2 Cent, Washington, Perf 10, Coil,. Stumped On Which Cat # Though

As I have continued sorting, I believe I found two, 2¢ Washington, Type II(s), I just dont know the Cat. #. I'd like to say I have confirmed and covered all ten points of which would make them a type II, but need more expert eyes, I suppose.. I am still a little green at identifying differences for sure. I've tried to take the best quality/magnified pics.

Go here:

https://stampsmarter.org/features/S...rank_ID.html

It will help you identify.

You will need to know if the stamp is watermarked or not.

no watermarks. checked with lighter fluid method.

From your link , it came up with a 491.

I suppose that me being so green, I'm not confident enough in myself to actually confirm.

With the catalog of #491 being around $600, I guess I would say it is highly unlikely you have one, let alone two. I'm not the real expert, so others will likely chime in.

As with all problematic coil stamps, I can't even tell if (at least) your left stamp actually is a coil or just a trimmed sheet stamp.
A hires scan is required, in both cases.

Several points & questions:
1. Where are you getting the "ten points"? It's not from Scott. As I noted in another of your threads, you would benefit greatly by obtaining a copy of the Scott US Specialized catalog. A used copy a few years old can be had very reasonable.
2. Your illustrations are confusing. You show two stamps, then reverse their positions for showing the reverse side, then show close-ups of only one of them. It would be more clear to deal with one stamp at a time. They can both be in the same thread, however separating them into two consecutive posts would provide clarity.
3. All that said, yes, I agree that you appear to have Type-II coil for the one you show enlarge images. As for the watermark, the single-line USPS watermark often shows just a small piece of a single letter and can be very tricky to see. The odds are far greater that you have a Scott 454 rather than a 491, as Nicholas suggests. Additionally, Paul Schmid's "The Expert's Book" on the Washington Franklin issue notes on page 127 "The watermark on Sc.# 454 can often be very weak and thus difficult to detect."
4. Since Type-II comes only in vertical or horizontal coils, it cannot be trimmed from any sheet stock. The very slight curvature to the cutting of the perforations is also consistent with the knife of a coil affixing machine.

Add:
It s also important to know exactly what to look for. Here is a (poor) image of a strip of Scott 455, the Type-III cousin, showing a single line watermark, note with the direction of the web of the paper for rotary coils, that that individual letters are on their sides, rather than upright.

Here is an outline of the strip of 5 drawn onto the general layout image of the sigle-line watermark, taken from Schmid's book. Note that a small portion of a letter is all that appears on some stamps.

Some other defining characteristics of type II. (Toward the bottom of page one.)

https://www.stampcommunity.org/topi...pic_id=42370

1847us.c o m /2c-washington/type-2-2c-washington/


This is where I got the "ten points from"

That's a great demonstration for how to try and see single line watermarks. Very helpful. Thanks John Becker.

Thanks. I had difficulty catching the watermark. It looks much stronger in-person.
It was in an envelope marked "Type-III coils", which I may never get around to watermarking, but at least it was mostly sorted!
Scott could be much more helpful on watermarks than they are, since the paper orientation (and thus watermark orienttation) can help authenticate or prove some fakery.

Al E. Gator has seen the 454 I sent to Bill Weiss a number of years ago, and I said in my note that if he found a watermark I would eat it.

Still have the stamp, and I didn't eat it, but the watermark was on one perf. This is as good of an example as any as to how difficult the single line watermarks can be. I did finally score a 491, but that is one really difficult stamp.