I Am Learning How To Plate The 1851 3c Washington, Need Help.

I have resumed trying to plate the 1851s, but the 3c is much more difficult than the 1c.

First, relief a, b, or c? I really need help here, as I can not seem to see the difference between a and b in the line around the oval at top or bottom. They almost all look like type b to me, with tesselation interrupting that line. C is usually obvious.

This pair (image below) has recut inner lines, and I do not see any other recuts. Unless I missed one, that narrows it down to plates 2 or 3. At this point, I am trying to narrow any given stamp down to the correct plate.

My main reference is Chase's 3c 1851 from the USPCS online library.

Nice pair!!
Sometimes the width between stamps can help ID the plate. I'm at work now, so don't have access to any of my literature.

I still lack the experience/confidence to ID plates by eye.

The heavy gouging of the top half of the UR diamond block, combined with inner-lines I would think would make this Plate 1-Late.

It is a nice pair Stampcrow, unfortunately not mine. I meant to mention that.

Txstamp, I did read that the upper label block was always recut and the upper right diamond block gouged out, but Chase says it's "obvious". I don't see the recut or the gouge. Is the diamond block obvious based on darker inking, shape, or?

I can't go into any depth at the moment but that is an A-relief pair from Plate 1L.

The top half of the UR diamond block simply has more ink in it than the bottom half. Quite a bit more. That is the so-called gouging.

Later impressions (this one is early), this shows much more readily, as the plate wore, and the difference between the deeper parts of the design and the shallower ones become more exaggerated.

Here is a sulfuretted example which shows the gouging well:
http://www.stampsmarter.com/plate/h...es/25858.jpg

Thanks for the explanation and image txstamp. I can now see the gouging in both images. I can even see most of the recut upper label block in your image.

Thank you as well, Sinclair. If you find time for more in depth comments, I would enjoy hearing them. It helps to know this is relief A. I don't see the "smooth" line Chase describes, so I am off to look for more examples of both reliefs.

It is probably best to show what a good B-relief example looks like. Some stamps show each characteristic better or less clearly than others. Look for the break in the tesselated work below the "O" of POSTAGE shown by the arrow. Also look for where the tesselated work impinges on the white oval directly above the "C" of CENT also shown by an arrow. Does this help?

Here is a nice example of the C-relief if anybody needs to see one... in a B-relief position to boot. Look at that C-relief gash! Must be the paper right?

Then this one would be an "A" relief?

Nope. B-relief.

I don't recall plating the item with the blue Philly cancel but since it is probably a stamp from the intermediate state of Plate 1, it is probably affected by a very slight north-south shift, making the lower area of interest more pronounced.

Thanks Sinclair, I can see it now that I know exactly what to look for. For some reason I don't always grasp what Dr Chase is trying to point out. Not only regarding the reliefs, but also which plates always had certain positions recut.

I still don't see how I will be able to get to a specific plate for any given stamp, but I am getting ahead of myself.

raymodj, some positions are easier than others. Having multiples like pairs often help.
I just look for clues. In the case of your pair above, a "lack" of clues help. Those being NO lines re-cut in the triangles and NO guide dots, along with knowing it's plate 1 Late, that's a really good start.

I keep this handy to remind me of general guide dot positions. As you can see, you've already eliminated half of the positions.