Determent Of 1 Cent Washington!

Understood. But it is not against the rules to be wrong.
Don

While we have been unable to budge the original poster toward the true identity of his stamp (or how to correctly use a perforation gauge!), sometimes a bad example is more instructional than a quickly answered question.

Even if the OP would submit his stamp for expertising, I doubt he would accept the conclusion.

It looks like you've gotten dozens of opinions on what this stamp could be. Sorry they are not the opinions you hoped to see. Seems to me, you have 3 things you can do now:

1) Spend $30+ to get a certificate.

2) Put it in your stamp album in the 423E or 423A space and show it off to all your friends.

3) Post it on ebay as a 423E, or 423A, whichever you wish.

Good luck with whatever you choose to do.

Looks like a 498e to me...

OK, Let's back up a bit for one last try at this. What is the actual perforation rate? There has been too much guessing at 10, 11 and 12. Why not establish that fact.

Since the top perforations are somewhat problematic, here is a scan of 3 stamps, from left to right,
perf 10 (a coil, very wide perforation bridges between the holes),
perf 11 (an offset printing),
and perf 12 (an early Franklin, narrow pointed bridges between the holes).
No doubt about the perf rates of these three.



While I cringe at "perf-counting" methods, I have added 2 thin black lines at the left sides of each design extending to the left vertical row of perforations. Each stamp has an image height of almost exactly 22mm (despite very small differences in printing methods and paper grain). This 22mm is 10% more than the 20mm (2cm) width of a perforation gauge.

The number of perforations coincident with the height of the printed area will be extremely close to:
On the perf 10 stamp: 10+10%=11 complete perforations
On the perf 11 stamp: 11+10%=12.1 complete perforatins
On the perf 12 stamp: 12+10%=13.2 complete perforations

More simply, count the vertical perfs in line with the printed area and subtract 1 to get the standard gauge rate.

Using this crude field method, the original poster's stamp is clearly perf 12 at the side (The original poster got this fact correct!). Don and Jaxom both clearly demonstrated the top perforation rate matches the side rate. 12 x 12. The Scott number can only be 405, either sheet or booklet. Several of us have voted for "booklet", due to the straight edges and wide blank area which would have had a guide line if it were of sheet origin. The aspect ratio could be easily measured to confirm this. Amazing how much time a 25 cent stamp takes!

I will make the same offer the OP made, please correct me where I am wrong in any of this.

Hello again! I have used the perfometer many Times maybe I wasent 100 %exact when tools the pitsher but even when I use the tool exactly its 10-12 perforation god enighet for me the stamp should be 423E or 423D if iam wrong there it can be tricks but it is 423E I think okey thanks for the help will read agien in Adam or Treo have a Nice night

magic70,
We have extended you every opportunity to prove that you are not a troll (someone who is intentionally trying to create drama on a forum). But your refusal to listen to logic and common sense has pushed this thread beyond reason. I am locking this thread, do not start a new thread or troll the community again in the future or your account will be locked.

If you get a certification on this stamp, message me privately and I will reopen the thread so you can prove that you were right.
Don