3cent Stamp, Grill

I've neglected measuring the grill dimensions because there is no accurate reference in the picture. Billw2 obviously has far more experience with the grills, so it could still very well be a C or D grill. I lack the "eyeballing" skills/experience. You might find it easier to measure under magnification (or better yet, under long-wave UV). I like to take the easy way out and count points, but that is not thorough enough. You do still have to measure the grill size. Some people like to measure first, count later. Others, like me, like to count first and measure later. But in the end, you should do both and arrive at a consistent conclusion. Just my opinion.

Also, I agree with Billw2 regarding when to get certification. I haven't bothered getting any of my stamps certified. There are different approaches to when/why to get a stamp certified. There are plenty of valid and important benefits to early certification. Personally, I would rather spend the certification money on acquiring more stamps. Again, just my opinion.

One final point, if it has the dimensions of the larger C/D grills but the point count of the smaller E grill, then you've either got a previously unreported grill or a fake grill. The measurements/counts should be consistent.

I am going to piggy-back on CJJA's 3c Washington image. I have a number of this same design (Scott's A25) with fancy cancels. My Scott catalogues indicate that there were some vertical pairs that are imperforate horizontally. I have one stamp, however, that is imperforate on the vertical edges and perforated 12 on the horizontal edges with no grill. My catalogues (Scott 1975, 2003) don't mention this arrangement. The vertical white margins are wide and the stamp measures 25mm from edge to edge while my fully perforated stamps measure 23mm from perforated edge to edge, which would negate the perforations having been cut off with scissors. Does anyone know if there was a vertically imperforate version of this stamp design?

Welcome to Stamp Community Forum, Cynical!

I see no mention of a horizontal pair with imperforate vertically in the 2008 Scott US Specialized for the stamps with no grill.

It is unlikely that your stamp was fabricated from a proof. Uploading a pic might be more helpful.



Unfortunately, that is not the case. Stamp paper width/height is an unreliable measure on US stamps. For example, stamps on the edge of the pane can have exceptionally small or exceptionally large margins. Even stamps within the pane can have the same extra large/small margins, although that will sometimes reveal part of the adjacent stamp.

The expertizing groups will almost never certify a single stamp with any type of imperforate error. In almost all cases, they will only certify imperforate or part perforate errors in multiples.

Simply take a very high resolution scan of the back, 2400 - 3600dpi should do fine. Enlarge it so there is no mistaking the counting of the grill points. That should give you a good barometer of what grill it is. Problem is that if you send it in for certification and spend say $60.00 or so to do it right and find out it's an E or F grill, you now have $60.00 spent to tell you that you have a $7.00 stamp.

Example, not sure though if the board throttles images. This is scanned @ 2400 dpi

Thanks for your input KNJ. I'm new to this & will attempt to upload an image. Hopefully I'm within the bounds of CJJA's thread. The vertical imperforate wide-margined stamp that I referred to is at the bottom left. The two rows of stamps are part of a larger sheet of fancy cancels.

KHJ: I apologize for getting your name wrong. Here is image of the single stamp if I get this right.

Golly as Jim N. would have said - my 3 cent Washington image posted above (and my first image) garnered no interest. Should I place it it on its own thread?

Cynical,
Right edge looks like a sheet margin. Left edge looks sissor cut. This issue was printed in sheets of 2 panes of 100. I believe your copy is a last column in left pane eaxample.

Hi Russ: thanks for that. I got excited when the margin to margin measurement was so much wider than the margin to margin measurement on my perforated ones. khj says the margins on the 3 cent are quite variable for the reasons he gives above. Based on what you two have said I will accept that this is the case. I have had the stamp and its siblings for some time without noticing the wide margin on this one before, which of course, sent my heart a fluttering. I appreciate your interest.

Cynical,
I should have added that on your oyher scan there is a very nice circular "paid 3" cancel.

Russ: the two rows in the first submission are part of a six row page set up to display fancy cancels, in fact, there is also a second page and both pages are all early American. My favourite cancel or rather postmark I guess, is a huge bold 1851 New Bedford Mass CDS on a cover that I have. When I see so many of my Canadian stamps with wimpy wavy line cancels I always think of my New Bedford one. I also have a similar one from Bowbells in the Dakotas. What a great name!

Cynical, in your image of the 12 fancy cancels, what are the two on the upper right--with the large D and what appears to be a smaller C overlaying it?

All 12 of the fancy cancels are very nice. I only have one or two of this issue with what are fancy cancels.

I agree, gorgeous stuff,
don't know much about early US,
but these examples are so attractive,
and instantly arise curiosity.

Rohumpy and Rod: thank you both for your interest. I will put on the entire sheet later in the day. I placed another cancellation image yesterday on a new thread regarding the use of the letter "S" or "US". It was my intention to follow that image with the image of the overlapping "CD" cancellations because I have been unable to find them in any of my resources (e.g., Billig's 19th Century United States Fancy Cancellations).