|
|
Post by thenewguy on Feb 22, 2024 3:24:40 GMT
|
|
khj
Member 
Posts: 1,467 
|
Post by khj on Feb 22, 2024 4:32:25 GMT
First of all, thank you for that excellent "through the paper" pic!
I deleted my initial reply, because I found myself confused after re-reading your post.
Exactly which stamp do you think is a Scott US #211B?
If you want to know what soft porous paper looks like, one of the common stamps that was only printed on soft porous paper is the 1892 2¢ Columbian Exposition stamp. You can use that for comparison.
That being said, the stamp in the 3rd pic (held up by stamp tongs) is most definitely #210(1Oct1883).
|
|
|
|
Post by carabop on Feb 22, 2024 5:26:50 GMT
There is not enough details to determine if it is a 211b. Me not being an expert but a USA collector for many years would say it’s 210 unless a certificate states otherwise. Also there a very few used copies of 211b.
|
|
|
|
Post by thenewguy on Feb 22, 2024 5:51:20 GMT
Apologize for the lack of clarity on which stamp I was trying to identify as a possible 211b. It was the Stamp that was held up by itself in the tongs and then it was the upper stamp of the two stamps pictured together in an attempt to show how different the paper looks between the two of them to a similar two cent Washington that appears to have been printed on a different type of paper and from all I could determine in a quick study there was only two stamps that this could be = either a 210 or a 211b
|
|
khj
Member
Posts: 1,467
|
Post by khj on Feb 22, 2024 7:06:26 GMT
No apology necessary. Just wanted some clarification. The stamp held up by the tongs is definitely #210(1Oct1883).
Both stamps are #210. The one held up by the tongs simply shows the mesh much more clearly. Soft porous paper is not identified by the mesh.
You can exclude your stamp as #211B without even considering the paper because the cross-hatching in the background underneath the chin becomes less clear as you go down toward the oval border (i.e., it literally looks like it's fading away). #211B has the cross-hatching fairly consistent all the way down. It's a known printing characteristic from the only press sheet for this stamp made from the Hoe steam-driven press.
|
|
rod222
Member
Posts: 9,910
What I collect: Worldwide Stamps, Ephemera and Catalogues
|
Post by rod222 on Feb 22, 2024 8:16:13 GMT
It's a known printing characteristic from the only press sheet for this stamp made from the Hoe steam-driven press. Hi Kim, Assuming the same press for the Tasmanian 1d Recess ? any idea?   |
|
|
|
Post by thenewguy on Feb 22, 2024 10:08:23 GMT
Appreciate the responses and sharing a quick and easy identification method of this stamp design in the future!
|
|
khj
Member
Posts: 1,467
|
Post by khj on Feb 22, 2024 17:02:32 GMT
Assuming the same press for the Tasmanian 1d Recess ? any idea? Sorry, I'm not really knowledgeable about the printing presses. Hopefully someone can chime in. Thanks for posting the article, it was an interesting read and the explanation does seem plausible. Regarding my comment about the cross-hatching for the 2¢ Washington, I am not sure of the history but I guess it comes from something regarding the plate or something they did to the plate (touch-up?), rather than the actual change to the Hoe press. But don't hold me to that. I just know the clear cross-hatching all the way down is a requirement for the special printing of that stamp. |
|
