Trouble With The Taylor 5 Cent A55 Idenfying It It.

Hello everyone;
I have this stamp and it looks to me that it is hard white paper bright blue it needs identified.
Take a look see if it is the same as the other two stamps I have here.
Which to me look soft and white paper but have a obvious blocks pattern in the paper.
I scanned both on the scanner and used my light box with camera for some pic's as well.
The first three images are of the same stamp, and this is the one I need identified.The fourth and fifth are sixth stamps that Im using to compare this stamp to ,which are a dark blue it might help I don't know?
Thanks Dan

It would be nice if when you post other stamps that you are using for comparison that you post them together. It doesn't help to add mystery on top of mystery. With that said, I would say you have a pretty good handle on identifying the Scott 179 and 185. You have one #179 and two #185.

Thank You Sinclair for your help!!
That is a good idea Im trying to make it easy and see to understand . I think that is great for the input I don't want to be mysterious.

This new stamp doesn't change what sinclair has told me and I believe sinclair to be right. But I just want to add a look at a comparison to a stamp I found ,I believe it is the same stamp a scotts 179.
But it was interesting to see a comparison.
I first thought this other stamp was a 185 and may be because of the look of the edges were slightly fuzzy .
But I did a light box viewing the third images ,and here is a picture to compare it to
to see those small box impressions or images in the 185 stamps paper shown in above picture .

Your newest stamp added to the discussion is most likely a soft paper stamp. I'm not a fan of your light box images. You might get better results just holding your stamp up to light. That's what everybody else does. Some nice pictures have been posted on this site using that simple technique.

I thank you Sinclair for the advice I will check it out .
I had this idea this morning to check my ebay Purchase history to see what I bought and if that stamp was on
that list and sure enough it was, stupid me.
They claimed that new stamp was a Scott's 179 .
And the first stamp Im having problems with they said it was a 179 or a 185 ? so that is were Im at.
I did look at it in the light I couldn't see and blocks.

Hello everyone;
I think this may be nothing but with this stamp in Question .I my be wrong or I cant see it ,but its something I don't see to often with a stamp it almost has to be perforated doesn't it?
I first thought it was perforated but the closer I looked, it looks like no perforation it skipped.

Try long wave UV light in a dark room. Hard paper should appear brighter while soft paper examples will appear to be "dead". If some stamps appear to be in between, they may be intermediate paper. While thickness ranges overlap, hard paper is generally thinner than soft paper and if back lit will transmit more light compared to thicker soft paper. Soft paper has a "basket weave" pattern visible when back lit. If the paper is brighter under UV and shows the pattern, it may be intermediate paper. While very scarce, double paper will appear to be thick like soft paper, but will reveal a chaotic pattern if back lit. The front of some double paper examples may appear to have soft paper on the front and hard paper on the back.

The "missing" perforation would occur if a pin was broken, seen occasionally on soft paper stamps printed by the American Bank Note Company,

Thanks cfrphoto;
That is great info, will check it out

OK here are some pic's I think you might be surprised at least I was!
I wish it was clearer but I hope you can see the difference .

I have a new view of the stamps, I worked on them in photo shop to see those patterns you mentioned.
The first stamps was the 179 stamp and the second was the questionable stamp. The third stamp or single stamp is the questionable one and the fourth stamp is the 179.

I guess I should have pictures of the soft paper stamp 185 in photo shop form so you can compare and see the difference.
The top stamp and the bottom right are the same stamp

I have been trying to get some better close ups of this crazy stamp I looked at the 179 and the wove is a lot bigger. Some new pic's the first three are the questionable stamp the last two is Scotts 179

Hello Everyone;
Im back with a update's I want to tell you about,I don't have a conclusion at all, but I think you might be interested in new facts that I have found and I want to share with you .I also want to say being that no one has found a used Taylor 181 it doesn't look good,but it is the fun of the hunt.
I think I read they made over 200 to 300 of these stamps I my be wrong let me know ?But anyway they did find 10 unused 181's I don't think they would make just 10 stamps.
I have this book called Identification guild to US stamps by Charles N Micarelli and in this book it says the way to the "1875 printing is determined by its paper" so maybe that means it has to be hard ,white and wove which it still has to be determined.
So what I figured out maybe a way to do this was to compare my stamp to other 181's and see what the difference are.
So I found this web site https://siegelauctions.com/display_...hp?catno=181 that has most of these 181's the only problem is I cant see the reverse side of the stamp to check out the paper.
But I was amazed how some of these stamps are very detailed like the hair and the arch around the top of the US postage and some are not so precise .I know the color will always change with the photo problems with color preciseness but it showed me some some color's were close to mine.What I did see were the perforation's some cut sharp some had the fuzzy tips like a soft paper stamp.
This makes me wonder why so many differences, it all should have been pretty close to the same ,being they were done on one plate one color one time ?
That's all folks , thanks for checking it out I did this for people that have a interest in this stamp and may have some of the same problems I have in identifying this stamp .May be you have that stamp and would like to know about it and make your 450,000.00
Thanks Dan

The first is my stamp and the rest are the amazing 181 unused

your missing perforation stamp appears to be a poor attempt to repair a damaged spot. look closely with a good glass or dip in watermark fluid and watch while drying.

Thank you M&M
I will take look closer