Scott 210 Without Shading Under The Inside Border?

So I have this one stamp that stands out in two ways no shading under the inside frame and a broken frame on the left side. I have several hundred and I put this one a side because of the broken inner frame and then I noticed no shading. Many stamps look like they don't have shading because the ink is heavy and the lines jus disappear. this one the horizontal lines are still pretty clear and there is no vertical lines or fatter horizontal lines. Thoughts? It is the one on the left. The one in the middle has heavy inking. The right one has shading. The stamp in question is the third single image. I also added the last two pics to show what shading looks like on many stamps with the horizontal lines disappearing into a muddle as they get closer to the inside frame. the shading starts centered above the "S" in cents and narrows down where the "C" meets the frame.

@3193ZD, Sorry, but your photos are too poor to determine anything.

I would suggest if you want an answer (maybe) provide scans, and add arrows to the Pick Up Points (PUP), a better scan and arrow pointing out the PUP would provide a better understanding, at least for me.

You said "the stamp in question is the third single image", sorry I'm confused exactly which one of the images are your referring to?

Stampmaster

I think the stamp was lightly inked, and the bottom line of the portrait didn't print. You scans are clear, but not labeled, gets tough to tell the 3 stamps apart, helps they're different shades.

Which line are you referring to?

My eye sight must be better. I see exactly what your talking about. However I do not have an answer for you. The difference in the shading stands out clearly on your photos. It could be heavy inking. Very interesting.

I was referring to the outer oval line that encloses the horizontal background shading lines of the Washington bust. I copied your scans and marked what I didn't see and what I did.

Stamp doesn't look under-inked.

I can give one theory/possibility. Since the line is so thin, after many printings ink could dry and accumulate in the hairline cut. In this case, it would prevent new ink from laying in the line...so that a printed hairline would not appear.

I believe there is a line there, it's just fainter.
The image with green arrows added you're comparing two different areas of the stamps and I think that confuses things a bit.

My thoughts, for what it's worth, this is just plate wear.

there is a line there. I do have some that have almost a full oval outline and many that don't. What about left side vertical line next to the outside left of the ball pattern? is that broken? All my stamps have a solid complete line except for this one. I also have stamps that have almost complete right and left out side borders. not common most don't have an outside line.

There is a fine book about this stamp: The United States Two Cent Brown of 1883-1887 by Edward L. Willard. Plate and printing varieties are covered in volume 1.

Thanks ttreen. My goal is to sell most of my surplus stamps without investing more into them. I got these in large accumulations I have bought over the years. I have focused most of my collecting on the Washington/franklins and postal history. Just planning on keeping a select few and the oddities I find along the way!

so I also found this stamp with it looks like no shading but also light inking as well. Just in the shading spots under the angular frame???? How can that happen?