Are These Both 367's?

Hello everyone.. I am not sure if the first stamp would be considered wooden or ragged pulp paper. the first, has more soil darker appearance in back than second stamp. wooden has cream or yellowish color, ragged is more greyish with specks dots in back..view only a small blemish on right lower vertical side of first stamp. Are both of them considered Scott 367's?
Thank you in advance.

IMO, yes.

it is not based with the difference color of a 357 and 359 blue paper,greyish color..read another indiviual check with soil, since paper can appear to show and difficult to determine differences as well withother hint of markings. it is based on ragged or wooden pulp paper, not deeper color of front stamp. I wanted to make sure since have a small lot of them..the lincoln blue papers for used worth over 200,used cv, and regular wooden less than 5.
Thank you for response.

the greyish paper appearance, but not blue looking is a 369..the first, I know it looks darker than other one in the back, than cream looking known with wooden.

This great piece of advice was give to you on another thread.

Most probably 367's. You either need to compare it side by side with another (or more) 369's to determine if it is anything other than a 367. Or you could send it in for certification. Judging by those small scans will never be accurate. Also, you can edit your posts instead of replying to your own posts.

based upon the images, the first stamp is toned and not some paper variety. To identify a 'blue' paper 369 scan on an orange colored background to make the grey appearance stand out. For newer hobbyists, buy a certified blue paper stamp and use it for a reference.
Don

Blazen, could I also please beg you to proofread and correct your posts, using standard English, before you submit them. This series of posts is almost incomprehensible gibberish, with many run-on clauses, and requires considerable guesswork to determine what you are saying. Slowing down and carefully composing your posts would greatly help you here.

I don't find my statements gibberish.Just for your information, I read from another post provided by male poster pertaining to bluish papers for this particular stamp when using the search engine. I viewed the difference of the photo displayed including comments made prior to writing my question.

When another poster asked similar question for his own stamp, he did not receive comments pertaining to his style of writings or rudeness at all. He received a very informative explanation.

Why is it necessary for my statements to a focused for your own level of approval such as proof reading skills? Others understood what was written. I must ask. Do you do this with all when it doesn't suit your own writing style of preferences??
Honestly,in my own professional opinion,If you want to be critical, this is NOT the place trying to control choices of how a poster should write to suit own benefit in a public forum.The question can be answered not in condensing manner to prove a point. To say gibberish or uneducated English?? Thank you for sharing your thoughts,but you are wrong.If you believe that it is requirement with rules, then please show me where that is written. Otherwise,if not, then it is inappropriate to express these statements.
My writings pertaining to questions about stamps are simple and appropriate. Many have been informative with their responses.
If it frustrates you, take a deep breath and relax. Breath in..count 10 and breath out. do it a few times..Don't you feel better?

Sincerely,
Blazenstar

Breathe, not breath.

Blazenstar, you will find very helpful people here but you have to do your bit. Above are just a couple of statements that personally I have no clue as to what you are stating.

Proper English is just being respectful and it helps us help you if we understand what you are asking or stating. A well written question will receive a well written answer.

Stallzer, please discontinue this behavior. I do not have to correct my English vocabulary. Read the rules and you will see that the statements are inappropriate conducted by a few responding to questions. Thank you. Good Day to you.

You can comprehend my writings including understand the rules of the room.
I'm not interested in your statements that you choose to feel necessary to correct my sentences. I am not treating you in that fashion, so please be civil. Please focus on the stamps. Thank you.

Blazenstar,

Here is what you said earlier:
"it is not based with the difference color of a 357 and 359 blue paper,greyish color..read another indiviual check with soil, since paper can appear to show and difficult to determine differences as well withother hint of markings. it is based on ragged or wooden pulp paper, not deeper color of front stamp."

I'm not going to bash you, but where are you quoting this stuff from? You quoted a while back, some Scott numbers for the 3c 1851 imperfs, with outdated numbers on the 3c perforate stamps. I think I remember your saying you had a 1980 Scott Catalog.

