Dot pattern on real T206's

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>steve</b><p>is it true that you can tell a fake t206 card buy the dotd under a magnifying glass, and also i was wondering if they made t206 cards in the "50"s or "60"s?. if so, how can you tell them apart if they look identical to the t206 1909 originals? i have been interested in tobacco cards for about 15 years and never new until recently that they possably made reprints in the 50"s or 60"s. i have one more question for you all, if they did make t206 cards in the 50"s or 60"s, did they make BLANK BACK ones?<br /> thank you for taking the time to read this, if anybody out there knows the answers to my questions, could you please reply or e-mail me at senichols1962@yahoo.com<br /> thank you,<br /> steve<br /><br /><br />edited title to be more specific

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>fkw</b><p>I have yet to see a good reprint of a T206 that has fooled me. 90% have design differences especially missing the black border arounf picture, the caption is different or the back is wrong color or missing the factory district #, etc. The only ones that may fool a T206 collector in a picture is the ones that are homemade made from a scan of a real card, and printed out on an inkjet printer. These are sometimes hard to tell in a picture, but in person would be obvious.<br /><br />Post a picture of your card.<br /><br />I believe all reprints are from the late 1970-now era, why would they reprint a T206 in the 50's or 60's, the authentic cards are common and were easily obtained for well under $1 back then. The Wagner may have been reprinted earlier than the 70's but I doubt it.<br /><br />PS If you are talking about that blank backed Wagner thats been around eBay for sometime, it is garbage and not even a good reprint, it has the same look as the reprint from the mid 80's "Baseball Card Magazine".<br /><br /><br />Frank

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Josh K.</b><p>Steve, <br /><br />There are others better suited to answer this question than myself, but I believe that when looking under a magnifying glass, an original t206 will have a pattern of single color dots (several different colors may be found, but each dot is a single color). The dot pattern found in modern reprints are, I believe, more geometrically shaped (octagon maybe?)and are multi-colored. The best way to tell the difference is take a modern bb card and look at it under a magnifying glass - that will show you what a t206 should not look like.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>Yes, it is true that you can easily identify a reprinted card from an original by looking at it under a magnifier. drCycleback is the expert in this field and he is published in this and other areas.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>John S</b><p>The dots on the original T206's lack a consistent shape and fall into no specific pattern with the other dots. The dots on reprints are arranged symetrically forming a pattern. The dots themselves are also usually more well defined.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>andy becker</b><p>what other have said is true. i agree the earliest reprint is from the late 70's.<br />those are the toughest to distinguish, as they may have honest wear associated with "older" cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Robert</b><p>I use to be in the screent printing business and modern photo printing is done usually with only 4 colors, cyan, magenta, yellow and black. Each color is a screen of dots set at a particular angle, thus it creates a pattern or a moire. I believe the T206's where originally printed using 6 colors and the technology back then would not use the same type of angles in the dot patterns as they do today.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>Yes Robert, that is my understanding as well. Specifically if you look at a brown (for example) area on a real t206, you will see brown dots. On a fake t206 you will see yellow, pink, black and blue (and combinations depending on density and shade of coloration). It is a color of the dots thing.<br /><br />I think that cyan + magenta = pink + blue; but Im not sure which is which.