A Penny Red I recently purchased lettered (AF). I measured and put the numbers in on this site, came back a exact match to plate 200 a13- b3+ c3- d4+
Then i went to the registration sheet it was missing, so I went to the imprimatur project site, found a copy.
Only to find position (d) to be way out it shows it,s 2 or even 2- some 8 positions different to the book, and my stamp (d4+)
My stamp has the perfect east side and the north west 6 o clock ray flaw.
After pulling up images of all the (AF) stamps with the 6 o clock ray flaw (plates 198 to 201) my stamp seems to fit plate 199.
The only thing is my stamp is imperf and nowhere can i find this plate 199 had any imperf sheets?
Any ideas please ?

I have no copies from Plate 200, but one (not AF) from Plate 199 - perforated. So far I can find no reference anywhere to imperforate copies from either plate.

under gibbons book for sg17/18 (C1k) it states imperfs known of plates 200 and 203 but i have not found any for 199.
Only thing that comes to mind is has someone used a imprimatur from the original sheet on a letter, possible i suppose.

Yes, I missed the reference in Gibbons to Plates 200 & 203 - was concentrating on 199 I suppose

Hi JimW
Can you post a scan of the stamp?
AP

When I click on the link I get this message:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KnoDGl ... sp=sharing
AP

Trying something else...

AP

What I have just done is
1) Saved the image to an external drive (in this case my Google Drive), obtained a link from the drive program and copied that link into the text.
2) Directly added the file by filling in the Upload attachment and putting it in line.
3) As above but didn't put it in line.

Not sure which is the best - whatever work for the user I suppose.

I will use the link version, which will save GBPS space and bandwidth, though if my account vanishes, then so will the images.

AP

I get that message if I try to view not logged in.
When logged in the file opened up ok.

Nope.
I'm logged in.
Can't see nufin.

Andrew send your email address to me at jward9jw@gmail.com and I will send you a copy

OK, got it.

I think it is here.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qF1p4A ... sp=sharing

Nice stamp.

It came through as a .php which is maybe why it did not appear. If you save as a .jpg, then most people will be able to see it.

Look at the serif top right of the F. It comes straight down at a 90 degree angle. It's alphabet 1. Alphabet 2 tends to stick out at an angle. The A is also a bit pointy for alphabet 2.

Have another go, and if you still cannot make head nor tail post again. Bring a shortlist of possibles.

AP

Hi JimW,

I beg to differ.

Lets walk around the stamp clockwise starting in the top left corner.

The outside lines of the NW square look to be normal on the 199, but on your example they have been re-cut.
There appears to be a slight TXW on your stamp which does not appear on 199.
The top of your stamp appears to have been heavily re-cut, apart from a tiny break which looked like a T flaw – but that is not the right position for that. The top of 199 is normal.
The top of the top right square appears very weak in your stamp. Apart from that the same corner of 199 is similar including a slight EXN or NEX.
The right sides of the stamps are similar and strong except that there is a fairly strong suffuse blur in the margin of 199.
The lower right corner of these stamps are very similar, that despite the fact that the check letters have been made by different punches. The footprint of both letters co-inside. The upper serif on your F drops down like a rope when playing hangman, whereas the serif on the 199 F has the corner filled in at an angle. This is a feature of most of the F punches of alphabet 2, with some swinging further out to the right.
The base of both stamps are similar.
The frame lines of the bottom left corner are similar, but the letters very different from each other. 199 shows an A with both ‘feet’ being level with the letter, but having a left foot down appearance, though the letter itself is upright. The A on your stamp is rotated slightly anti-clockwise (or TlE if you wish), with both feet more or less level. The left serif has a pointed toe appearance which contrasts with 199. These letters do not overlay any where near exactly.
The left side of both stamps are similar, with weaknesses appearing in both at the same points. However, your stamp completely omits the very strong diffuse marginal blur shown on 199.
Looking at the general impression of the stamps, 199 is showing much more weakness in the background latticework than your stamp. Compare the area by the queens bust. Even an over inked, dry print of 199 could not produce such a solid print as you AF.
Also, remembering that 199 was at press just a very short time, there is really no way that the marginal blurs would have disappeared to the extent to make your stamp 199.

It’s not 199.

On the plus side, your image embedding worked a treat.

AP

Agreed.

It's plate 146.


Scott

Ah!
Agreed Scott.

I got that one wrong.

AP

....though I'm quite puzzled why jimw would even consider plate 199 for his imperf stamp!


Scott

I have measured this stamp many times and i cannot get position A to 13+ I get 13- at a push in some light conditions i would go to 13 just its that close.
Putting the numbers in on the plating aid on the GBPS site: A13- B3+ C3- D4+ came back an EXACT match to plate 200.
After putting up plate 200 on the registration site, and finding it missing i went to the imprimatur site and pulled up a image of plate 200 AF only to find position D was way out.
So the point of my post, was to inform the GBPS site and anyone of its members who use the Fisher/Brown plating books that plate 200 letters AF is wrong.
Instead of 4+ for position D it should read 2 Or 2- perhaps someone with a copy could measure it and post the exact measurement.

Since communicating with Andrew i have found images of most AF stamps from Alphabets 1 and 2 all 210 of them except 4 and made a short list of 5 stamps for further investigation, I just need images from plates 186 / 188 /189 /and R2 .
One thing i can rule out is Alphabet 1. Plate 146 is a the strongest candidate. This stamp shows NW 6 o clock ray problems, that made me consider stamps with 6 o clock flaws from plates 198 to 201.
My last sentence from my initial post was, plate 199 should be perforated and my stamp is not, that's another reason for my post I needed help.

My apologies for what I now realise must have been quite an abrupt post, Jim.

I have images of AF 186 and 188, that I will submit to the Missing Imprimatur group and if agreed they will be added to the site in due course.


Scott

An little update for you:
The GBPS have re-measured the letter positions of stamp (AF plate 200) and it is wrong.
They will update position D from 4+ to its corrected position of 2+ ASAP .
So any of you that have book 5 of the Fisher/Brown plating books, can update stamp (plate 200 AF) to its corrected position of 2+.

I would also like to thank Scott for offering to send 2 missing images of stamps to the imprimatur site (stamps AF plates 186 and AF 188).

Hi Jim,
For what it is worth, here is a little of my story. I started by using the F/B books in the 1980’s because I had nothing else. I then started to buy photos of the imprimaturs from the BPM to help nail them. I never got a complete set of the area I collected, so perhaps half of my collection was plated using only F/B.
Then there was kids.
Then there was computers.
Then I came back to the hobby.
Then I realised that 60% of the stuff that was plated using F/B was wrong.
Then I realised that 25% of the stuff that I plated against the imprimaturs was wrong.
Then I realised that 95% of the stuff I plated on my computer using a graphics program using scans of the imprimaturs was right.
Then I realised that most of the “plating features” could not be relied upon.
Then I realised that stamps had a working life that changed their appearance as they got older.
Then I realised that I am still learning.
Jim, I rarely use F/B, except for clues for the odd missing imprimatur. The main body of the stamp is designed to be an exact duplication. Forget NW ray flaw and all that apart from the odd exception that was ‘mucked about a bit’. The corner letters however were struck by hand. And all are utterly unique. You cannot see these differences using F/B, but only by direct comparison of the stamp and the imprimatur.
AP