My opinion is that if you are going to continue to quote references, you should offer some type of footnote to the reference. You simply can't quote a reference manual, as if it is your own thoughts and writing.

How would anyone be able to know if the stamps you attached were from wooden or ragged pulp paper? Are you referring to the 35% rag content that was an additive that was the source of the blue paper? I haven't ever heard this stamp referred to as having "wooden pulp paper" or "ragged pulp paper", and I've read Martin Armstrong's Washington Franklin book from cover to cover several times.

Before you ask a question like that again, and before you chastise Stallzer, who was trying to help you, maybe it would be better if you looked up information available to you, even from this forum. Bill Weiss stated last year that the easiest way to see the blue paper is to put the stamp on an orange background. You'll find that information if you look for it (which Don also mentioned in this thread).

You will learn more about our hobby if you read Brookman's set of books on US Classics, and the Schmid or Armstrong book on Washington Franklins. Throwing out questions left and right, looking for easy answers is not going to help you in the long run. It's kind of like the analogy, that if you give someone a fish, you take care of a hungry person....if you teach that person how to fish, you can feed a village. We've all pointed you in several directions, and hope you can learn from this.

Thanks, Ray

I read information from posters in questions previously requesting assistance(12/21/2014)(Monroe47)from search engine. It was very helpful. Excellent information provided by Historical DNA, including other postings pertaining to the stamp. I read information including did orange background test as suggested within his postering prior to asking my question about these two stamps.
With the previous information pertaining to the coil stamps, I regret even allowing others view in room due to responses received. I wrote in parentheses when quoted directly the paragraph from Scotts. I did not write in my own words that paragraph. I also informed where information was provided. Thank you, Ray for your suggestion.
ALL HAVE A RIGHT not to be bashed or harassed due to asking questions from posters pertaining to US stamps.Rules are placed for reason in the community forum, NOT to defame ones character for their own amusement and satisfaction. There private issues whatever may be in their personal lives are NOT to be displaced on other posters. The topic is stamps. I am not here to be target of bashing behavior.When I asked questions in other rooms, this is not occurring.I don't get questioned about my English. It is ridiculous and appalling. If cannot keep within topic,I will have no other alternative but to report. Regulars and other posters are able comprehend my writings.
Please do not continue this discussion. If I choose to place another stamp up for another topic, that will be my own choice.

Incredible.

Blazenstar...I'm afraid I have to agree with the others to the extent that your posts can at times be a little hard to understand. I'm sure people just want to give you honest answers to your questions, but that can be a little difficult if your post isn't clearly written. Don't take the comments as criticism, but as friendly advice. A little proofreading before posting doesn't hurt. Don't take it all so personal, and have a good day!

Whatever your opinions are should not include expressing statements such as "uneducated English."
First, I have a University degree I received within the US over 30 yrs ago including long post training experiences in a professional,honorable,career specialized within the field of study. I have been on several Executive Boards of Organizations in my community that helped many in positive ways. Involved in education too. I have had many positive achievements over the years with my accomplishments, including with my hobby with stamps.
Secondly, I have NOT asked or written any of my questions in this room in a foreign language, only in English. This proves many making assumptions inappropriately which has nothing to do with topic of stamps.
Individuals can view patterns with previous questions I have written and received with other topics compared to other posters asking similar questions.
Others in my presence have viewed my writings without difficulties. I'm not the only one who seen this since I ask to review what occurred.
I'm in disagreement with your statements for a valid reason . I have been cordial and civil with my responses without insulting individuals especially never met face to face with their intelligence.It is inappropriate with communication skills to choose to do it.
It is not unbelievable when rules are set in room for all to follow which should be abide.I do not want to continue this discussion when I do have different reference books on stamps and read other regular posters have respond with answers. I was recommended to look at other discussions in search engine before, which I did as well. I did my research including testing of orange background before writing question.
Thank you for your understanding. I hope things improve for all.
Blazenstar