Show Your US 1851-57 Imperforate Stamps

Hi, stampcrow. On some short-transfer positions that I've see, the TFL was recut after the short transfer.

Do you know the position of your stamp?

I'm sorry CC, I haven't plated that stamp.

Hi StampCrow --

Your potential "short transfer" stamp led me down a couple of rabbit holes. Comments and observations as follows:

-- Despite you not having a scanner -- I believe that your stamp plates to position 31L1L. One of the most notable features of this position is that there are faint lines (i.e., relief lines) running parallel to the left of both the recut LFL and recut LIL -- from a level roughly opposite GW's lip to opposite the 10:00 level of the LLR. Your stamp shows these same lines -- and is a solid match to 31L1L in all other regard.

-- Chase classified position 31L1L as having recut #27 -- top label block and upper right diamond block joined at top. That said -- your stamp does not show this feature -- but neither do any of my half dozen reference copies. Very strange that only the Chase photo stamp is the outlier that shows this "supposed" recut?

-- The StampSmarter reference copy of 31L1L with the black STEAM SHIP cancel is NOT position 31L1L. I have not tried to plate it yet -- but if somebody with the power could please remove it from the 31L1L slot that would be helpful.

-- Regarding your original question about your stamp being a "short transfer" -- after looking at roughly a half dozen other reference copies -- hard to say. On the one hand -- there are clearly noticeable and consistent weak spots along the top edge of the TLB on all of my reference copies -- although none as weak as seen on your copy. That said -- on the Chase photo copy -- the image is so dark that none of these weaker spots are visible -- all very strange. Still, we know that the reason why most of the stamps from plate 1L have such heavy recutting along the top edge of the TLB is because the design did not transfer well when originally rocked onto the plate. My guess -- and this is only a guess -- is that it appears as though TCC did not recut the top edge of the TLB on this position as heavily as seen on most other positions from plate 1L. Yet the lack of apparent recutting still doesn't explain why the top edge of the TLB transferred so poorly when TCC produced plate 1L? I suppose that a "short transfer" is a plausible explanation -- but on that many stamps?

Enough of my rambling -- but I would be interested in seeing other reference copies of position 31L1L -- especially because Chase classified the stamp as a recut #27 -- with a line joining the TLB and URDB at top -- and this recut is not visible on any of the reference copies in my data files -- all of which have been confirmed as being correctly plated as position 31L1L.

Hopefully others will weigh in with additional thoughts on all of this.

Regards ioagoa

edited for typos and grammar.

Ioagoa,

Sure enough I have this in my plated 1L stamps.
Does it appear that the TLB is showing wear not short transfer?

Nice stamp, stampcrow. And nice job plating it, ioagoa.

I checked my two copies of 31L1L, and both appear to show the recut line in the top label block almost connecting, but not clearly connecting, with the recut line on top of the UR diamond block. Perhaps there was some ink pull helping make the connection on the Chase print stamp.

The image below clearly shows the relief lines ioagoa referred to, alongside the left lines adjacent to "Toppan" in the imprint.

Classic --

Can you repost that image of your imprint 31L1L as a jpg file?

I tried to download it -- but it is a "wbep" type file and I cannot open it with my viewing software?

Thanks // ioagoa

That's new. I linked it from my imageshack image hosting account like I have been for many years. They must have changed something.

I deleted the original image from my post and tried uploading it again, but it didn't change anything.

ioagoa, I'll email it to you.

Hi Classic --

Thanks for the off-line email with the jpg file of your imprint 31L1L.

Hi Classic and StampCrow --

So, I have now looked at 11 copies of 31L1L -- all of which I have confirmed as being correctly plated -- and roughly 75% of them do not show the recut #27 -- all very strange???

I also searched my email history for the position -- and found an email exchange from late 2013 and into early 2014 with Dick Celler (my plating mentor who I miss every day) -- in which we discussed this very issue -- as neither Dick's copy nor my copy of 31L1L showed the recut #27 that was clearly evident in the Chase photo stamp.

FWIW -- Dick's opinion was that the Chase copy was a "very early plate 1L printing and an 1852 brownish carmine sharp print" (as he would call them) -- and that the recut line joining the top of the TLB and URDB wore away very shortly after the plate was put into production.

StampCrow -- still hard for me to say what caused the very weak areas at the top edge of the TLB on your stamp. Clearly -- the weakly inked areas are generally consistent with the other reference copies I have looked at. Intuitively, it looks like the reentry when plate 1i became plate 1L did not transfer sufficiently -- necessitating TCC to recut the TLB's on almost all 200 positions. For whatever reason -- it looks like they missed this one? Sorry I cannot offer more. Perhaps others can add insight.

Regards // ioagoa

Dick's explanation for 31L1L certainly makes sense. stampcrow's copy is certainly "not" an early impression. It is showing wear in general.

Does anyone know where the Chase 31L1L is, in order to possibly get a good color scan of it? A combination of colorizing it along with a more detailed scan could possibly close the door on speculation.

Ioagoa, I have removed the 31L1L steamship cancel from the database and moved it to 31L2L.
I did the same with 32L1L as they were an attached pair.
Thanks for posting my error.

I looked at all the compression images and found this as the best match on the second go around.
Here is the compression images for that stamp and 31L2L.




Classic and Stampcrow, can I put your images in the database for 31L1L?

Jaxom, yes please do and thanks.

Yes you may, jaxom100.

Thanks guys. I added both 31L1L stamps to the database and moved the steam ship pair to 31-32L2L. Keep notifying me of any errors.

what can you see in these images?

sandman, looks trimmed to me. Perf scars upper right corner.