S-21 Straight Edge Or Cut Edge

That's what he said to me about the "8A" that was really a 7. Said he had a "local expert" who confirmed it. Must be the same "expert" who identified the #21.

I got another message that he's waiting to hear back from Bill. I mentioned that the stamp has an A relief guideline so can't possibly be a type III. All plate 4 A reliefs are type II. Plus I think the plate 4 guidelines were erased, but not sure about that.

The dark vertical line at UL only comes from the plates that produced #24. This stamp can only be from the top row of one of those plates, as you said in an earlier post, raymodj.

EDIT: skstamps is still telling me that Bill Weiss thinks this is a 21, but needs plating. Funny, the skstamps guy (don't know his name) calls him "the weiss".

Bill, isn't this a type V 24 A relief? It has the vertical mark UL, incomplete side ornaments, and the bottom line ends just under the e in cents, all signs of type V A relief. Dudley plated it as 8L8, which looks right to me based on the only image we have.

This is partly my fault and I will try to convince CK not to sell it based on the opinions here that it plates as type Va. My "fast" analysis was that the right side ornaments looked too complete to be type V, but honestly - he's right, I was more concerned about the straightedge and told him he needed to get it plated before selling it as Type III.

I think that's a cultural thing - pretty sure the ckstamps guy is Chinese, since he packed a remaindered album I once bought from him in Chinese newspaper. That purchase sticks in my mind because I also got a nicely centered fake 423A out of it that I hadn't noticed while looking over the pictures in the listing :)

It's Type V, not Va, Bill (Plate 8; Va only comes from Plate 5). But a #24 no matter what.

OK, so now I've corrected by earlier post to refect Type V (not Va as Dudley rightly points out) and I've contacted ckstamps through the ebay Contact Seller as follows;

"Dear ckstamps,

Kenny,

I just found out that this stamp is Type V (position 8L8, Scott #24), so is *NOT* a #21, so please do me the favor of cancelling the sale. I am sorry if I gave you the impression that it could be a #21. It definetly is not, so please do not sell it. Thank you.

Bill Weiss";

So hopefully this will all now be straightened out. Sorry for any confusion caused by me!

And by the way, his name is "Kang Chen" and I believe he is indeed Chinese, but I think he likes to be called "Kenny" (although where THAT comes from, I have no idea!).

Thanks again Bill.

Neinken (and so everyone one else of course) describes the 21 as having "complete" side ornaments, but because of my ongoing discussion with Kenny I noticed that the left side of some 21s are not always complete. Anyone want to take a shot at explaining this, or is it just one of those things that goes along with trying to type stamps into groups when each position of the plate can vary slightly.

or is it just one of those things that goes along with trying to type stamps into groups when each position of the plate can vary slightly.

That is exactly it, raymodj. The identification of one-cent 1851-61 stamps by "type" based on visual "completeness of design" criteria is inherently fuzzy because each position on each plate can vary, due to variations in the relief used, the transfer process, reworking the plate, and plate wear over time. The Scott catalog weasel-words this by using the phrase "substantially complete" to refer to the various type-defining design elements ("the side ornaments are substantially complete," etc.). No type (not even Type 1, Sc. #5) has a complete design when compared against Ashbrook's "complete die design" illustration we see in the literature. If you have access to the USPCS Chronicle I recommend David Zlowe's article "EVOLUTION OF THE TYPES OF THE 1¢ 1851 STAMP" in Vol. 66, No. 2 (2014). He argues that this classification scheme is outmoded given our current state of knowledge about how these stamps were produced.

I agree with Ray, as I have often noted this slightly "incomplete" left side design on better types of the 1c and that fact has always bothered me as well. Glad to learn I'm not the only one!

Here is response I just received from ckstamps;

Dear wrw1943,

thank you , I will cancel the transaction.


- ckstamps

Have bought stamps from both Kenny Chen and Eugene (the 2nd stamp that was mentioned), and have returned stamps with issues to both of them. Just wanted to mention that have always found them both to be honest-- and never have had a problem returning an item which was flawed and not described. No questions ever asked.

PS.. sometimes the mis-ID can be at the buyers advantage also! :)

Ray

Bill, I really appreciate all the work you've done and continue to do with or without ebays assistance. In a perfect world, everyone who bids on stamps would be made aware of resources like Stamp Smarter and this forum.

Dudley, thanks for clearing that up. I will google David Zlowe. I would join USPCS in a heartbeat if for no other reason than all the great resource books in their library. They've literally saved me hundreds of dollars I would pay for used copies of the books they provide free of charge. Unfortunately I don't know anyone to use as a reference, and I believe I need 2.

Raymodj, you can feel free to use me as a reference (see email for details).