26A On Cover With Damaged Plate Variety?

Not sure but I think this is the stamp with the damaged plate above the rosette? Are they retouched? Also I think it has double frame lines on both sides not complete and look at the shading in the oval, the top half is under inked?

It looks like a retouched damaged transfer to me. Here's a link to some damaged transfer retouch varieties I posted in another thread:

https://goscf.com/t/38556#328700

I think the "shading difference" your seeing is caused by uneven plate wiping. It's not just the oval, I see it in the entire upper half of the stamp.

The top of the stamp being lighter could also be from fading after printing.

could this stamp also have both frame lines doubled?

Doesn't appear to be.

Here are the best I can do for the lines.

Here is a recent thread about the double frame lines.

there is no thread.

The missing link

https://www.stampcommunity.org/topi...60935#525371

That's the thread ^^^

Sorry

Yeah I was on that one . Still not sure why the expertizing committee says it is a double when this forum is saying otherwise.

My take on "double frame lines" is that they're lines purposely added or recut. The examples that Sinclair2010 shows in the above thread are great.
Your example is not that. Extra lines like the ones your stamp shows, I thought were engravers slips, but I've learned here that they are more likely worn leftover lines. See how faint your extra lines are.

This is just what my current understanding is. Not in anyway an expert offering.

This response will have a little for everybody. The stamp is a top row stamp from Plate 15, thus a Type III, Scott #26. All 20 top row stamps from Plate 15 have a single repair of the damaged transfer area. The so called "damaged transfer" variety was caused by damage to the A relief on the transfer roll and not damage to the plate. There is a wonderful article in the Chronicle about Plate 15 written by Thomas Alexander that more or less defines his idea of what a doubled frame line is. It is a good standard. It also addresses what is called a split frame line such as in the upper part of the left frame line of the stamp under discussion.

Any perceived doubling of the right frameline is caused by the combination of the recut frame line and a faint relief line. The relief line being previously described in the other mentioned thread.

Thanks Again guys! You make stamp collecting more enjoyable with the information you bring to light! I appreciate and have a better understanding now when looking at my stamps. I am just glad I held on to them till I got a better grasp of what they really were. I have sold too many items not knowing what I had to see them resell for someone else at much larger returns! My biggest regret is I went to a dealer in chicago area and was selling a few covers and the first one I had was a receipt from Japans government for our US navy electric bill while at port in Japan at the end of WII. It was for I think $6,000,000 dollars. and it several had high Japan revenues on it. This guy looked at it set it down without saying anything and then went on to talk about my FDCs and covered it up. I forgot completely about it because he made such a big deal about my other covers. I realized a few of days later that he didn't offer me anything for it but kept it. Kind of hard to go back now and claim we didn't have a deal. Live and learn. Maybe it wasn't worth anything but the more I thought about, I bet it was.

Is there a single reference for plating the 3-cent stamps from plate 9 through 28? If not, what are the best references available?