Show Your US 1851-57 Imperforate Stamps

Hi Harper --

I agree that your pair with the black APR 23 CDS cancel is correctly plated as positions 2-3L4.

This is a very interesting pair (at least from the perspective of a plater) -- as differences in inking and impression distort things a bit -- including being able to clearly ID the relief.

The pair is unmistakably from plate 4 -- and I compared it against all 200 positions on the plate -- and my conclusion is that it can't be anything other than 2-3L4 -- albeit a strange impression indeed.

Reminds me of the Sherlock Holmes quote -- "after you eliminate everything else, whatever is left must be the truth".

As an aside -- nice job on the plating !

Regards // ioagoa

Moyock and Ioagoa thanks for your input and verification. Moyock, I originally thought these were B reliefs as well and set about finding the matching pair on plate 4 but there weren't any that matched up. I even went through plates 6,7 and 8. Ultimately it was the compression images that led me to their positions. I gave up on the reliefs and just went through each position. From there I went in and compared mine with the available examples from SSD and Lund.

Thanks again
Harper1249

It's plating day here - first up a #11. I attempted it myself. I am learning - but slowly. The best I could find is 47L4. I think, maybe, could be?

Next is what I'm hoping is a type II, but not high confidence. The best I could find is 62L2. The guide dot and stray mark at the top left both look good, but I don't know.

Hi rlsny --

Your 3c imperf with the straight-line PAID cancel does not look like 47L4 to me.

// ioagoa

Well my main goal with the 3c was to prove it wasn't a 10 - and I feel pretty good that it is an 11. So I'll probably leave it unplated. The features that made it look right are: guide dot position, gap between guide dot and the end of the bottom frame line, left frame line very close, bottom frame line heavy, triangles seem to have the same cuts. I found 4 or 5 other similar guide dots, but none seemed right.

Hi rlsny --

On your 3c imperf with the straight-line PAID cancel -- if you ever did want to plate it -- one of the key plating characteristics showing on your stamp is the extended RFL of the adjoining stamp below that pokes up into the white space between the two stamps and comes very close to the BFL of your stamp.

In any event, if all you really wanted to know is if it is a #10 or a #11 -- you are correct that it is not a #10 -- so at least when we see it pop up on ebay in a day or two it will be properly described.

// ioagoa

Thanks ioagoa. That is my goal. I want to get it right on ebay. I only list about a dozen stamps a week. By taking my time, I hope to give each stamp enough attention that I can get the id and condition right. I do invite anyone who notices a mistake in identification or a missing fault to bring it to my attention with a direct message. I will fix it if I get it wrong. I have only ever had one return for misidentification. It was for an 1861-6 24c when I got the shade wrong.

rlsny - will do, as I have done in the past!

Anyone have an opinion on the 1 cent? I only found 3 positions with guide dots like that one and 67L2 was the only real possibility. But it isn't a perfect match.

Rlsny

One cent looks recut thus Scott 9?
Double recut on bottom. Should be easy to plate
I think

Rgstamp is correct. Very clearly a Type IV.

risny - I agree with rgstamp that your stamp looks to be recut once on top and twice on the bottom. 84R1L seems to be a good match.

Thank you. You can see why I don't trust myself to get these right yet. I still cannot recognize a bottom recut for one thing. Anyway thanks.

rlsny, it is true that in Type IV stamps the bottom recut is in general more difficult to discern than the top recut, but when the recut at bottom is double the inner recut line is unmistakeable, especially the portion between the E of ONE and the C of CENT.