Looks Like A Plate 77 Penny Red To Me...

Thank you Peter. Yes it does.

I think the blue filter does pick out whatever line engravings etched into the design and the blue image very clearly shows the lines. On the position of the plate number to the left of the head, the first 7 is at a slightly lower position compared to the second 7, explaining why the horizontal line for the second 7 is adjacent to the frame. The right side of the queen's head seems to correspond as well, with the first 7 at a lower position than the second 7 which has its horizontal line eating into the frame.

Louise -

This stamp was used for a long time - and printed many different times. Each time they used a new plate, the plate # was engraved into the plate so that it appears on the stamp. As the thread is discussing...

Plate #77 is extraordinarily scarce. The catalog value - from my old catalog - is $130,000.

Which is why all the discussion about what plate # is on the stamp!

You're succumbing to confirmation bias. With the blue filter, I see 47.

If you won't do a scan, then at minimum, change the background to a neutral gray matte sheet. The textured background you are using is fooling the camera's auto-focus and forcing a soft focus on the stamp image to a point of uselessness.

Cjpalermo, with all due respect, it can never be a 47, penny reds start with plate 71. Thanks for helping me to confirm that the second digit is a 7, that is all that matters.

A couple of quotes from my literature:

SG QV Specialised: "Collectors should be wary of stamps from Plate 177 which by accident or design have the small figures "1" of the plate numbers obscured; so making them appear to be from Plate 77."

Lowe Encyclopaedia: "The following simple test can be applied to dispose of the claim of Plate 177, so often thought to be its extremely rare precursor. On Pl. 177 in none of the four "7s" is the tail of the figure placed immediately above the intersection of the curves below. In plate 77, three of the four tails of the figures are in this position on genuine copies, while the fourth, the unit "7" on the right hand side is to the left of the curve intersections.

Both Pl. 77 and the scarce plate 225 should be examined for painted in figures on a common plate."

I have no idea what Lowe means by unit.

Pennyblackie, I do want you to have a plate 77, there's a part of all of us here that does I'm sure.

Like many of us, I've been in this for decades and the first rule I apply when looking at something potentially rare is "I must look for anything that does prove this is not rare, not anything that might prove that it is".

It could well be pl. 177 The top part of your 7's are not in a slight downward direction.

http://pennyreds.co.uk/SG43-44-PENNY-RED-Plates-

Unit 7 would be the 7 in the units space rather than the 10's space. Makes sense?

Me too! I would be getting excited.............

I would also, be taking wise counsel from members here, whom have dealt with these for years.
This always for me, brings up the old chestnut....Does one risk sending off a valuable stamp, or not?
If it is a 77 then I guess it would pay an airfare.

Rarity Potential.........One specimen is in the Tapling collection, and 6 or 7 others are known. Whew!

What we need is an example of a genuine 77, PB's stamp shows the leg of the 7, perfectly in line with the bisect crossing of the curved rose engine work. I wonder if this may be a clue.

Oops! sorry, just read Bobby's post.... same thing.

This would be my worry....looks dodgy

I recently did a blog post on "in search of plate 77"

http://bigblue1840-1940.blogspot.co...d-sheet.html


Close-up Plate 177, right side

Long story short: naturally I did not find a 77, but I have scans of lots of other numbers - including 72, 76, 78, and the forger's choice, 177. Perhaps, the other examples might be helpful in some way.

Jim Jackson
bigblue1840-1940.blogspot.com

Here's a plate 77 from the BBC News

Thank you Partime, yes that makes perfect sense I had forgotten those terms from my school days

My guess is it's quite likely an altered 177. But the correct way to authenticate this is to compare to the distinctive design elements of a plate 77. If it doesn't have those, or if it has demonstrably late-state features, then it can't be genuine.

Although the print date for plate 77 wasn't documented by the security printer, IIRC the evidence from both the numbering sequence and known examples suggests it was a very early plate with corresponding strong early state impressions. Plate 177 was made much later, and the design had been re-engraved several times in the interim. Later plates have subtle differences in the design due to the recutting and natural wear when compared to early plates. There are also subtle differences in color, due to changes in the formulation of the ink between the time early plates were used and the time late plates were used (penny reds were printed over a long period); experts can look at the ink as well to determine if it's genuine.

I'm not a penny red specialist, so I don't know off the top of my head what the differences are, but that's the way to tell. Dig into the literature, compare with your stamp, and if it still appears good as a #77, send it for an RPSL cert.

Most of the 77s appear to be more or less leveled, making my case for a 77 weak. Anyway, I will just keep this in my collection whether it is a £2 or a £500k stamp.

I am surprised there have been no comments about the position of the check letters. The upper left "C" is punched low.