Is This A Scott #7 As Advertised Or A 5A Or.

I am pretty unfamiliar with the distinctions between 7,9 and the others but this one stood out to me and bids were high for a 7 but not extreme leaving me wondering what this stamp actually is.

It looks to me like a top row (relief "A") from Plate 4. Scott makes all of these Type II, which for imperforate stamps means Scott #7. There is too much contrast in the image for me to be say which top row position it is.

I spent a little more time looking for a top row, plate 4 match for your stamp. I think the position is 1R4. One can see a faint guide line through the guide dot, and a blur in the bottom margin beneath the right plume. Both of these features are on the Neinken map for this position.

This web site can be useful when plating 1¢ stamps:

http://www.slingshotvenus.com/Frank...hv_Main.html

The example for 1R4 is damaged and may not help enough, but the site has been useful. It should be used in conjunction with Nienken as it does not have examples of all position.

To address the original question, there are #7's and then again there are #7's. Those from the top row of Plate 4 (as widglo has identified here) are much scarcer (and hence command higher prices) than many of those from the more common Plate 2, for example.

I thought I recognized Dick Celler's former stamp. I seriously considered getting all of his top row plate 4 material, but settled for only a few.

https://www.rumseyauctions.com/sear.../9/1/desc/25

Rumsey Sale 101 Lot 1321.

I have scans of Dick's old 1c album pages, and he definitely had this mounted in the spot for 6R4, which matches the catalog description. I haven't checked it myself, but I'd certainly go with Dick's plating.

I agree with txstamp; 6R4 must be correct - besides being a Celler plating, the stamp in question is an excellent match to both of Doporto's examples.

I relied heavily on the Neinken map, but after looking at the Doporto examples who has taken his images from a 6-10 R4 strip of Nathan Shmalo, and a 4-6R4 strip of Tyler Moody, I am left wondering if there is something wrong with the Neinken map.

Neinken's location of the guide dot is a little low and a little too far right of ornament Z1, and he has noted none of the blurs or marks in the bottom margin. Interestingly though, the bottom frame line in the Neinken map looks almost exactly the same as the Doporto examples. Perhaps he just didn't feel the need to note everything, and this example simply underscores the need to look at every resource available.

Yes, there are little subtle issues like that throughout the Neinken book.
Its good to mark up one's own copy.
Buy a spare book to "collect" - I used to have about 6 copies, I think I'm down to about 4 now.