Stamp Community Family of Web Sites
Thousands of stamps, consistently graded, competitively priced and hundreds of in-depth blog posts to read
Stamp Community Forum
 
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

Welcome Guest! Need help? Got a question? Inherit some stamps?
Our stamp forum is completely free! Register Now!

1c 1851 Plate 4 Stamps

Previous Page | Next Page    
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Replies: 222 / Views: 18,016Next Topic
Page: of 15
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2288 Posts
Posted 09/11/2020   6:26 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add txstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
I found a small black and white 1<->1 sized scan of my old 41R4. It was not sold as a single lot, but instead was part of the large group lot which consisted of a lot of my platings and such.

Anyway, your stamp looks a lot like mine at the left margin in terms of ornament completeness. I'll caveat that with :

1) your scan could be a bit better - the plate 4 minutia often requires serious resolution to see

2) my scan is lousy, but I can mostly see what I think I need to, and I do remember the stamp. I stared at it for so many hours, I probably lost half of my vision in so doing. (I wish I had my vision back )

Well - I'll leave my post above unedited - but the PF came through for me.
I just found my old stamp on pfsearch.org : PFC #312680


Quote:
POSITION 41R4, TYPE Ic.
AND WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT
It Is A Genuine Scott 22, Type Iiia With A Pulled Perforation At Top Left Center* * * * * * * * *


Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by txstamp - 09/11/2020 6:27 pm
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2288 Posts
Posted 09/11/2020   7:46 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add txstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
So that summarizes my current knowledge.

Next step is to study some 41R4s, and other officially expertised Ic"s to detect patterns/criteria used.

Also it occurs to me that the Scott US specialized may have a 1- line zinger to clarify any suggested adaptation.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2288 Posts
Posted 09/11/2020   8:22 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add txstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Scott Specialized on Ic:


Quote:
Same as Type Ia, but bottom right plume and ball ornament incomplete. Bottom left plume is complete or nearly complete.


It doesn't say "bottom of bottom left plume", it says "bottom left plume".

To me that would seem to count the outer left part of the plume as part of the type characteristics. So maybe rather than taking Ashbrook literally - maybe if a certain percentage of the whole plume is there regardless of what parts of it are there - maybe that's the criteria. It's the only thing I can actually make sense of at this point.

edit: to clarify what I'm looking for - the definition of what's required on a Ic from the bottom right plume and both balls is fairly clear. The issue is entirely how much and what parts of the lower left plume have to be there to be a Ic.

Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by txstamp - 09/11/2020 8:46 pm
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2288 Posts
Posted 09/11/2020   9:32 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add txstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
So, trying to wrap up my discussion with myself - I've spent some time studying Ty Ic submissions to the PF, thanks to the pfsearch.org website.

At some point, I should compare to PSE.

Anyway, after looking at a lot of certified Ic's all positions - I've concluded that the bottom left plume needs to be substantially complete - minus maybe just a bit - mostly at outer left, in order to be considered a Ic. Of course - lower right plume and balls need to qualify as well - but those are more consistently defined as to what to look for, I think.

41R4 is a particularly hard position, since its mostly not a Ic, and only rarely is. Most, if not all of the other Ic positions show much more of the lower left plume than 41R4 does. That makes this a non-issue for most Ic positions. Even 91R4 (from a distance, without magnification ) looks more complete than a standard 41R4.

In looking at just the 41R4 submissions, and opinions, I could make an argument that there are 41R4's certified as Ic's that shouldn't be. At times they've been too generous, I think. But I expected that, and I don't blame them. Overall, they've done pretty well, I think. One 41R4 I saw called a 19b (Ic), actually had a perf hole punched right where the left outer plume line should be - and probably wasn't there -- but it got credit for being there. Oh well. Imperforate, that stamp would be expertised as a IIIA !

So, getting back to dudley's 41R4 - my reaction from what I can see in the scan, is that it should be classified as a IIIA, and not a Ic, since the outer left plume is largely missing. Now, with a more detailed scan, maybe there is more there that I can't see. Also, the PF has certified one or two 41R4's that resembled mine, as Ic's. So there is definitely inconsistency, and although my take on yours is its a IIIA, you could roll the dice, send it to the PF, and see what lucky number you draw. I will still contend its a IIIA now that I've worked through all of this.

That's my take and I'm sticking with it based upon what I've seen from opinions rendered and what I now believe to be necessary criteria.

I hope that helps. It helped me get my head around this difficult Type finally, I think.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
Learn More...
United States
159 Posts
Posted 09/12/2020   11:08 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add widglo46 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
These discussions focused on just one Plate have been very helpful to me. They have inspired me to reexamine every 1 I own, and to try to plate them. I can read Neinken for an hour and not remember a tenth of the details he talks about, but if I afterwards spend a couple of hours studying a single stamp, it begins to sink in.

I deduced pretty quickly that the stamp below was from Plate 4 based on the wide top and bottom margins. I also decided it was a a relief "D". That narrowed my search to rows 4 and 8, and my best guess is that it is position 72R4, with the dot next to the ornament "A" being the most helpful feature.

