1c 1851 Plate 2 Stamps

Here is another one. It is Siegel 998 lot 350 from the Vogel collection. It is plated as 97R2. Without a need to look close, I notice the guide dot at top right. There is a stamp above so it is not a top row stamp. It is B relief with a B relief above so that makes it a bottom row stamp. All of row 9 on the left pane has a guide dot close to the plume. Showing the guide dots from my old chart on the 9th row of the right pane, the only guide dot that low is position 88R2. Which makes this stamp 98R2, not 97R2,

@jaxom - agreed; 88R2 is a unique guide dot for the 9th row.

Of similar interest - nearby 96R2 was the last position I completed on Dick Celler's plating.
I found it surprisingly hard to plate and I finally was able to obtain a copy definitely plated from the guide dot at LR of 85R2 which is not mistakeable. I still have a couple bottom row plate 2 stamps, including one of Dick's that I have not yet been able to plate. Someday I'll put more effort at it.

I will look into your questions that you sent me via email in the next few days.

Nice to see you posting away here.

@txstamp - check out the previous page for other recent posts. I would be interested in seeing your unplated bottom row stamps. I have created a correct image for 41R2 as shown previously. I am having a problem finding 27R2 and 29R positions and guide dots. I have not gotten to rows 9 and 10 on the rework yet. Hopefully I can find some images to help you with your plating there. Also, take a look at the strip of 3 in the plate 3 thread.

jaxom, here is 29R2 with a good view of the guide dot and the doubled dot at UR of 39R2.

Thank you Doug.

I have completed new spacing and guide dot charts for the right pane of plate 2. All images are 1200dpi. The guide dot images were created new in a new format, not using my old chart images. I still have about 100 images to go through before I replace all images in the database for the right pane. I have taken a close look at all images to confirm the platings as best as I could.

Jaxom,

Attached is a 1200 DPI scan on the #7 pair for 62-63R2. Hope this helps. As soon as I get back the strip of 3 #9s in the 71-73L1L position back form PF (sent for a cert), I'll scan those as well.

I have a couple more #9 and #7 pairs coming in for my latest auction purchases, and as soon as I get those, I will scan them as well.

Just out of curiosity, are you planning on being in Boston for the Expo
Cheers,
Josh

jaxom100 - Your new spacing chart for the right pane of Plate 2 is great. For Plate 1, Neinken's book has a table with accurate drawings showing the position of the ornaments at the right and left upper corners for each pair of columns, but for Plates 2 and 3 he uses just simple rectangles to depict each stamp. Knowing that the right side of a pair is, for example, "Slightly Lower" than the stamp on the left leaves a lot of room for interpretation without an accurate drawing or an image to compare. One could use as a standard the alignment drawings Neinken made for Plate 1, but having the precision of images from actual stamps is much better.

I like the fact that your Plate 2 chart also labels each interspace with both the spacing and the relative position of the stamp to the right. I hope you'll consider redoing the Plate 1 chart with the same labeling. It was also nice that you took the pains to show the exception of the 9-10 interspace for 99-100R2. It made me think that for completeness you might want to do the same for 98-99R2. Below is with the standard column 8-9 spacing/alignment on the left and 98-99R2 on the right taken from a 97-99R2 strip (Siegel Sale_1242_Lot_86).

When you finish with the Left Pane, I'd greatly appreciate it if you'd send me the individual images you used to make the charts for both Plates 1 and 2 so that I can use them in my 1c Franklin Plating Application.

I changed the spacing chart to show 98-99R2 spacing.

Here is another misplated pair. Siegel 998 lot 355 from the Vogel collection. It was plated as 51-52R2 (image 1), If you compare the guide dots on the top of the pair to the chart, you will see that they match 21-22R better than 41-42R (image 2). Therefore, the pair is 31-32R2.

Years ago Dick Celler gave me an errata list of misplated stuff from Ray Vogel's sale. I should try to dig that up.

Looks like Dick agreed with you on that pair.
Here is his errata from the Vogel sale.



edit: iPhone pic so I hope its not upside down; you can rotate if it is

Thanks for that info. It looks like I found 3 of the wrong positions that were posted on here. lots 347, 350 and 355. Glad to know that I found the correct positions. I will check for the others to make sure that I did not miss any. Did he make a list for the Wagshal collection, Siegel 994? It looks like I missed lot 338 indicated as 21R2 and actual 41R2. Looking at it again, I agree. That gives me a position that I needed.

I recall sitting with Dick at his dining room table going over his Wagshal purchases, but I dont recall any errata list.

Wagshal was a better plater than Ray Vogel, so while there are likely to be mistakes in almost everyone's plating, Ray's sale had a higher than usual miss-rate. Ray was always friendly to me though and sharing of his material. I had some enjoyable chats with him.

That list for the Vogel sale saved me a lot of hours replating a lot of stamps. I really appreciate it.