Trouble With The Taylor 5 Cent A55 Idenfying It It.

Dan, this is what I could come up with.

First, employing a side-by-side flick test this last one I had posted has a higher pitch to it. That's a very subjective test tho.

Next I compared the back of it (top right in the pic below) with two others that are light colored paper (but not as white) using as much of a close-up my USB microscope can provide. Not sure what to look for here.



Next, using just natural daylight (cloudy day) I took a cell phone pic of the same three stamps. The whiter one is on the left.



Lastly, I took a cell phone pic of the three on a light table with the whiter one on the left.

Thanks You caper123;
You went all out here I commend you, they look good!
The far left stamp I believe its a 185 because of the blocks I see.
The webbing of the paper in the closeup look all the same, on all three stamps.
I can see vaguely see blocks on the other two, but I believe they are all 185's.
Thanks again Dan.

I have about zero knowledge in this area, but I do have a copy of "The papers and gums of United States Postage Stamps 1847-1909 by RH White". Plate 12 has pictures and commentary about the 1873-1879 Continental and American Bank Note Issues. There is a comment about yellowish paper and thin, white paper that could be of value to this conversation. The picture is included just for completeness. (Not easy to scan.)

Thank You Partime;
This was help full this might be the answer I need for my stamp.
Why it is so smooth, it could be the white gum possibly making it smoother and white.
I will check out my stamp closer and maybe I can see something.

Dan Townsend, just getting back to this post. Had a bit of time to look at one of the 5C Taylor stamps a bit closer and am a bit confused by one of the stamps we've talked about earlier. What I noticed was a real lack of detail in that one stamp. An almost absence of vertical lines in some of the scroll work which on all others I have are very distinct.
First a 'normal one' (bottom L & R)




Next the 'odd' one (same - bottom L & R)





Next a close-up of both together showing the right side. The lines are very thin on the 'odd' one vs the 'normal' one.



Lastly, the detail difference in the FIVE CENT banner:




I suppose I might be reading too much into what could be just a difference in inking too. What are your thoughts?

Hi caper123'
That is real interesting, All I can tell you what I know about the weak printing is could possibly be with the 204 but it is so rare not likely it could be .
There is no writings that I know talk about the weak printing in early printing of this stamp.
.The prerequisite for a 204 would be if the stamp was soft paper with richness in color.I have a stamp too but I believe it is hard paper with a very weak printing , check it out it is really a bad printing I don't know how its possible part of the stamp is fine and parts of it is bad.

Dan, how did you decide your stamp was on harder paper? What stamp did you compare it to?

Except on ribbed paper, Continental Bank Note printings often have missing fine line detail. That is one of the surest ways of distinguishing the 15 cent Continental Bank Note company printed Scott 163 from National Bank Note Company Scott 152.

Hi Caper123;
To be honest ,Im in a delirium about the paper its doesn't seem to look like a 179 or a 185 .It looks white with no molting that I can see, not like a normal 185 ,and the webbing of the paper is not like a 179 the paper looks hard but it could be soft who knows this could be the key to finding out? Now if like cfrphoto tells me that a it could be a continental printing which would make it hard paper.
That's all I got

Hi Again to all that is interested;
I think this is note worthy .
I want to show just how whacked out this stamp was printed.
It was very funny how it looked like two plates were used just the way area's of the stamp were printed some light some dark.
Here are some close ups.

If we look at the plates used, Continental wore out five plates and were working with the 6th to print their 15.3 millions, before becoming American BNC.
American also used the 6th plate and made four more plates to print the 42 million 185s.

Seems Continental's ink formula contained something quiet abrasive.

http://stampsmarter.com/1847usa/187...tml#Scott179

Thanks for the info Phil.
It makes it harder to see which company did this print since they both used the same plates for a while.

I just wish I could just submit my stamp to the PF and get the results (whichever way it goes) along with the 'scientific' rationale for their decision. It should not rest on just pure trust in their opinion. If based on an example in their collection a side-by-side scan pointing out the differences would not only provide satisfaction but a great learning tool.

Caper123 That's exactly the way I feel.
Why do it on just there opinion I would like to see why and decide with facts.

Everyone ;
I just had a good look at the back of this stamp.
And I'm almost convinced its a 179 .
You can see many silk or wood pieces on the back of the stamp and 185 doesn't mention any silk or wood in the paper ,its hard to believe it , this paper is so different than the other 179's I have with the spider web like paper with more texture.