Show Your US 1857 Perforated Stamps

Thanks for the correction Dudley. I think I just skipped over it being a type I - thinking that only applied to #5. But now I know there are Type I's on Plate 12. So this a "C" relief that looks to be position 67R12? I see a scratch below right side ornament "N". I see a dot in the lower right part of the "O" in ONE. I also a see a large "blurred" areas along the left side.

I also think I'll keep this one out of the damaged envelope and give it a better home.

Harper, I think 67R12 is correct. Well done!

I have these additional stamps to add to the discussion.



There seems to be a guide dot on the lower left. Also there is a lot going on with the stamp. I have never tried to plate any of these. Today my image seems a lot bigger and I may have improved the quality, hope so.


insertsmilie('')

Chipshot, the larger image is of a Type V C Relief stamp, which had no guide dots. The other two are, L to R, a Type V E Relief and a Type V A Relief (top row). The latter shows a guide dot at upper right and a heavy dot on Franklin's shoulder which identifies it as coming from Plate 9.

dudley, thank you for the information and putting me in the right direction on the 1 cent stamps I posted.

Finally was able to get a decent copy of position 48R2

stallzer - Your 48R2 is very nice. Perforated examples must be especially rare.

Sharing a couple of #26's.
A top row MNH strip of four including top selvage.

Also a #26 with extra frame line at left.

Stan Shepp

All,

Thanks for bearing with me as I grow from #10/A's & #11/A's to #26/A's. I am still struggling with being sure about reliefs.

The outer frame lines appear straight as an arrow, so I am guessing a #26, not a #26A - even though the outer frame lines stop at exactly the bottom of the stamp design.

The bottom margin is deep enough to have shown the top of any stamp that might have been below it, so I am 99% sure that this is a Relief "F", Bottom Row.

All of that certainly makes it a viable candidate for a #26, but how do I exclude a bottom row #26A (other than having all of the plated and images available to compare it to?)

It is on a cover, with a blue, Type C Supplementary Mail cancel. 
Scott's 2022 lists this cancellation (Type A, B, or C) with a +$500 premium on a #26 - and has no listing for it on a #26A. 

Simpson lists Type A & Type C as a rarity 8 and no listing for Type B.

Thanks in Advance,

Stan Shepp

Here are a couple of examples that I got in a grouping of pairs, both imperf and perforated.

I shared the imperf on the appropriate thread.

These appear to be:
#25 Horizontal pair
#26 Horizontal Pair
#26 Vertical Pair

Just sharing for the sake of sharing.
Enjoy!

Stan Shepp

Here is an interesting share - a Scott #26 with a rarity 8 Shield Cancel from Clariden, OH.

Listed in Simpson on pages 148-149 - image included.

Interesting side note: If you look closely at the design at the bottom of the stamp, it appears that there are top and bottom framelines that have been erased. I have even seen them described as being erased from the #11 plates. I don't think that is true. I don't think these plates ever had top and bottom frame lines. I am not sure how to describe the ghosted lines and I am open to learning. So feel free to teach away!

Stan Shepp

I scanned in 11 pages of mostly Scott #26's so that I could zoom in on my computer screen and see if I thought any were actually #26A's or #25's or to see if I could find any interesting double frame lines or plate flaws.

I found these two to be interesting.

I think that you will as well.

The quadruple plate flaw (18L28) is listed in Scotts Specialized at $2,000 (in italics) and it is one that I have elsewhere on cover.

The other one, the neck flaw, and I probably have an example on cover (2L26), isn't listed in Scott's (or Chase?)

Both are very nice finds. Enjoy!

Stan Shepp

Hey Stan Shepp —

That neck flaw on your 2L26 looks like Hegland's flaw #78.

See his USPCS Chronicle article for more info. Link is here:

http://chronicle.uspcs.org/PDF/Chro...05/17318.pdf

Assembling an example of all listed flaws can make for a nice showing.

Regards // ioagoa

I believe that you are correct.

That is the same position that Winston suggested.

Sharing today the plate cracks of positions 47 & 48R7 -

From the 1942 revised edition:
THE 3c STAMP
of
THE UNITED STATES
1851-1857 ISSUE - REVISED -
by CARROLL CHASE

Page 61 -
"The sixth crack exists only on the perforated, Type I, stamps. Its plate position is 47 and 48R7. This crack is stellate, having many branches. It shows on the upper left corner of one stamp, the strongest part of the crack cutting the upper left rosette almost in two. It runs out into the white margin between this stamp and the stamp to the left of it, and shows slightly on this left stamp, four or five tiny cracks running into the design near the upper right rosette, the longest one of these lines extending two-thirds of the way across this rosette (see Figure 39). Three perforated copies from one or the other of these positions have been seen which show no crack, but the damage must have developed shortly after the perforation of the stamps began as a stamp with the crack has Been seen cancelled August 25, 1857."