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!

Show Your US 1851-57 Imperforate Stamps

Previous Page | Next Page    
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 1,549 / Views: 64,529Next Topic
Page: of 104
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
1854 Posts
Posted 05/14/2021   11:01 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Classic Coins to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
Gary, do you think it might be worth starting a thread about that stamp?

Hi Stephen,

That is an interesting idea. It may even be worthy of an article.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
183 Posts
Posted 05/15/2021   12:31 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add ioagoa to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Hi Classic Coins --


Quote:
I'd appreciate seeing any other examples anyone may be able to post.


Regarding position 1L0 -- here are 2 additional copies --

The first one has the left margin shaved too close -- but I am posting it anyway as once you know where to look, I think I can see the barest trace of the horizontal line (TFL ?) poking in? This copy also has what looks like some inconsistent stray inking in the sheet margin outside of the LFL opposite the upper left rosette as well.

The second example seems to show the same marginal inking variety as yours does -- although a bit distorted due to differences in inking and impression.

It looks like you have tracked onto a consistent plate variety -- and I agree with Moyock13 that is sure does look like a partial entry of a LFL, TFL and ULDB.

I will reach out to some of my fellow platers (i.e., those who I know do not follow this board) and see if I can round up additional copies having a wide sheet margin at left -- and if I am able to get any additional examples, I will post them here.

Regards // ioagoa




Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
1854 Posts
Posted 05/15/2021   4:17 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Classic Coins to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Hi ioagoa,

Thank you very much for posting these additional 1L0 reference images. I also appreciate your opinion that it looks like a partial entry, as Moyock13 observed.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
711 Posts
Posted 05/16/2021   10:25 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Moyock13 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Which plates tend to oxidize more than others? I vaguely recall a conversation where that was discussed. Thanks.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
1854 Posts
Posted 05/16/2021   1:18 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Classic Coins to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
Which plates tend to oxidize more than others?

I would say that it is more about which ink formulas tended to oxidize more than others. Iron oxide is believed to have been the dominant colorant for the orange brown inks, with probably red lead being a secondary pigment. The orange brown inks (from the orange brown plates) are not very susceptible to oxidation.

Generally, in my experience, all the other 1851-57 imperforate colors are much more susceptible to oxidation than the 1851 OBs. Iron oxide is not believed to have appeared in more than trace amounts in the non-OB inks.

Which inks can be restored after being oxidized is another matter. In my experience, the oxidized 1857 clarets respond the best to peroxide treatment (I have not sufficiently experimented with oxidized 1852 clarets). Below is a 91R4 that I've posted before that was treated with 3 percent peroxide for about 25 minutes that was very nearly restored to its original claret color.

Recommended reading:

"The U.S. 1851 3 Stamp: Color, Chemistry, and Changes;" James A. Allen and Thomas Lera

"The 3 1851 Stamp Plates: Color Changes and Earliest Documented Uses;" James Allen; USPCS Chronicle 266, May 2020



Edit: Minor word changes
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by Classic Coins - 05/16/2021 6:41 pm
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
711 Posts
Posted 05/16/2021   7:07 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Moyock13 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Thanks Classic Coins. I've never been brave enough to soak anything in peroxide. I'm always afraid that I'll pull up a blank piece of wet paper.

I was curious if any particular plate showed oxidation more than any other. Maybe not, huh?

Looks like I need to read a little James Allen.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
2655 Posts
Posted 05/16/2021   8:25 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add littleriverphil to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
http://goscf.com/t/63879#554929

You may want to read the last paragraph of txstamp's comment here on sulphuretted 3c stamps. (posted 10/03/2018 2:12 pm)
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
1854 Posts
Posted 05/16/2021   8:40 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Classic Coins to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
You're welcome, Moyock13.

I haven't noticed whether the stamps printed from any particular plate or plates were more susceptible to oxidation. The extent to which a 3-cent imperforate stamp could be discolored by oxidation would depend on the chemical elements of the ink formula used to print the stamp, and each plate was used with a variety of ink formulas (and colors). Allen and Lera listed calcium, iron, lead, sulfur, and Barium among the elements found in the inks used during the first two years of production.

I you refer to the "Timeline of printing by each plate and colors used" chart at the following stampplating.com link, you'll see that each of the "red" plates printed at least three of the primary colors, and plates 1L, 2L, and 3 each printed five of the primary colors.

http://www.stampplating.com/resources
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Moderator
Learn More...
9384 Posts
Posted 05/16/2021   8:46 pm  Show Profile Check 51studebaker's eBay Listings Bookmark this reply Add 51studebaker to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
What is wrong with patina? Has no one ever seen Antique Roadshow?

Hydrogen Peroxide is a bleach. It is in a dark bottle because it is not that stable and after opening begins to lose strength. Bottles which are open for a few months are much lower strength. How many philatelic posts, articles, or advocates have you seen make sure they cover the issues in understanding the Peroxide strength challenges? (i.e. If you have to dip a stamp for 2 minutes in a new bottle, how long do you need to dip the stamp in a 6 month old bottle?)

And I have noticed that stamp which I have previously altered/restored (depending upon your opinion) seem to re-tarnish/rust/oxide after a few years (even when stamps around them have not). I began assuming that the underlying chemical changes were still in play.

