Help -- Not My Field Of Expertise Cat # For This W-F

If I posted this before, I apologize.

Found this in a stack I recently uncovered.



It has 453 written in pencil on the back. It measures Perf 10 20x22½.
I can't find a watermark.

Any help??????

Stampsmarter has very useful tools for this identification:

If you start at the general entry point http://www.stampsmarter.com/1847usa...ankmain.html, you will get pretty quickly to the matter of whether your coil is rotary press or flat.
You might compare dimensions with known flat press stamps, or known rotarys, take a look at the gum for breaker marks, or in this case with an apparent joint line and a slight misalignment on either side, conclude it is rotary.

At this point you then have to look at the types for which
http://www.stampsmarter.com/1847usa..._03main.html should help you work through the specific type (I, II, or III).
Then depending on the type, you may need to watermark it.

I think you will want to work through the type identification closely to satisfy yourself. In this case, I'm having a little difficulty picking out the various points of identification from your scan clearly enough, except I believe I can see that your toga rope and toga button are not well defined, so it would not be a type II.
Maybe others with better eyes than mine can see (me - I really need to use a loupe on these), but I'm not seeing the hair on the scan as type 1.
[updated to add] And the right ribbon, I think I see the extra line in the shading that would suggest these are type 3, in which case it is not a 453.

I hope this helps.
- Jonathan

Looks to me like type I, in which case there are 2 choices … 444 (flat plate) and 453 (rotary). Since both of these have the same watermark (single line), even seeing the watermark would likely not help. You can check for offset … or, if you've got a known flat plate or rotary stamp from the same groups, compare the width of these stamps to the known stamp. The rotary will be slightly wider. I'm no expert, but I would guess that this is indeed a rotary 453 strip.
Added: Already I'm second-guessing myself. After reading Jonathan's post I took another look at the ribbons and do seem to see 2 lines on the right side of the ribbon on first stamp. In addition, the vertical lines on the toga rope don't scream type I. Yet I don't see type II or III characteristics (vertical curved line in sideburn) either. Color me puzzled. Good luck with identifying these. Will be watching for one of the experts here to possibly settle the issue.

I agree type III right ribbon has the second line in it.

It's certainly a type I, and it appears to be a rotary. So it should have a watermark.

This is a fun puzzler, and like JLLebbert I hope to learn from others who weigh in on this one.

Tried to look at the upper right laurel berries, on the left hand stamp it looks like a V-shape although not as sharp as a pair of 492 I have I will admit. And the ones on the two right hand are indistinct. Is that just the scan?

I have gone back to look at the line under the ear, running down from the earlobe. The middle stamp does not seem to show one at all. so I'm still leaning to type III. Are you seeing that line revcollector, perhaps on the left stamp?

The top toga line is much too weak to be a type III; also no curved line on the hair, as has been pointed out above. It has to be a type I.

Yes these do have a weak top line on the toga rope.
Wasn't clear to me if all type IIIs were as consistently sharp or nearly as sharp as the type IIs.
I thought some were pretty broken up.
Thanks.

Larger more detailed scans are needed, a minimum of 600 DPI. Software exists to reduce the number of bytes in jpg files, enough to maintain size and sharpness on a computer monitor. Some scanning software will attempt to thwart attempts to make detailed images easily within the capability of most scanners. The stamp may be an indifferently printed type III. Watermarks on 453 and some 454 examples are fairly easy to see. 453 would have vertical watermark (sideways to the design) while 444 would have horizontal watermark (letters are upright). ebay considers 600 DPI scans of single stamps to be too small, but will accept them.

I admit that I still lean towards 453, not so much out of utter conviction but in the knowledge that someone who actually had the stamps in hand & could see them up close had decided that was their true identity. Without a better scan or the stamps themselves, I have no better answer. Also, the 2nd line that I am seeing in the right ribbon of the first stamp seems to me to really be just a hint of a line rather than a distinct full line. As is typical of these 2-cent W/Fs, it is the preponderance of the clues taken together that sometimes wins out. Especially if one or more distinguishing features is indistinct or covered by a postmark.

So now I'm having fun looking at examples of 453, 454, 455 on hipstamp where some are decently scanned so you can see these points of distinction.
So much for doing any yardwork this afternoon
Have to make a nice dinner now to distract my wife from my lack of productivity today...

- Jonathan

OK. Here's each stamp by itself to help with the resolution.







I enhanced the scans hopefully enough to bring out more detail.
Honestly, after reading these posts, I'm more confused than ever.

Here's the back side if that matters:

The setoff on back would indicate a flat plate printing, would it not?

Is that setoff I see on the back? Yep, I now think it's the more than exceedingly rare flat plate rotary hybrid type III Scott 492 variety without watermark. Time for dinner & a quick call to the shrink.

The ribbon lines indicate type III. Thus I suspect this is pseudo-setoff from the full coil being in a humid environment and the gum pulling ink off the next layer of stamps in the coil, rather than the standard set-off from a flat plate.