1857 10 Cent Type V (Scott #35) Plating

Have any of you attempted or completed plate 2 of the 1857 10 cent Type V (Scott #35)? We talk about plating for the 1c Franklin and the 3c Washington all the time. I was just wondering if anyone here has tried the 10c. And if you have, how difficult is it (for reference, I am currently slooooowly plating Plate 1L of the Franklin 1c)? I read some of Neinken's book on the 10c, and he makes plating it sound feasible, but I've yet to hear anyone talk about it.

Just to be clear, you mean Ty V, not Ty IV.

I have not tried it, although it seems as though it should be doable to some degree. There are quite a few multiples out there to be had.

The Ty V 1c stamps can be a bit challenging, due to poor quality paper on which many are printed. That said, there have been some real breakthroughs on those in recent years.

I suspect the 10c Ty V's will probably have some of the rag paper and bad impression issues that the 1c counterparts have, which can make it tough to get repeatable impressions. It makes small plating marks hard to see, and seem to not always be repeatable.

Give it a try!

Yes, Txstamp! Type V. If I had the money to plate all the Type IV's, I'd be quite happy, though.

I have plated a number of Scott #35's in my time, but they are more difficult than the one-cent. Fewer plating marks overall.

So I went and re-read the Neinken 10c book on Plate 2 last night.

Its a 6-relief transfer roll, which means that you have to rely more on differences in the reliefs, as opposed to guide dots. One usually gets a guide dot for each transfer roll setting, so with more reliefs, you get fewer guide dots. So you'll likely have guide dots for the top and 6th rows only.

In looking at the reliefs, that appears to be where Neinken ran into some real issues, as they appear to be less dissimilar than the 1c Ty V reliefs, for example. If you can tell the reliefs apart easily, then it doesn't matter if you don't have well-known guide dots everywhere on a 6-relief roll. With not many guide dots, and reliefs that are hard to distinguish, and high rag content paper printings, this will be interesting.

So I agree with the previous poster who stipulated that the 10c Ty V's can be difficult - that seems clear. I fully suspected that to be the case, however, the last thing I would want to do, would be to discourage someone from trying to do it.

People who don't plate stamps, or maybe who are just starting out - possibly like yourself, might not realize that there have been significant breakthrough's in understanding 1851 and 1857 issue stamps in the last 25 years - beyond the Neinken and Chase books. Some of this has been documented, some of it is starting to get documented, and plenty of it still has yet to be documented. The point I'm making is that just because Neinken didn't find clear differences in the reliefs doesn't mean you can't, or that someone else might. Neinken was clearly a good plater, but, in my opinion, what he was really good at was recording his progress at plating what he did. So many of us (myself red-faced) don't do a good job of documenting progress that we make in plating.

I guarantee you that not as many people have very actively tried to plate the 10c Ty V as have tried to plate the 1c and 3c stamps. That alone in my mind, tells me that there is a lot of room for discovery.