Help Me Plate This Scott 21 Type III

this stamp in upcoming Siegel auction.

Need help from the plating experts for the 1c.

type III plate 4. Scott 21.

Interesting stamp because it has flaw under "U" (see arrow) giving impression it could be a Ia. However there are a few stamps with this flaw that are IIIa and even more super rare.. type III as seen here.

F relief, thus it must come from 6th row of plate 4, left pane only. Can't be right pane as only type IIIa on the right. Can't be 10th row because ornaments at bottom not consistent with Ia.

Basically leaves me with like 5 possible positions but I just can't match it up. Driving me nuts.

If anyone can nail down the position, thanks in advance?

I can't plate it, the image isn't good enough. I would stay away from it unless I was able to get a new cert. I think there is a reasonable chance that it is an altered stamp. The PF cert is too old and the newer PSE cert is no comfort to me.

Took another look and figured it out. It is 53R4. I am going to upgrade my suspicion about an alteration to a near certainty and will probably send a note to Siegel.

Edit: 53R4 is a Type IIIa position.

Wow.. I'm at work, but looking forward to getting home and loOking this up ... IIIa? Sinclair you have really stimulated my interest here!

Are you suggesting that perforations at bottom are altered or embellished to make it appear the bottom outer line is incomplete???

No. My suspicion is that the outer line has been scraped off at bottom, a very common alteration. With said, not all abrasions are intentional alterations. I view the two very differently but they are nearly always pigeon-holed as an alteration, which is not fair to the stamp or the owner.

I went over to online plating archive doporto. I agree with Sinclair 53R4. Neinken book at home but will take a better look later.
I guess now I know why I couldn't figure out plate position since I was only looking at type III positions or IIIa/III hybrids.

yep. 53R4

type IIIa

arrows point to plate marks. "b" arrows point to blurs.

this stamp should not have a wide break at bottom margin outer curve. (or any break actually)

could the plate have worn, and this is the discovery copy of the 53R4 type III? That is one big break at bottom for a stamp that generally has a complete bottom outer curve. I don't believe it could wear that much.

....or as Winston concludes bottom was scraped/altered or abrasion (intentional versus not)?

I side with Winston that stamp was altered!

I owe you a bottle of wine or a case of beer.

I contacted Siegel and they said that they had already been alerted by a well-known expert of the 1c stamps. The stamp has been withdrawn.

I'm not going to give any more passes to PF or PSE for their "expertizing" work on the one cent Franklin.

2 certificates, 2003 PF and 2012 PSE. Not that old???

Many, if not all of these stamps NEED to be plated to properly identify and if expertizing firms do not wish to pursue this endeavor because it is time consuming, they will continue to make many errors. You are better off getting the stamp expertized on this forum than PSE or PF for this issue.

I understand that there are many stamps that cannot be plated especially Scott 7, 24 and if cancels or perfs impinge on plate marks. But a beautiful stamp as seen above that could be worth easily 2000-3000$ should be given better attention by PSE and PF.