Ok, 1st, and second pic appear to be fat Qs. 3rd looks like the narrow type, last runic shield looks a little harder, not sure if it suffered from a fish eye shot that gave the shield a narrow type look, but appear to have a sharp point in the second rune.
The top two are wide style, the bottom two are narrow style. Wide style have uniform, pointy rune tips; the narrow ones do not and are asymmetrical, not uniform in shape. Also the wide shield is wider by probably half a mm, but it's not really obvious in pictures. (This is all in my updated edition book by the way).
Regards,
Kelly
Ok, that's what I thought. Not easy sometimes when going by photos. Sometimes we get too close and the pic results in a fish eye effect.
By the way Kelly, this is a one of the traits that lots of collectors ignore, personally I find it critical and essential when studying the characteristics of 'Q' pattern decals.
Sure thing, you are welcome anytime!
Kelly these, like with thin and fat Pochers are simple print registrations I firmly believe resulting in varied ink displacements.
Hello Doug, I find that they are two distinct decals. This is a different issue than mis-registry among the narrow ones, which is quite commonly noted. the wide Q lacks the left rune bulge and the right rune 'tail'. The wide q runes are perfectly symmetrical and pointed on the rune tips. Also unlike the pochers, the wide Q lacks the inner border; the narrow Q posesses it. Lastly, the backgrounds differ. In hand multiple examples bear this out. Kel
Yes that's true, I agree 100% with that as you know. The decals like everything evolved over time.
I was trying to say that the print registration is evident throughout, note the last one. That thicker sloppy print is evident of registration and displacement, when magnified vs the cleaner "thin" print and how the lines are much cleaner on the thin.
I think we're talking the same thing over different decals like we've discussed on the phone on printing variations.
Got your message but was walking el pooch. Will call soon.
Doug, I definitely concur with the fullness of your statement. The evolution is clear, and I think at some stage, (1939-ish) Quist's contractor may have sub-sourced, or even an RFP situation arose-- to generate some variants. Hope the walk was pleasant. I'm about to board here in T O but still have some time if you get a chance to catch up. K
Similar Threads
Bookmarks