Scott 10/11 Plate Help

Thanks! I've received a lot of enjoyment "playing" with the 3¢ 1851-57 issue for the past 35 years or so.
Best wishes,
Steve

COMPLETE SET OF CHASE PHOTOS.

Just ran across a complete set of Chase photos on ebay. Complete reconstructions of all 13 plates, 2600 positions. The buy it now price is $400, including shipping, which is at least $100 off of the Smithsonian price.

Quite a good deal for the serious plater or for someone who aspires to be, IF these are glossy and not matte. Seller does not mention glossy or matte, but trust me, stay away from the matte.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Dr-Carrol-C...em2595824964

Best wishes,
Steve

I am left unsatisfied with no conclusion to this thread.

SavStamp's original question was to verify the validity of the plating number written on the back and whether or not it is a #10 or 11.

From the detail in the printing standpoint, I don't believe that we have seen a scan of it yet that shows enough detail to accurately call it either 10 or 11.

The plating number is probably correct, but it isn't guaranteed.

The pencil writing on the back is most likely to be that of Steven Ruecker. However, it doesn't look difficult to replicate and could be forged to add monetary value.

The supposed author of the pencil writing on the back seems to have created an account with the same username as Steven Ruecker's ebay account. I don't have any reason as of yet to disbelieve that Steven isn't actually ser1851 of ebay notariety. However, the Internet is a place that is full of uncertainty.

ser1851, can you confirm that this is your handwriting? Can you verify your identity in a manner that links your ebay account to your account here on this forum?

As for my wild assumption that the perforations my be special, can anyone provide a valid argument for or against?

If we can see a clear scan of SavStamp's suspect, then we don't have to do much work to confirm that it is or not the plate position labeled on the back.

Perhaps I am making a mountain out of a molehill, but I don't think that any certainty has been achieved as of yet.

I am certainly a student of these subjects and I ask only for clarification. Perhaps something that is not obvious to me is obvious to you. I ask for help in understanding. All arguments are welcome.

Thank you,
Ryan / Hysterical/Historical DNA Collector

Hi Ryan,

My name is Steven Ruecker in Hillsboro, Orygun. My ID on here (just signed up), bidStart, ebay, and various other places is "ser1851".

I am a life member of USPCS, APRL, and AAMS. I was a member of the APS (56227) since 1968 but resigned a few years back because I couldn't stomach their unconscionable greed anymore, charging what they do for membership and doing an incredible disservice to novice collectors.

I have been playing with the 3¢ 1851-57 issue for 35 or so years. After accumulating a number of copies over a couple of years, I consigned most of my US to Siegel, flew back to NY to Sale #564 in June of 1980 and dropped 10K on 10s & 11s. Most of the lots had been consigned by Bill Ammonette (recently passed away). Quite a memorable trip as it was topped off by St. Helens blowing up on the way back diverting me to Seattle.

All that being said, yes that is my plating, which I take very seriously. The stamp in question, being from plate 2 Late, by definition can only be an 11. ALL stamps printed from plates 1 Late, 2 Late, 3, 4, 5 Late, 6, 7, and 8 are 11s. ALL stamps printed from plates 1 Early, 1 Intermediate, 2 Early, 0, and 5 Early are 10s.

It is also my much neglected website that links were provided to. If we are provided a clear 600dpi scan, preferably non-optimized and uncompressed, you can compare it to the 2 copies on my website.

As for the "wild assumption" that this stamp has some kind of perforations, I would suggest that on 3 sides the sheet was simply folded and torn apart on the fold. The right side is obviously a scissors or knife separation.

From the scan we have been provided with, we can easily see that this is a top row copy, evidenced by the position dot at the UL corner of the UR diamond block. This particular one is somewhat distinctive as it is a bit larger than normal and is below the top frame line which narrows the field down considerably making it quite easy to plate if one has a plate reconstruction or the Chase Photos. Compare to the 2 scans on my website.

http://www.stamps4collectors.com/in...2l-l01-1.jpg

http://www.stamps4collectors.com/in...2l-l01-2.jpg

Best wishes,
Steve

P.S. "ser1851 of ebay notoriety" You have no idea! Several years ago (back in the day when you could contact bidders) I was making life miserable for ebay and the crooks ebay coddles and supports. I was naru'd so many times I lost count, for contacting hundreds of buyers letting them know that what they had just bought was fake, altered, misidentified, etc. Ah, those were the days 8-)

Steve,
Welcome to SCF. If you are still interested in assisting with educating users about making online purchasing of stamps and covers please consider joining us at Stamp Smarter. http://www.stampsmarter.com/
Since the changes were made at ebay regarding listing oversight; we have tried help philately by posting Reviews of listings and contacting sellers. Many sellers have responded favorably and have updated their listings and thereby reduced the number of frustrated philatelic transactions. Membership is free and we would love to have someone of your experience on board.
Regards,
Don

Hello Steve,
You have assuaged all of my uncertainty. I hope you find your time on SCF enjoyable.

Thank you,
Ryan

Wow this is right up my alley! although admittedly I been sort of keeping to myself of it because of all there is to know...yet ;) This has cleared a LOT of stuff up in a few paragraphs! Outstanding! Thank you very much. -Jeff

Ryan, I should have been more explicit in my earlier post. I contacted Steve, showed him the scan of the back of the stamp in question, and asked him if it was his mark. I have known him on ebay for some time. It was no doubt in response to my query that he came here.

dudley, no worries. Steve not only confirmed his identity, he confirmed his mastery of this subject. Pretty darn impressive.

I guess I'll jump aboard with my question.

I assume the copy below is #10, based on the quality of print and the color. But this is way above my head to make a sure decision, and I would greatly appreciate a help from someone way more knowledgeable than myself.








Color with red brown and Carmine for the references.





I believe CDC is New - York, Feb.

Your stamp is definitely an orange brown 10/10A. I say 10A because I think the upper part of the right inner line is very faintly recut. I agree it looks like New York. A red NYC cancel struck in what must be Feb 1852 is pretty unusual. I have never seen one. If you tire of owning it let me know.

Tire? I don't think anyone can tire of owning such a beauty. This stamp is a gem of my collection, and now that I know for sure that it is #10, it became the best stamp in my collection. I appreciate your help very very much, but you will have to wait a long long time for me to get tire of it

On a more serious note, I thank you very much for your help. I'm working my way slowly from modern stamps into classics, and not ready yet to jump into such complex issues.

Thats a #10.

Here's a couple of off cover OBs that I have..