It's sad that someone decided to cut the corner crease off this stamp just so that they could get a grade. I like carrier cancels, and at the time I purchased it, I didn't want to spend a lot of money on a type IIIa, so I succumbed.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
1411 Posts
Posted 09/12/2020   11:18 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add dudley to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Thanks, tx. This discussion prompted me to reread David Zlowe's magnificent CHRONICLE article Evolution of the Types of the 1-Cent 1851 Stamp (CHRONICLE 242, 2014). In it he shows an example of position 41R4 (p.143) with bottom ornaments very similar to those on the one I posted, and makes the point that it cannot be definitively assigned a type. This uncertainty, as is also manifest in the PF Cert database, makes me believe that you might be correct in your estimation of the advisability of having given Type Ic catalog listing. At any rate, it seems that the "transitional" nature of this particular position actually involves distinctions without a difference. Type IIIA it is.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by dudley - 09/12/2020 11:21 am
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2288 Posts
Posted 09/12/2020   11:41 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add txstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
I think that 72R4 will be correct.

It is actually most unusual to get a solid plating mark that clear on plate 4 at the dot at UL.
When I saw it, I instantly directed my attention to 32R4, because that would have been the prior position entered with the same relief. When you get transient markings from a relief, its often useful to look at the prior and subsequent entries. Sometimes foreign matter will stick on the transfer roll for a couple entries. You will note that 32R4 also has a dot in that position, albeit a lighter one. 31R4 even has a very faint one - not in Neinken.

Nevertheless, as strong as the one on your stamp is, I suspect 72R4 is right.

One cannot be too careful with plate 4 stamps. They are deceptively hard to plate, and will drive even an experienced plater nuts sometimes. The appearance of the positions changed remarkably from printing to printing. So many markings that seem big and obvious on some, simply aren't there on other impressions, and vice versa - new things appear over time. Its really maddening.

On one of your prior stamps, I think it was - a plate 2 item with a notable scratch, that will be more consistent than anything you will see on Plate 4, for the most part. There were comments to the effect that said scratch cinches the plating and so on for the stamp -- which was mostly true, however, I have learned to apply a certain level of paranoia to plating. I always question myself, until I keep getting the same answer long enough. Back when I had time to spare in my life, I would sometimes spend all night staring at one stamp -- and maybe 6 hours in, my eyes would focus in just the right way, such that all of the the subtle markings would finally make sense and convince me that it was a position that I hadn't even suspected for the prior 6 hours. Anyway, you get my point.

That's a nice stamp, I always enjoy seeing pretty Plate 4 stamps. They can be quite attractive.

You seem to be doing a good job so far in your plating. I may take another look at this stamp later, just to be sure. I never trust plate 4 material until I've given it due rigor.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2288 Posts
Posted 09/12/2020   11:46 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add txstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
dudley - Dave Zlowe was the gentleman who expertised my 41R4 for the PF.

He and I had a long back and forth on that subject for years.
He was and is right to press on the issue, as it is problematic, which you now understand.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
Learn More...
United States
159 Posts
Posted 09/12/2020   11:47 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add widglo46 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
txstamp - Thanks for all your feedback to my posts.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
1411 Posts
Posted 09/12/2020   12:09 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add dudley to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
widglo, I don't see that the angled corner detracts from your stamp. Still a nice big margin at left.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
81 Posts
Posted 09/12/2020   5:10 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Njs900 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
I am greatly impressed by the depth of the discussions over the past few days.

As to type Ic, I have been going with "complete or nearly complete" left plume. The slight incompleteness can be on the left of the plume or on the bottom but the overall look is nearly complete.

My 41R4, shown below does not meet that standard nor does Tex's former stamp or Dudley's.

I have never seen a scan of a 41R3 that would.


/Users/phyllisshmalo/Desktop/Unknown.jpeg





For perforated stamps the identification is made more difficult for E and F reliefs as the size of the full relief is larger that the normal height of the perforations. Generally the perforations will cut into the top, bottom or slightly into both. This problem probably accounts for Scott numbers 19 and 19b values being for a stamp that is Fine (70) not the usual Very Fine (80).

If you can't fully see the left plume because of the perforations in the swing positions, then it cannot be considered a type 1c.

I prefer E and F reliefs to show the full bottom even at the expense of the design at top being cut into. This probably means no grade but it helps as reference for plating.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
81 Posts
Posted 09/12/2020   5:13 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Njs900 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
This is the image that was supposed to show above.


Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2288 Posts
Posted 09/12/2020   6:32 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add txstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Hi njs, always nice to see you drop by.

I appreciate and value your input on Ty Ic.
It sounds like we are on the same page, which is a good thing.

When dudley posted his 41R4 it brought back memories of my experience with this position. I think this position is a good one to use to have a Ty Ic discussion in general, for reasons already covered.

Even though my old stamp had a pulled perf, the design mostly fit vertically, which is really tough to find - alluding to your comments.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2288 Posts
Posted 09/12/2020   6:40 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add txstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
widglo46 - just wanted to get your attention, as I'm not sure when I'll have time to go through the reasoning, but my initial thought of your stamp maybe being 32R4 is correct.

This is another good example of the amount of diligence required to do plate 4. Just when you think you've got it, just remember: it's plate 4. :-)

When I get a good block of time I'll try to make the case.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
81 Posts
Posted 09/12/2020   7:20 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Njs900 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply

81R4 E Relief Type 1c

Good bottom but cut in at top.



Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Page: of 15 Replies: 222 / Views: 18,016Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.


Go to Top of Page
Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Stamp Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2021 Stamp Community Family - All rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Stamp Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Privacy Policy / Terms of Use    Advertise Here
Stamp Community Forum © 2007 - 2021 Stamp Community Forums
It took 7.61 seconds to lick this stamp. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05