1¢ Franklin Transition From Ultramarine To Blue

While combing through the online scans of BEP approval proof sheets, held by the National Postal Museum, for another thread ( https://goscf.com/t/76998 ), I came across the two plates that show the color transition from Scott 246 to 247. Thought it might be educational to post here.

According to Durland, both colors overlapped on eight of the same plate numbers -- these two plates show the first instance of when this occurred.

https://postalmuseum.si.edu/object/npm_0.242263.16


https://postalmuseum.si.edu/object/npm_0.242263.17

Really neat stuff, thanks for the posts on all of these proofs.

I know almost nothing about these issues, but I was looking at the SiskinBerkun EDU lists, and

246 - ultramarine - 10/17/94 EDU
247 - blue - 11/5/94 EDU

So based on that, both of these sheets appear to have been pulled prior to issuance of the stamps themselves, right?

You can pull a proof anytime, so I'm always curious when they were pulled relative to everything else.

The images certainly demonstrate two colors.

Whether or not the images accurately reflect the proof colors could only be determined in-person or if the two proofs were imaged together at the same time.
Don

Yes, these certified proofs were pulled in advance of actual printing. Each plate had to be approved before being put into use. The first stamp printed by the Bureau that was issued is the 6¢ Garfield (Scott 256). Its Earliest Known Use was July 18, 1894 -- and the approval date on its proof sheet is July 9, 1894. Nine days! That is extraordinary when you consider the stamps had to be printed, gummed, perforated, and transported to their point of sale. I'd like to know where that EKU was cancelled -- my guess is Washington, DC.

https://postalmuseum.si.edu/object/npm_0.242263.27

I suspect the imaging is pretty accurate, especially in comparison. These scans would have been done on the same machine within minutes of each other. I know the Rapid Scanning Project used color calibration. And because the proof sheets were stacked in piles for decades, very little light degradation would have occurred.

Its Earliest Known Use was July 18, 1894 -- and the approval date on its proof sheet is July 9, 1894. Nine days!
Note plate proofs are on unhardened steel. For this issue, hardening happened July 10, 1894. For these early plates, there are no records when the plate went to the printer after hardening, but later records show one day after hardening as the fastest time.
So printing the stamps could have happened around July 11, 1894, just seven days before the earliest known use.

Regarding what city the July 18th cover was from, here is the what SiskinBerkun says about Scott 256 -




I don't know all of their encodings unfortunately and I often have a hard time deciphering this document.

That's helpful -- thanks! If I'm interpreting correctly, EDC would be Earliest Date Cancel? Now if we could parse out "S83/POD/APMG94". I'm guessing it relates to delivery date of the stamps.

Just shooting from the hip?Specimen / sample / submission 83 / Post Office Dept - Approved / approval Post Master General (18)94?