday I will see if I can pick up a set of 4 as a prize. No guarantee but have fun doing the research and email me the names to cddstamps@gmail.com with your mailing address. Anyway, what is more interesting from a philatelic perspective is that these stamps were printed in 10 Micron Stochastic and these are the first Australian stamps to be issued using this technology. The use of 10 micron provides a much sharper print result giving more intricate detail. If you want to know a bit more: For print projects that require impeccable accuracy, 10-micron stochastic screening produces images over three times more detailed than conventional print techniques. In traditional offset printing, dot patterns are equally spaced in a rigid pattern. A variety of dot sizes are used to achieve tonality, density and shading. Under magnification, you can easily identify the dot pattern used to create the image. In the stochastic process, all dots used to create an image are equally sized and are much smaller than those used in traditional offset printing. The dot pattern is randomised to allow a wider range of definition and dimensional effects, as well as a broader spectrum of colours. Light and dark areas are defined by using less or more dots to achieve the variations. Projects printed using 10-micron stochastic screening have greater detail, increased clarity and greater dimensional effects, as well as better flesh tones for a more realistic result. Colour is also controlled more effectively, allowing for a broader colour spectrum with smoother gradations. I will try to get these stamps. For myself as well as it might be nice to have a first issue of these printing type in Australia. Have a good weekend.. Michael

Hello, continuing my theme of rubbish listing on auctions sites only because I saw this and just had to show you. Rubbish or what? Well I would not bid on it at any price and especially at an opening bid price of US $14.49 even with free shipping. Really this is not even a space filler is it. Sad because the seller is supposedly quite reputable but given some recent listing I am beginning to question my own judgement. This is listed at 10% of catalogue, so that may seem reasonable but really the condition is surely less than something one wants to enjoy looking at in ones collection. You tell me, am I wrong? And, you won't find me selling this quality, or any IPDA member.. I hope :-) Michael

Hello, On the subject of space fillers. Is there is a line that could be drawn, between space filler and downright damaged and maybe not worth the postage? I saw this listed on that great auction site and thought; well the seller has described it pretty well, as a space filler, but even if I was desperate why would I waste my money buying this? to start with I do not know from the listing if this is SG 98 (Cat 550 GBP) or SG 110 (Cat 275 GBP) because the watermark variety is not mentioned in the listing. The potential buyer is led to believe this is a SG 98 since it says 1865 in listing title. But that really is not enough in my view. Then I thought - and this is the reason for writing and telling you - why would I sell this. I really don't think it correct to be selling this even if it is described as a space filler. The reason I say this - you can pick up hundreds of damaged stamps in various sales outlets - ie auctions selling bulk - and start selling them as this. Is that ethical I ask myself? I don't think so. Just my view: but if you are selling this you are just clearing all your rubbish at the expense of the not so experienced collector. If you are the not so experienced collector, or your friend is, then ask them why they are wasting their money on this. Buyer beware even for a "as described - space filler" As a final comment, if you really want a copy of this stamp go to a recognised dealer and pick up an average used copy for US $35 instead of wasting US $21 on this rubbish. You will be happier and you will have a resalable copy. Your views? by all means disagree with me Best wishes ... Michael

Hello, Hope you like this Miniature Sheet. I am back in Australia and picked up two of these today. Thought you might like to see them. And one for a prize, to the first email, to cddstamps@gmail.com with correct answer and mailing address. What were the names of Captain Cook's ships, that crossed the Antarctic Circle on 17 January 1773? Hope you enjoy the research and associated readings. Michael