1c 1851 Plate 1-Late Stamps

It can't be from Plate 1E.

Interesting discussion.

I see clearly, the mesh pattern on the 3c stamp you posted, sinclair. That's a very interesting observation on your part. Its nothing I'm familiar with.

It doesn't seem quite as evident on the plate 2 1c stamp ... but maybe also there.

I would say, I'll have to go pull out all of my stamps and compare, except these days, almost all of my stamps are on cover, which, for this .. not so good. I probably have enough, however, to make a simple comparison. You definitely have my curiosity up.

I'm certainly familiar with the higher rag content that went into the paper circa mid 1857, around when Toppan-Carpenter started rolling out the second contract stamps. This, however, is news to me. Do you have any prior art to point to on this, or is this just something you noticed yourself?

rgstamp - regarding the dingle -- think of the dingle as a point where the A relief shows "more" of the full design than the B relief, at the bottom. In most other areas, the B relief is more complete at the bottom than the A relief. The dingle is the exception, so yes, it is on all A reliefs, by definition.

njs900 is responsible for this discovery (the dingle). Our study group was involved with trying to figure out the effects of guide reliefing or general transfer roll (over)-rocking on the various Transfer roll #1 plates of the 1c stamp. I recall when njs900 called me one night, and asked me to look at my 9th row B reliefs. It didn't take too much looking to figure out that he was definitely correct, in that with the transfer roll adjustment, to enter the 10th row B relief, that the bottom of an A relief would sit over the bottom of the 9th row B relief, thus imparting dingles. You can thank him for the name

Thanks for dingle info. Nothing in Neinken about it so presumed more recent discovery
I thought it may help plate the stamp, but would only help if B relief. Since A, doesn't aid much here.

That stamp still driving me nuts


If plate 1E, then 13L1E could be it but missing important plate mark upper right

Or if plate 2, just not sure...?

Initially I thought bottom was recut but top definitely not. Definitely doesn't plate or match to top row plate 1L
.

A reliefs from Transfer roll #1 can be notoriously hard to plate, when they have no easy markings. That's where left side ornament shortness or completeness comes in to play, along with very light plating marks, like small plate scratches, which are often consistent, but not noted in Neinken. You need reference material to get those right.

I was able to confirm a 1E A relief plating last month using the 1c plating archive. Without the reference copy from there, it would have been difficult.

dingle - yes, njs900 found it in the mid 1990s, as part of our study group. I published the initial find in a short-lived publication I was making at the time, for our study group.

If I recall, I believe it got well written up in the 1851 Sesquicentennial book by the Classics Society.

txstamp--the dingle was mentioned and credited on page 17 of the 1851 Sesquicentennial book (article by Celler and Omiya). That's how I first learned of it.

What is this "dingle" that you guys are talking about?

dingle - I already gave a very high level overview of it -- if someone has the time to make a scan of it and post, that would be great. It certainly requires a picture, and I'm not in a position to make one at the moment.

njs900 - If you happen to stop by, this would be a good place for you to step in.

jaxom, the "dingle" is a fragment of the left plume that was transferred to all A Relief positions and ninth-row B Relief positions on Plates 1, 2 and 3. It appears as a short line segment extending horizontally to the right from the left plume remnant. See image below (13L1L, chosen at random from the Plating Archive).

It's there. These kinds of details don't always show the same from scanner to scanner. I can buy a stamp with a stitch watermark that I can see clearly in the listing only to not be able to produce a decent scan with my scanner.




It is my own discovery. There probably has never been anybody that has spent so much time looking at the other side of stamps than me.

Thank you Dudley for taking the time to show me the dingle.

Rather than remain quiet and stupid, I figured I would speak up and remove all doubt....

Hmm. that did not come out right...

Referring back to the last stamp we talked about, I think I may have a possible plate position for it thanks to littleriverphil's marks in the lettering. Also looking at the top left scroll work. Here are pictures of my stamp and the closeups of the one on the Doporto site for 20L2.

What do you guys think?

Lower right plume of your stamp doesn't match 20L2. Your stamp is "short" in this area. Is your stamp scuffed or damaged bottom right?

It is a little soft around the edges but does not look scuffed.
The top right is blurry for some reason. It is not the scan that is blurry.




On second look... there is some sort of discoloration/line right at the point where the design fades. The it turns down right before then ball under the right plume. hmm.. Almost looks like a coffee stain on the corner or something that left a mark on the area it touched.