Needing Help To Identify This Washington A140 Stamp

This is were I'm at I have just four choice's .
A 491 no watermark vertical perforations if this watermark is right its going the wrong way it should be a horizontal perforation's.
A 454 with watermark same as the top one the watermark is going the wrong way but it does have a watermark best bet.
Another one would be the 487 but this one you need no watermark so that doesn't work.
And the last one 539 ,a long shot the perforation are 10 and it all so is vertical but this one has to have no watermark.
So if you have a watermark or none ,so that's the choice's
It doesn't look like any one here.
This is crazy


A

Hi Again ever one nothing like beating a dead horse again
but I think you might find this really interesting .
I decided to take a closer look at that watermark and take a look what I found.
I will let you decide but I think its a real discovery.

What?

I think this stamp has ink bleeding through these pin holes that is your watermark
The post marks are exactly at the same spots.
So it got wet and it bled.
That's what I think is going on, I might be wrong but what are those holes.

It's also a WWI era paper, which sometimes has a lot of shadows.

Thanks revcollector
Maybe what happened the person went to the post office bought a stamp
licked the stamp then had it postmarked .
It looks like something like sand or something grainy was on the stamp it poked
little holes in it that caused the ink to bleed .This could happen when the ink was fresh
the image of the postmark is very grainy also.

I found this stamp I think is interesting it has all the same things the other stamp has
same perf 10 same vertical perf and it looks like type II.
I think around neck the toga rope is more defined in one but the color as you can see is brighter on one.
Are they the same stamp, what do you think?
I have this identification guide 2013 and they say the 454 has a watermark and in the Scott's catalog there is no watermark that I could tell ,I find this funny ,
was it once and now it's changed into what who is wrong.?
very confusing

I found this stamp I think is interesting it has all the same things the other stamp has
same perf 10 same vertical perf and it looks like type II.
I think around neck the toga rope is more defined in one but the color as you can see is brighter on one.
Are they the same stamp, what do you think?
I have this identification guide 2013 and they say the 454 has a watermark and in the Scott's catalog there is no watermark that I could tell ,I find this funny ,
was it once and now it's changed into what who is wrong.?
very confusing

453,454,455 all have single-line watermarks. They can be illusive to find sometimes. 491,492 have no watermarks. All are rotary press productions. Color can vary at production and after production due to how the stamp was handled/stored etc. over the past 100 yrs. Can not tell by your images (too small) whether the two are the same in appearance--heavy cancellation can sometimes be a hindrance too. I'm assuming you're thinking these are both rotary and not flat plate printings. The attached give you a guide for flat, rotary and off-set printed issues (they are not off-set issues).

http://www.stampsmarter.com/1847usa...ntifier.html

You are really helpful AL;
They are rotary
I thought the bottom stamp had a watermark but Im not sure anymore I had another member Revcollector tell me, a lot of these stamps have shadows.
The first one I thought didnt have a watermark .Will show a picture you be the judge .
The second stamps is so much lighter than the first one maybe just age fading.
The ink on the first one is a little thicker I looked at both and they have incredible detail one not so much ink.
.This picture is high lighted for more detail this is the first one.



This is the second one
The first one I just redid it a little a close it looks very much like the dark spots that are bleeding.

Here'e a larger look of the stamps

Hello again;
My search I think is ending and the last resort was to try wet scanning.
Which lukusw blog and Historical DNA last resort collector helped me in doing,
I was worried about the flammability so if you do it be real careful.
The first stamp the problem stamp that had a shadow , I tried first wet scanned it and when I did it ,I saw no watermark so what the heck is going on .
So I did many other scans with the same result no watermark or shadow .
So I need to try it on a stamp that I knew had a watermark
and sure enough the watermark was there.
I tried another stamp that I knew had watermarks was there, sure enough
there was a watermark .
So I conclude this shadow stamp it's got to be a 491 because of no watermark and its a type II it has
vertical perforation and a rotary stamp.

I have been reading all of the feedback on the OP's supposed "coil stamp", and maybe I am the only one who feels that the bottom may have trimmed perforations; the bottom edge looks very suspicious to me. Of course, some rudimentary measurements could easily confirm or dispel this theory.

What are the measurements I could tell.
Thanks Reedededge

Don't overthink Washington/Franklin stamp ID. Once the type established, and it was as a type II, the stamp cannot be a flat plate sheet stamp.

The key attributes of the stamp, including color, printing quality, design size, margin size, die type, paper, perforation alignment and general appearance point to Scott 454 with a vertical watermark.

I went back and looked at the original image from the OP. Type II characteristics are visible, despite the small size of the images. The watermark on the lower left corner of the back image is readily apparent. Scott 491 examples are found on a coarse, less bright paper of variable thickness, as are some Scott 454 examples.

Direct examination by an expert and VSC-6000 or equivalent is needed to confirm that no watermark exists. While faint partial "S" shadows exist on some unwatermarked paper, an expert should be able to tell the difference.

There is no need to speculate, invent varieties that cannot exist or misread the Scott catalog. I doubt if any expertizing committee would accept the stamp as a Scott 491.