So a few years ago I gave up on playing amateur chemist and now enjoy my stamps they way they are; some future owner can do as they wish but I am choosing to not 'leave my mark' on the material that I currently possess. Few people see my stamps, so I am pretty sure no one gives a rats butt if some of my stamps have sulphuretted.
Don
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
1854 Posts
Posted 05/28/2021   5:43 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Classic Coins to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Here is a #10A from position 92L1i with a clear printing that I picked up at a recent stamp show. It has a blue Taunton, Massachusetts CDS.

It is a triple-transfer position. The tesselated design straddles the left frame line, and there are plenty of design elements in the white oval (annotated in the 2400-DPI closeups).

The triple transfer is best seen in the area of the upper-left rosette. The rosette center is shifted both to the left a to the upper-left. Unfortunately the cancel obscures the UL rosette on this example, but it is visible on the stampplating.com and Stamp Smarter examples.



Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
257 Posts
Posted 06/03/2021   12:33 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Hobsun013 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Hello again,

Back to the plating effort. This item was submitted by a previous owner as a Scott 10 and has a 2018 PF Cert stating that is it a "Scott 11, Yellowish Rose Red". The color designation aside, I purchased this one due to the overall eye appeal and the cancel. "Saint Dennis. Md." ("Dennis" being the key). As to the plating, my previous successful efforts have always been aided by the documented primary recuts or visible guide dots and this one provides no obvious clues at least to me. I see no inner frame lines and no clear recut markings. (maybe a single line in lower left triangle but that may be stretching it and a very light impression of the upper right triangle).



As always, any feedback is appreciated as I continue to learn from all the input provided.

Hobsun

Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
1854 Posts
Posted 06/03/2021   4:16 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Classic Coins to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Hi Hobsun. It's good to see you here. I always enjoy your posts.

That's a great cancel! I'm struck by how close the 8 is to the E-almost touching.

I believe I see a gash on the shoulder. What do you think?
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by Classic Coins - 06/03/2021 4:20 pm
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
1854 Posts
Posted 06/03/2021   5:11 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Classic Coins to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
I forgot to mention, the single vertical line in the LL triangle is normal for a LL triangle that is not recut. There were two vertical lines on the left side of the LL triangle on the master die. The one on the left edge was very lightly cut, and doesn't show well on typical printings. The one just to the right was heavier, and this is the one we see on your stamp.

Here is the LL corner of a 41P4 proof to illustrate this:



Edit: Minor word change
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by Classic Coins - 06/03/2021 5:15 pm
Valued Member
257 Posts
Posted 06/03/2021   5:28 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Hobsun013 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply

Classic Coins,

Thanks for the input. I can't say I definitely clearly see the "Gash" given the cancel but once pointed pointed out it seems possible - if it is present and assuming no inner lines, the plating tool points to POS 70L6. In reviewing the available samples it seems this could be when comparing the cuts in the various diamond blocks. My thought of a single line in lower left triangle would also be incorrect given this position but the samples do show a somewhat non perpendicular line which aligns with my copy. Open to other feedback as I may be overlooking something that leads in another direction.

Hobsun
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
183 Posts
Posted 06/03/2021   5:46 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add ioagoa to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Hi Hobson013 --

I agree with Classic Coins that your stamp does appear to have a faint gash on the shoulder -- and other C relief characteristics as well.

Given the combination of the C relief, the recut TFL, and the strength of the recut BFL -- I would start the hunt on the top row of plate 4 -- and also check 21L8 and 2R8.

Logic is as follows:

Your stamp is a #11 with neither inner line recut -- so has to be plate 4, 6, 7, or 8.

Based on the strength of the BFL -- unless a very unusual printing anomaly, your stamp is not from plates 6 or 7. Plate 7 is 100% out as the only C reliefs on plate 7 are top row positions -- and none of these had the TFL recut. Likewise, none of the stamps in the top row of plate 6 had the TFL recut either -- so those are 100% eliminated. That said, there are a number of inter-pane C reliefs on plate 6 (15 of them to be exact) -- but again -- given the strength of the recut BFL on your stamp, unless a very unusual inking anomaly, which is highly doubtful, plates 6 and 7 are eliminated.

Regarding plate 8 -- the C relief in combination with the recut TFL eliminates all top row positions on plate 8 except 2R8 (i.e., since 2R8 is the only top row position on plate 8 with a recut TFL) -- and the only other inter-pane C relief on plate 8 is 21L8 -- both of which you should check.

That leaves the top row of plate 4 as the only other possibility (i.e., as all top row positions on plate 4 had their TFL's recut and there are no inter-pane C reliefs on plate 4).

Bottom line -- I would first look at the two possibilities on plate 8 -- and then check all top row positions on plate 4 -- and I am pretty sure that out of those 22 candidates you will find a match.

FYI -- I have not tried to plate your stamp yet -- but if I were to give it a go around -- the above is where I would start.

Regards //ioagoa

Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Page: of 104 Previous TopicReplies: 1,549 / Views: 64,529Next 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 0.34 seconds to lick this stamp. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05