Am I Losing It Or Are These Really All The Same Type III 1857 10c Stamps?

Usually I don't find identification of Scott numbers 31-35 difficult. But the previous owner had these identified as three different types (as you can see from the backs. Note the back scans are in reverse order.)

But they all look like Scott 33s to me (type III).

I need some reassurance from the gang here that I'm not crazy.

Obviously the condition varies a lot between these three, but step 1: get the id right.

Thanks.

The last one with the July 23 date stamp. Doesn't have the three pearls at the bottom right side. You can clearly see them in the other two. It might actually be labeled a 35 correctly. That is my quick take.

The center and right-hand stamps certainly look like Type III. The left-hand stamp looks like it has one complete curved line from the bottom right shell, which is characteristic of Type II. Looks like someone has drawn in part of the outline of the upper right circle around the X, which is unfortunate. No guide dot is visible at upper left, but it could be from the top row of the plate. Can't tell from the photo whether the top frame line is worn or broken. Possible Type II requiring close examination.

ETA: Wshuwahere77's thought posted as I was writing this. The right-hand stamp to me has side ornaments that are too complete for a #35, but there is something funky going on at the bottom right. That purple smear might have been added to hide something (a repair? Added piece of a different stamp?)

Thank you both. I do believe the three pearls are there on the last stamp - just mostly covered. Looking at the stamp in person - I think they are there.

The point about the first stamp is interesting. I don't see the line under the bottom right shell that you see. It doesn't look different from the second stamp to me. Can you point out where you are seeing that line? In any case, the upper right corner is repaired. That drawn in line is on a piece that appears reattached.

On stamp #3 I looked closely at the purple mark. I dipped it and used bright light through it etc. I don't think there is any hidden damage there.

rlsny, the line is not under the shell but part of what is the shell in the complete design. It is defined by the arrows in the attached. At least it looks that way to me in the photo. If under magnification you see a complete curved line there then you probably have a Type II. If the line is not complete then it is a Type III.

There is a note in the Scott Catalogue that some Type V examples show 2 or 3 pearls, so it is possible to have a Scott 35 with complete pearls.

Thanks all. Looking closely that line does appear unbroken. I guess the first stamp might well be a type II - will attempt to plate. It's a space-filler in any case - so I'm not going to spend that much more time on it. Thanks again for all the comments.

I agree with what is written on the back for the 1st 2. The last is made virtually impossible to tell from the location and strength of the cancellation.
The one thing that leads me to believe it is a 35 is the thickness of the green portion at the bottom (outer line). It more closely resembles that of a 35. I used both a close-up of the bottom and a Retroreveal run below it. Neither the Type II or III have complete bottom outer line. Can't completely rule out the possibility of a Type IV tho.

Caper,I looked at that too. The apparent bottom line actually looks too thick to me. There's something odd going on with this stamp. It doesn't have the look of a 35--the side ornaments are too complete and the bottom left shell is not complete enough. Maybe someone tried to fake a Type IV by drawing in a phony recut at bottom, botched the job, and tried to hide it under the blue/purple ink.

Dudley - certainly a possibility. Could also be a Scott 35 position 47R2 double transfer of the bottom frame hidden under all that ink.