Stamp Community Family of Web Sites
Thousands of stamps, consistently graded, competitively priced and hundreds of in-depth blog posts to read
Stamp Community Forum
 
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

This page may contain links that result in small commissions to keep this free site up and running.
Welcome Guest! Need help? Got a question? Inherit some stamps?
Our stamp forum is completely free! Register Now!

Scott Number? 1857-61 1c Franklin

Next Page    
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 22 / Views: 3,540Next Topic
Page: of 2
Pillar Of The Community

United States
966 Posts
Posted 12/24/2016   2:46 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this topic Add rgstamp to your friends list Get a Link to this Message
experts please weigh in?



happy holidays.
Send note to Staff

Pillar Of The Community
United States
2571 Posts
Posted 12/24/2016   4:37 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add txstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
This one might require a bit better scan.
At first glance the worn impression tells me it's plate 1 late and the bottom line completeness tells me it's a bottom row B relief.

That said I can see what appears to be an unrecut top line above the T in postage. I think all bottom row 1-lates would show at least a bit of recut there. Sometimes it's hard to see. Someone with a full bottom row reference, or the time to study the 1c plating archive might be able to match this. Depending on how my day goes I may look a bit more.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
966 Posts
Posted 12/24/2016   4:47 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rgstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Happy holiday txstamp. Not surprised you were first in on this one. No rush here. I'll be looking at my copy of Neinken as I overeat this Christmas and watch my waste-line expand. I thought this one was a challenge.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2571 Posts
Posted 12/24/2016   5:00 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add txstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Overall ornament completeness of ornaments FG and PQ also heavily favors plate one-late over plate 2.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Rest in Peace
United States
205 Posts
Posted 12/24/2016   5:07 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Tipzi to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
I agree it's from plate one late - don't discount possibility of being position 4R1L.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2571 Posts
Posted 12/24/2016   5:18 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add txstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
tipzi - a valid observation - except 4R would not have a complete bottom line like this one has. Those are typically only found on the bottom row of transfer roll 1 plates where the T relief couldn't have been used to guide in the next setting. The bottom of the T relief usually irons out the bottom of most body of plate B reliefs from guide reliefing. The bottom of this stamp is not ironed/flattened out and mimics the true B relief bottom. Also it is not recut at bottom. All of that implies bottom row.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by txstamp - 12/24/2016 5:22 pm
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2571 Posts
Posted 12/24/2016   5:46 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add txstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
I have to run but some good possibilities include but are not limited to:
93L. 95R. 97R
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
966 Posts
Posted 12/25/2016   09:34 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rgstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Unfortunately I cannot offer a better scan. Stamp should be recut somewhere. I see nothing and is driving me nuts! My gut tells me the top is recut once, perhaps perfs running in making it tough to identify it. B relief looks right. Bottom row definitely possible (93L, 96L closest I can find). I can't tell if upper ?recut line splits. Could bottom guide dot right lower (class B) suggest from body, not bottom row (examples with single recut top, B relief, are 44R, 67R, 49R?)

Original question: Scott 23?
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2504 Posts
Posted 12/25/2016   2:18 pm  Show Profile Check sinclair2010's eBay Listings Bookmark this reply Add sinclair2010 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
It certainly looks like a #23 to me. I too think that 96L is a good possibility. I think the top margin of this stamp is suffering from a little "edge wear".
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
966 Posts
Posted 12/25/2016   8:17 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rgstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Tipzi, txstamp and Sinclair: I find it interesting that when you guys plate this, you all seemed to go right after the plate ID number versus Scott catalog number. When I first looked at his stamp, I didn't see a recut. My first thought was type 2, Scott 20... of course that opens up possibility of this stamp coming from a number of different plates . Even tipzi suggested this could be type 2 by suggesting 4R1L ( the only type 2 on plate 1 Late).. Understanding that the impression is worn, is there any other hint that made you all jump to plate 1L without seeing any obvious recut? Are the impressions that obvious on plate 1L that there was no question this couldn't be a type 2,B relief from another plate (such as plate 2 or 3). It amazes me that you picked out plate 1L which pretty much guarantees it's a Scott 23 and then tried to plate it.

Still not sure of plate number but I keep coming back to 93L, 96L, or 44R.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
1646 Posts
Posted 12/25/2016   9:42 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add dudley to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
My first impression was #20 with no evidence of any recuts. But I think Winston might be right. We'd need to have a close look at whether the bit of ink visible in the perf tip at top, sixth from left, is a split top line recut or not, but there appear to be marks under the left scroll at bottom, as well as a visible dot in the white label frame at bottom under the left serif of the E of ONE, both characteristic of 96L1L. Definitely not 4R1L (the top left ornaments are not doubled).
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2571 Posts
Posted 01/02/2017   8:12 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add txstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Catching up after the holidays...I hope everyone is well for 2017.

rgstamp - regarding the alleged guide-dot at LR, I suspect that is an optical illusion created by a combination of a bad/inadequate scan, and a strong impression at the lower-right of the plume. It is not uncommon to get a strong entry there which can sometimes be confused with being a guide dot.

