1895 8c Grant Wmk Question

Can we get a nice backlit view of the stamp?

It would be a nice find, but it could be possible that it's a "P" rotated to the right, as there is the rest of the "P" curves a bit visible - but as it's much more faded than the rest I also think it's a good candidate for an "I" :).

wtcrowe: Some time ago I made some "research" about the difference between the USIR and the USPS as I thought that they must be different, not only in the "R" and "I" but also "U" and "S". I think the "S" of the USIR is less narrow, for example. So as you mention the difference of the "I": is this just your thoughts as you have seen many of them or did anybody make any research about those two watermarks? As said, they are different and make a premium for some stamps, so some investigation would be interesting.

Thanks everyone. I realized my Grant error while falling asleep.

I'm not sure what a backlit picture is exactly. Please describe and I will try to get it.

Scott Specialized says "Nos. 271a, 272a must have an identifiable portion of the letters "I" or "R". Single stamps from the same sheets, but showing the "U" or "S" are considered to be Nos. 271 and 272."

It is an I. It is too centered to be a U, since you would see the other part, and too much is showing of the straight line, the line would be visible to the top or bottom part of the letter to be a P.

A backlit image would one where you hold the stamp up to light so that we can see the watermark that way.

Guys, we will find out at my expense. My first submission to APS is off in the mail now. Wish me luck!!

Good luck.

I would put money on USIR. The serifs between the you and P are also different from the USIR picture Don posted.

Without a clear I or R, preferably an R it is highly unlikely that a certificate for 272a will be issued.

Well, I simply don't know...but will. Life is a dream...

Thanks all once again!

That it is. I think you've got a pretty good chance. Good luck.

We currently have a 272a listed on ebay, lower part of R. The I and P/U are different from USPS and USIR, I don't see why this can't be certed as a 272a, however, it's appeal to collectors is going to be low because it doesn't have the full watermark. The one in my collection has a full R on it.

It's very easy to tell the difference between an I and a "U" as well as the I and the P. The you body width of the watermark is 5mm wide, while the body width of the I is 4mm. To tell an I from a P, as long as you have more than 7mm of the leg (and it's 4mm wide), then you can determine if it's an I or a P. At the 7mm mark the lower edge of the D part of the P is visible. So this is distinguishable. But as I mentioned before, this won't be highly desirable. But any 8, 9, 10mm portion should be more than enough to verify the watermark as an I, P or U.


EDIT NOTE: Can this site PLEASE stop auto-correcting a capital "U" (without quotes around it) to "you"? So annoying. This thread is riddled with them, and I corrected this 3 times before I realized what was happening.

I hope it does get a cert but as I said before it is highly unlikely based upon prior certs that a stamp without a full R or I will get one. Just the way it is.

How could you possibly know this? Unless you have seen the watermark of every stamp with a genuine cert it would be impossible to know what they look like.

Rev - I have owned eight copies through the years and own two now. All have had a clear I or R. All have had certs. Of the approximately 75 copies known Siegel has sold most of the available ones at one time or another. They all have had a clear I or R. It is required because regardless of how much analytics one wishes to apply to validate their assumption if an I is what is in question it must be clear. That is reality.

Can you point to any copies that have a cert and have a partial letter?