Csa #4 - Stone 2 Or 3?

Although I've posted here about Confederate stamps a number of times, I've never put myself forth as an expert. Sometimes I find myself out of my depth with these, despite how much I've read.
So, I'd like to put this question to the real experts out there.

Below is an image of two CSA#4s that I have in my collection.



The stamp on the left I purchased in 2013 in a collection of fakes, and it turned out to be real. Best 11¢ I ever spent! The stamp was id'd by Dr. John Kimbrough, an expert with the Confederate Stamp Alliance, as 'a genuine CSA #4 and plates as Stone 2 Position 17.'

The stamp on the right is another #4 purchased with a group of stamps last year. Looking at it tonight, I was noting some differences, and started to wonder if this stamp was possibly a Stone 3 printing.

Stone 2, as described in the 1986 Dietz Confederate States Catalogue and Handbook: 'The impressions are generally rough and coarse; the colours range from light to dark blue to indigo.'

Stone 3 impressions are 'generally clear and sharp; two shades of blue are most common, clear deep blue and light milky blue.

I've put some arrows on the image above. Notice the extra lines on the left of the frame on the Stone 2 stamp. Also the scroll in the upper left is 'dirty' as is the P in Postage.
The upper left corner of the right hand stamp is much cleaner. Also I notice a slight difference in the scroll on the bottom right.

Trish Kaufmann on her website has several possible stone 3s for sale. They would have to be plated for confirmation. But the images certainly show clearer impressions.

www.trishkaufmann.com/csa-4-5-cents-lithograph

So my question to the real CSA experts out there is, do you think the stamp on the right could be a Stone 3 impression, or simply a Stone 2 which was simply inked a little lighter and cleaner?

I understand that without plating I am only asking for an opinion, and won't hold anyone legally responsible.
Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

the main difference I see is just below the "T" in cents the device is missing half of it body in the stone 2 example you show compared to the stamp on the right where the device looks complete.

Yes that is true. Another example of the coarseness of the Stone 2 printing. I also notice now, looking at it again, that there are a number of subtle differences in Davis' portrait, such as his mouth. On the confirmed Stone 2 stamp on the left, there's a slight enigmatic smile, whereas the mouth on the right has more of a frown. Some differences in the tonal lines as well.
I'll note that these two stamps were scanned together, side by side, so even the subtle differences are pretty well represented. There is not the variation you'd get from two separate scans being married together.