As to your question of why doesn't one reply with a scott catalog number vs dive into what plate a stamp is? Always remember that the Scott (and all other catalogs) are just systems of classifying and organizing stamps, to record what exists. This also helps create a market of stuff for us to collect, and for dealers to sell. Toppan-Carpenter didn't know what a #23 was. Additionally, with the one-cent stamp, in particular, where one has positions that are sometimes one Type, and sometimes another Type ... also look at that Type Ic discussion we had previously, where one had to plate a stamp to determine its Type .. its often best with this stamp to determine as best and quickly as possible what it is, then allow that to determine Scott number, rather than go in the reverse.

Finally, regarding how to tell what plate a stamp is from -- that is a very useful skill which you will develop well if you do this long enough. Plate 1 is a very fun plate to study the overall progression of stamp appearances over time on. This plate was used from 1851 (early state) until mid-1857, including the early perforated stamps and experimental Chicago perfs. The early recut stamps from June 1852 do not resemble in many respects, the 1857 printings. 1857 printings from plate 1-Late tend to be quite worn, especially so in the head, where the less deeply transferred detail in the head/bust have worn off and no longer hold ink, so you get white-space. Also the recut lines which tend to be deep, still hold ink well, and now contrast much more with the now absent detail lines in the bust/head. So recuts show well in late impressions (except on your stamp -- where the recut is either scraped off of just due to a bad scan is giving us optical illusion issues -- don't underestimate that possibility).

The only other plate that could have produced a transfer roll #1 B relief perforated would be plate 2. The Plate 2 EKU is 12/1855, so, although plate 2 did wear, it did not wear to the degree that plate 1 did over time, and once you get used to it, there are differences in the average degree of side-ornament completeness between the plates.

The way that I taught myself to be able to date a stamp from plate 1, on or off cover, was by collecting on-cover dated copies. I'd get 2-3 covers from each 6-month period starting from either July 1851 if you want to include 1-early, or June 1852 if you want to start with one-late. Once you have a critical mass of covers, sort them by date, and start looking at them. Then go back to the neinken book and read where colors and impressions for 1-Late are discussed. It will all start to add up .. just takes some looking.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
1119 Posts
Posted 01/02/2017   10:41 pm  Show Profile Check ray.mac's eBay Listings Bookmark this reply Add ray.mac to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
I made the mistake a couple of years ago telling somebody (IIRC, it was Duncan, and im still sorry for that) they had a Type IV when they had a type II, because of the darker impression of the frame line under the "E" in "ONE". Looks like a recut, but it isn't, and IIRC, didn't someone explain this is a common characteristic to Plate 2?

This stamp has the same strong frame line under the "E". Could it be just a poor impression from Plate 2?

I'm still more of a Plate 5/5a guy, so I may have misspoke here. Is the darker frame line common to plate 2?

Thanks, Ray
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by ray.mac - 01/02/2017 10:42 pm
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2571 Posts
Posted 01/03/2017   10:15 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add txstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Interesting thought on the line under E. I see what you are talking about. I looked at a few other stamps, but at the moment, I have no opinion on that, other than to say that (not including this stamp), recuts will often get in the way of making a determination based upon this - so I'm not too sure how good of a reference point this is.

Regarding this particular stamp, it sure looks like a bottom row 1L stamp, but the scan makes a definite plating hard-work. I doubt I'll have the time to finish that. Stamp work is very part-time for me. Others have chimed in with possibilities - all I'll say is I've run into scenarios where when a better scan/photo is provided, many of ones prior analyses go out the window. With what we have so far, I'd say #23 is highly likely.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
966 Posts
Posted 01/03/2017   4:47 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add rgstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
To all you guys,

thanks for taking time to respond and the education on plating. It is much appreciated.

txstamp, ray, dudley, sinclair, or whomever:

below are both Scott #9. The one on right is 9R1L from other thread, recut once at bottom. The one on left is 2L1L (?)- recut twice at bottom. This one has monster margins, but corner crease and tiny thin

For years I thought these were both recut once on top as well. (see arrows). I always thought identifying recut was relatively easy. However these top row stamps from plate 1L are a little out of ordinary.

But Mortimer was a genius. For neophytes like me, he explains in his book "In the reentry, one thing among others, is especially noticeable, the top lines of top row positions were greatly strengthened, hence when recutting was done, the top lines of top row positions… were not recut." Neinken noticed this as well, obviously, so I don't feel as dumb now.





I put these next to each other to evaluate the impressions from plate 1L -- I assume the 9R1L was produced much(?) earlier due to the finer impression, whereas the 2L1L is really worn out in the hair area/face (1857?). Regardless both these impressions are more worn than a plate 1E stamp?
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
6473 Posts
Posted 01/03/2017   7:49 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add stallzer to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Not exactly true about the Plate 1L stamps. The plate was reconditioned sometime in early 1854 but no alterations were made to the plate, it was simply cleaned. Neinken states the stamps printed just prior to the cleaning show that they came from a very dirty plate with the lines of design being far from sharp and having a very dull appearance. He goes on to state that "Subsequently we find entirely different appearing printings. These show the lines sharp and clear with a white background to the designs"

But he does state that the surface of the plate was showing signs of wear. In the cleaned condition Plate 1L was in use until sometime in 1857.

Here is my 1R1L




Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Page: of 2 Previous TopicReplies: 22 / Views: 3,540Next Topic  
Next Page
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.


Go to Top of Page
Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Stamp Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2023 Stamp Community Family - All rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Stamp Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Privacy Policy / Terms of Use    Advertise Here
Stamp Community Forum © 2007 - 2023 Stamp Community Forums
It took 0.76 seconds to lick this stamp. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05