Any Other 30c Greenish Black Design A53 On Hard Paper Other Than Scott#176, Please?

thank you both. this is a fascinating topic without easy answers. I don't have the knowledge of you both, so my thoughts are quite superficial about this, but sometimes easy thoughts also help to categorize.

I don't have the collection to really to research on this as I nearly don't have covers and very few stamps with the logo capture. would the plate number also help defining the printing company?

I mentioned the intermediate paper as this is the term used also by the PF, and Barwis himself also mentions this type of paper without doubting it, although naming it transitional paper. So both the PF and Barwis seem to say that there is a type of paper which can be defined by personal examination and which is the intermediate paper. Hahn mentions the 185 as a typical stamp for intermediate paper. So there is enough convention in the philatelic community to expertize an intermediate paper without any doubt (otherwise there wouldn't be the certificate). Barwis also mentions that it's not the sense of philatelic analytical work that at the end each collector has to go into the laboratory before defining a paper type. You can always find a subtype of a subtype if you want. Again, catalogues and terminology live from simplification.

I am really willing to look at my bank note stamps for doing some little research about this topic. It's quite easy for me to distinguish the hard from soft paper. But for the transitional period it would help me a lot to get the confirmation to how I am looking for intermediate paper. For me the difficult part is not the intermediate paper on the American side (if it may exist), but on the Continental side. American paper is "more or less soft", but Continental paper is hard to soft, including the intermediate paper. So if I look at a stamp for intermediate paper, is it:
- at first sight looks like hard paper (smooth, clean impression)
- perforation tips more like soft paper
- snap test more like hard paper
- before light the paper looks mottled, but not as much as soft paper
- thickness (and probably other aspects...) as the type 5 of Barwis

I think I forgot a question mark before my last list above.

Actually I am not sure if this list is correct. So if anyone with more knowledge about the so-called "intermediate" paper wants to correct or add anything to that, I am glad to read it. As mentioned there are certificates for "intermediate" paper by the PF, so they have to do something to check if it's intermediate paper.

So I don't want to match the list to Barwis' article or any other new results of the paper research, but just to the "last known convention" about the intermediate paper. (Or does the PF perhaps not make any certificates for intermediate paper and early American paper anymore until Barwis' results have become accepted and categorized?)