1c 1851 Plate 2 Stamps

Here is my next puzzler. Looks to be a B relief type II so I'm assuming a plate 2 piece. I was sure I posted this before but using the search I came up empty.

No, that's a plate 1L B relief - Ty IV Scott #9.

It has an "A" relief dingle on a "B" relief so it is a ninth row stamp.

Well, thanks for pointing me forward. What do you think of 29R1L?

An auction win from a local auction firm. I believe this to be position 60L2

60L2 is correct. The vertical scratches in the right middle margin match a 60L2 I have, perfectly. The diagonal scratch between the right ball and right plume matches. The ornament shortness at left agrees well with Neinken and my stamp.

Pretty impression, and also helps show that plate 2 did not have a centerline. Nice positional item in that respect.

stallzer, on your previous stamp with the three horizontal pen line cancellations 29R1L looks like a good match (I didn't find one better on any of the imperf plates, including the ninth row of Plate 1 Late), but the so-called "dingle" coming off the remnants of the lower left plume is quite evident, as jaxom stated. This feature is only supposed to be found on A reliefs and on most ninth-row B reliefs. I have looked through all my Plate 1 Late holdings and cannot find a non-ninth-row B relief stamp with a prominent dingle such as this. I'd be interested in the views of txstamp, sinclair2010, njs900 and other One-Cent experts on this seeming anomaly. Can a dingle-like mark appear on strong B relief impressions outside of the ninth row? For the record, the "dingle" refers to the small horizontal mark indicated by the arrow below.

Stallzer, I have to agree with the position 29R1L. I set up a few images for comparison. This first image shows the spacing between the stamps and the horizontal alignment with the inset. (Inset from OP stamp and sheet stamp swapped.) The top stamp is the OP stamp, middle stamp is from the full sheet image, the third image is from the archives, submitted by Dudley (order the same on all images). I also indicated 3 dots in the letters that are not show on the plating drawings but seem to be consistent, at least on earlier copies. It is harder to see on the sheet image.



Next image shows the guide dot and the plating mark shown by Neinken.


The third image shows the plating marks in the lower left. The sheet image does not show the dingle but it is very light on the third image.


The plate bruise in the head is not visible on the OP stamp but may have appeared later in the life of the plate. It appears that 29R1L is correct to me. Stallzer, I would like your permission to use your image for an ID image for this position. The early printing shows the plating marks well and a few that Neinken missed.

You certainly have my permission to use any image I post. Your efforts here have been very useful in my learning of this issue and I can't thank you enough for all you've put into your work.

I like the Plate 2 margin copy. At the risk of being called a wet blanket I am mentioning for everybody's edification that the left side is at least partly reperforated.

dudley - I don't remember. Its been a long time since we did the study on the dingle. I definitely recall going through all of my stamps at the time. I had quite a few from all different plates. The pattern of dingles and no-dingles was undeniable and very predictable. I had most of the tricky positions, like 90R2 (above an A relief 100R2), which, therefore, shouldn't have one, and didn't. When the pattern was 9th row B, and 10th row B, they showed on the 9th row. When it was otherwise, like, 9th row B, 10th row A, it did not show, as expected.

I want to say I've seen some other stamps like the one in question, that showed some similar remnant - on possible non-9th row stamps. Its not an everyday occurrence but I agree that its worth discussion and some study. This stamp is an early impression, and the dingle often wore in late impressions.

Here is a thought on the subject - Plate 1-Late, unlike Plates 2 and 3, was re-entered. Every position was re-entered, and 199 were recut. Some positions were clearly re-entered with a different relief than that which they were originally entered with. For example, positions: 96R and 97R, if memory serves, were originally A reliefs on Plate 1-E, but were re-entered with a B relief over the original A. I'm using that as an example of the fact that with a re-entered plate, things can get "changed" a bit in less predictable ways. That said, I definitely agree that this is worth some discussion.

Here is the ID Image that I came up with for 29R1L and a link to the database location.



http://www.stampsmarter.com/plate/h...es2/8747.jpg

Plate 2, type II - just posting for the thread

This is position 8R2.
It shows a small but nice double transfer at ornaments T and Z at the top left and right.

This is Ty II, Scott #20.

I like buying covers with stamps, and finding out if you get a neat plate variety or not. Its kind of like playing the lottery.

Apologies for the horrible scan, but I just can't get my scanner to do much better on single stamps. Someday I'll upgrade.

I really have enjoyed this thread.

I just listed this strip of three, positions 7-8-9R2.

This a link to the ebay listing.https://www.ebay.com/itm/233324343458