1c 1851 Plate 2 Stamps

stallzer - difficult stamp to plate, made more so by the blue colored cancel. Give 47L a look also as well as the top of 57L which looks a lot like the top of the stamp below in your scan.

Since I'm thinking about the sale of Dick Celler's remainder material at Rumsey this past week, I thought I'd post Dick's former 99R2, Scott #8 that I obtained last year.

99R2 is a Ty III, with top and bottom lines cleanly broken, with the massive right side double transfer.

Gorgeous.

Posting a couple more of Dick Celler's stamps that I obtained last year.

Position 100R2 is a really interesting plate position. It is a bottom-row (misplaced) A relief.

We had a discussion on it here, previously -
https://goscf.com/t/58151#508483

Here are two copies of it that Dick had. Note the 11th row effect, where you can see the top of the B relief in the bottom margin, from the over-rocking of the transfer roll. It is very visible on the pen-cancelled stamp. The stamp with the New York CDS, is ex-Wagshal, and was lot 940 in his Siegel sale 994.

Discussion of 70R2 here :

https://goscf.com/t/72775&whichpage=142#737360

This one has all the markings for 60L2 but I could not find anything to match the marks in the two "S"s in "US POSTAGE". I even checked plates one and three. Any ideas"

jaxom100 - I looks to me that your stamp is lower than the one to its left. If so, it can't be from the left pane of plate 2.

Sometimes you find extraneous ink marks that look like consistent plating marks but in fact are not.

jaxom100 - On closer look, I can't really say your stamp in lower than the one to its left. The little bit of ink that I see could be even with the ornament on your stamp. The diagram in Neinken's book shows column 10 higher than column 9 on plate 2, but his diagram exaggerates exactly how much higher. I think 20L2 may be a match. Yours shares the same plate marks in the RLC ast Doporto's, and the incompleteness of ornament "H" is also the same as 20L2.

I agree with Dudley and with 60L2. The marks opposite Franklin's nose are perfectly consistent with a reference scan that I have for 60L2 and it matches my copy in other respects.

Oddly nobody has posted this one.

48R2

Very nice, stallzer. It's especially difficult to find a perforated example that is so well centered.

I bought this 1L2 at a recent Schuyler Rumsey sale. I think most of the bidding was based on the fact that it had a PSE gem 100 cert, but I wanted it because it is the so-called "dropped relief" position. It got that name because at one time it was believed that the transfer roll was accidentally dropped onto the plate, and that this is what produced the "big crack" starting at 2L2. From what is known today about the early transfer presses and the guide relief method, it is now felt more likely that the extra plate marks were produced because the transfer roll and the plate were somehow wrongly aligned.

However it happened, the result was that the bottom of another relief was transferred above 1L2. On this example, the top margin is wide, and the evidence of the extra relief transfer is very clear, making it one of my favorite position pieces.

I've tried to find out more about how the production mistake happened, but apparently no one knows for sure. It seems to me, however, that since there is no evidence of a double transfer from reentry, and since 1L2 was entered with the "T" relief, the marks couldn't have been produced the by overrocking. One possible scenario I can think of is that the siderographer somehow forgot that he was transferring the top row, lowered the transfer roll onto what he thought was the guide position, and touched only the bottom of the relief to the plate before he discovered his error. Maybe someone else knows enough detail about how the guide relief method was used and can comment on my speculation.

What a stamp.

1L2 is definitely not a case of over-rocking.
It is something else - a prior entry not fully erased -- certainly which may well have had something to do with the big Crack/Flaw due to proximity.

I need some help on the stamp below. I think it is 21R2 based on the guide dot position and the dot in the "O" of "ONE" and the spacing and relative vertical alignment of 22R2 (slightly lower and 0.7mm spacing). The other marks in the "O" and in the "N" of "ONE" don't quite match any other known examples, so I'm in doubt.