1c 1851 Plate 1-Late Stamps

Couple of new pickups.

98L1L. Was actually described as a Type II #7 but it's a position I am missing so I decided to bid on it anyways and ended up getting it.






49 - 50R1L

Great looking pieces!

Yes, very nice, congrats.

stallzer - You picked up some very nice stamps! I know they aren't easy to find.

I also like what Ben has done with his hair.

Moving/starting this discussion here as I feel fairly confident this is a stamp from Plate 1-Late. I'm currently working on trying to plate it.



Appears to be a Type IV.
"A" Relief
Recut single line at both top and bottom.
Part of top line is missing but recut does not appear to extend left over the "P" in Postage.

Possible candidates include: 37L, 31R, 32R, 39R, 40R, 59R. I'm leaning towards 40R at the moment but need to make more comparisons with examples.

Please let me know if I'm off course on plating this.

Thanks,
Stephen

harper1249 - On closer examination, I have to agree with you. 40R1L is surely correct. The dots on the shoulder of the bust are really convincing.

I originally thought the frameline over the "P" of POSTAGE was not recut enough to make most positions other than 37L1L possible. The block below from Siegel makes me think that the Neinken map of 40R1L is slightly misleading in that it shows the recut extended just a fraction of a mm too far over the "P".

I picked up another 1¢ Franklin without being sure whether it was from Plate 2 or Plate 1L. The top and bottom frame lines did look recut, but the pronounced blurring in the top and bottom interstitial space wasn't something I had seen, or was aware occurred to this degree, on Plate 1L. After receiving the stamp I could study it more carefully. Someone else had penciled 32R on back, so that was an obvious starting point to look. I believe the plate mark below and to the left of the left plume of 22R1L is unique, which pretty much confirms that it is another 32RL1.

Maybe it will help nail down stalizer's suspect 32R1L with even more certainty.

Notice that the photo of 32R1L in the Doporto archive also shows blurring along the top of the design.

In another thread, it was asked to share examples of how to mount platings. This item is not mine, however, this was Dick Celler's reconstruction of Plate 1-Late.

He would hinge the stamps onto a large thick cardboard backing (presumably acid-free). He then cut a large Mylar sheet to cover the entire cardboard. One can fold the Mylar out easily to get to the stamps.

So it looks like the original 'sheet' would - and also by keeping the Mylar page covering the stamps, one can use a plating like this quite easily. You can just put your magnifier right on the Mylar and move it across the surface as needed without lifting it up. You can see at the left, vertically where the Mylar has been taped to the card, such that it opens like a book.

Hi txstamp --

Those platings are a thing of beauty -- thanks for showing them -- and ex-Celler to boot -- so you can be assured that each stamp was vetted by Dick -- and probably numerous times -- to ensure that each was correctly plated. An amazing piece of philatelic history and probably the most reliable plating reference extant for plate 1L of the 1c blue!

Thanks again for showing these.

Regards // ioagoa

First off, always thank the digger of the well when you drink from the well. Jaxom thanks for starting this thread.
Earlier today Plate 1l right and left sold on Sterling Stamp Auction. Plated by Mr. Robert H Good
Is he a known plater, or an unknown expert. Cheers mark

http://goscf.com/t/79658

re: Bob Good, see above.

He was a 1c plater.

These complete platings make it tempting to try to plate 1L myself, but I'm not quite ready to specialize to that degree. The plate is alluring though, especially because so many nice examples can be found at affordable prices.

I recently acquired a 1L1L that reminded me of some advice from txstamp:


Siegel sold this stamp in sale 1227 and described as a 21L1L. It had a 1999 PF cert that didn't plate it, but described it recut on the top and twice on the bottom. Evidently Ed Reiser bought bought the stamp and got a new PF cert. Again, it wasn't plated, but the recut assessment was the same as the 1999 cert.

I'm not sure how so many people could make the same mistake, because the guide dots alone are probably enough to identify it as a 1L1L. The position is further confirmed by the dot under the "O" of ONE and the line in the "P" of POSTAGE. The next time I send something to the PF, I'll probably ask them to correct their most recent cert.

Nicely, done, widglo. I see no reason not to engage with the PF right away to correct this error. The obvious fact that this stamp is a T relief should have been enough to alert the PF expertizers that it is not recut at top.