Show Your US 1857 Perforated Stamps

The Doporto site. I've looked at every eye curl image I could find. The part on the hair should have some kind of arc. I see no evidence of an arc on my stamp. Under the T, that spot of color is supposed to have a comma shape. My stamp doesn't show evidence of a comma shape, just a spot of blue. That all said, I defer to those who know way more about this than I do. As I said earlier, I own only two #24 and have not tried to look at either of them in depth, not until Ray suggested I have an eye curl variety. Didn't know what that meant because it's not in the specialized catalog.

The curved ends of the eye curl arc on your stamp are obscured by the bars of the cancel. Plating marks vary in appearance according to plate wear and the quality of individual printings, but they are definitely there on your stamp.

@dudley, thank you once again. I really do appreciate your patience and insight.

Should be a centerline with 10L and I missed that......

wondering if one of the experts can help ID Sc no. and Type & plate. I haven't a clue! Is it an inner frame ? If so, a weak one, yes? About all I got is the perf, 15 1/2.... Tks in advance.

You have a type III stamp. Scott 26. There are no top or bottom framelines - that means it is a type III or IV. There are no breaks on the left and right framelines and they are perfectly straight. That makes them a Type III. Reference material on the types III and IV are thin, but maybe one of the experts here can tell you what plate and relief this is from. I see no really distinctive characteristics like a damaged relief or extra framelines.

Thank you. Am I right that there is only outer frame on sides? Also, do you know if its ok to soak these?

am now wondering if the upper left triangle has been recut?

There were almost no recuts on the type III stamps - no inner lines or triangle recuts. The interesting features I look for on these stamps are doubled frame lines, engravers slips on the framelines, and damaged reliefs (white space or disruption in the tessellation above the lower left rosette.

i soak these all the time to get rid of old hinges and any crud that will rinse away. they are no difficult to soak than 20th-century stamps.

Im confused, Sc26 lists 5 lines triangle recut upper left. Is there a site to figure out plate like there is here https://www.uspcs.org/resource-cent...-1851-stamp/ , but for imperforate?

Thanks again!

Hi Stamps4Life --

Regarding varieties of recutting on Scott #26 and #26A -- Philazilla is correct in that there are only a handful of positions -- but there are some -- and they are discussed and described by Chase in his book under the Chapters titled "The Plate 10 Group" and "The Plate 9-12 Group".

You can download the book for free at the USPCS website. Link is here:

https://www.uspcs.org/wp-content/up...okmarked.pdf

Regarding the so-called "5-line" recut on Scott #26 -- that is position 52L25. The recut in the Upper Left Triangle (ULT) on this position is made up of 2 vertical lines, 2 somewhat horizontal lines, and 1diagonal line.

Here is a scan of the full stamp and a 1200 dpi crop of the recut detail so that you can see what it looks like.

Scott #26 -- position 52L25 is here:


And the recut detail in the Upper Left Triangle is here:


Hope this helps clarify things a little.

Regards // ioagoa

Many thanks. That helps to see it close up as in my image I only have horizontal lines in the triangle. Can you or anyone else outline the best way to go about trying to figure out the plate?

Hi Stamps4Life --

First -- allow me to qualify this entire post by saying that while I consider myself to be fairly knowledgeable with regard to the 3-cent type III and type IV issues of 1857–1860 (i.e., Scott #26 and #26A) -- I am no where near the "expert level".

That said -- I personally do not know how to begin to figure the plate from which your stamp came -- other than to repeat what Philazilla had already stated -- that based on the straight (and apparent continuous) side frame lines, your stamp looks like a type III, Scott #26 -- which means that it is not from either plate 10 or plate 11 -- (which are the 2 plates that produced the type IV, Scott #26A stamps).

Unfortunately, many of these type III, Scott #26 stamps cannot be plated because no individually unique identifying characteristics exist. Also, for those plates that have been reconstructed (or partially reconstructed) -- unlike the imperforate 3c issue of 1851 for which there exists a central repository of information, there is no similar resource that I am aware of for the 1857–1860 perforated Scott #26 and #26A stamps.

FYI -- The side frame lines on the type IV, Scott #26A plates were recut freehand on a stamp-by-stamp basis. This is why we typically see a break in the frame lines between stamps -- and also why we see bends and curves in the recut side frame lines (i.e., similar to the bends and curves seen on the 1851 imperforate issues -- Scott #'s 10, 10A, 11, and 11A). Generally speaking -- It is these bends and curves in the frame lines in relation to the other design elements of the stamp that enable them to be plated.

Conversely, on the type III, Scott #26 stamps, the side frame lines were recut using a straight edge guide in one continuous swoop from the top of the plate to the bottom. Consequently, unless the patient stamp has a guide dot, flaw, captured imprint, double transfer, or some other distinctive characteristic -- in many cases they cannot be plated.

And not to complicate the issue any further -- but there are few plates that are known as "hybrid plates" -- (for example plate 15) -- where Toppan Carpenter (the firm producing the stamps) started to recut the side frame lines stamp-by-stamp -- but midway through the recutting production process decided to make a change and finish off the recutting with the straight edge guide approach -- (which is why we see lots of doubled frame lines on that particular plate).

In any event, there were 2 plates used to produce the type IV, Scott #26A stamps -- and there were 18 plates used to produce the type III, Scott #26 stamps. More specifically:

Plates 10 and 11 (i.e., the type IV, Scott #26A plates) each exist in 3 states -- namely Early, Intermediate, and Late -- and with the only difference between each state being due to re-entry. If you consider each state of the plate as if it were a separate plate -- that makes 6 plates for the Scott #26A stamps.

Plate 9 -- and plates 12 through 28 inclusive produced the type III, Scott #26 stamps -- and 2 of these plates (i.e., plate 9 and plate 'Z') -- exist in two states -- namely Early and Late. Again, if you consider each state of the plate as if it were a separate plate -- that makes 20 plates for the Scott #26 stamps).

Now you are probably wondering what the heck is plate 'Z'. This is one of the so-called "alpha plates' -- where Dr. Chase was unable to match up stamps he was plating to the plate's number -- so he assigned letters as placeholders until he was able to figure out the numbering. I may be wrong on this -- but I believe that the associated numbering of some of the alpha plates has never been determined.

As you can see, you are scratching the tip of an iceberg when it comes to the subject under discussion.

If you have an interest, I would suggest first downloading the Chase book from the link in my prior post -- and if you wanted to do an even deeper dive, I would search through the Chronicle articles on the United States Philatelic Classics Society (USPCS) website.

The link to the Chronicle search page of the USPCS website is here:

https://www.uspcs.org/resource-cent...e-chronicle/

I believe that if you are not a member, that you can search and read everything except for articles published in the last 5 years.

Between the Chase book and the Chronicle articles there is a ton of information about these stamps -- and you can dive in as deep as you want. On the other hand -- if all you want to know is the Scott #, I think we have answered that for you. Speaking for myself, I do not have the expertise to begin figuring the plate from which your stamp came -- other than to say it looks like a type III, Scott #26 to me.

Maybe there are some other experts out there who can weigh in?

Regards // ioagoa

Great explanation @ioagoa! I appreciate your thoroughness and precision when describing these stamps. And thanks for the scans of the triangle recuts.

@ioagoa - again, thanks for the great details. I have been reading the Chase book. I guess tht I was overly optimistic that more blanks had been filled in on the perforated issues - I did see he mentioned there were many gaps and not as much there as the imperforates. Still reading and lots to take in!

Thank you for your time. Wm.