Found this T206 missing magenta in my collection.

[iggyman]

A few observations, if I may and hopefully I am not in anyway cutting into Roberts European vacation plans.

1. Glue residue on a T206 card could conceivably cause some discoloration on the front, but the discoloration would not be consistent. In other words, we would still see some red on the front of the T206 Carrigan. A more viable theory in regards to the glue residue and something that raises a red flag in my book, is that the orange version Carrigan could have been mounted in a picture frame as opposed to a scrapbook. Thus, exposed to light.

2. What exactly does the strip of orange on the left border of the red Carrigan prove? Can someone please explain that to me. I'm a bit bedazzled with that one! My T206 Carrigan also has a small strip of orange (on the right side border as opposed to the left). The strip of orange only verifies what we already know and has already been stated by Erick in this thread.........."orange (yellow, then pink/buff) was the next to last colors used, with Magenta (red) as the last overlayed color." With exposure to light, the red gradually disappears and we are left with the color that was underneath. In this case, it's orange.

3. What is so wrong with the idea that the red on this hat and the "STON" on his uniform simply did gradually disappear by being exposed to sunlight. When I look at the card, I actually see a faint STON on the orange version Carrigan (a slightly faded pink/buff perhaps). A plausible reason for why we don't see orange behind the STON and hat, is because only pink/buff and not yellow was used. One would expect pink to fade along with the red.

Let the bullets fly.

Lovely Day...

[teetwoohsix]

Well, I'm definitely no printing expert, but it sure does look to me like it missed the whole red pass. I don't think the red would just evaporate away (or fade so consistently with no trace left at all). I would think even if it were faded, you would still see evidence of the red somewhere?

No bullets for you Iggy, just my opinion

Sincerely, Clayton

[RCMcKenzie]

Iggy, you bring up some interesting points for debate, but I do not believe this is a case for Hercule Poirot. I once left a 1959 Jim Bunning on top of a stack of cards near a window for over 5 years and the card faded. I will try and find that card this weekend and post a scan. As to value, a Sweeney missing ink sold for 1500 this year, so I would guess this one would go for around that.

[iggyman]

I've shown this before but here is a classic example of a T206 red Cobb that was sold as faded.


t206 cobb orange.jpg


You can see the photo-corner mount in the upper right corner and the results of fading (how certain shades fade at different rates (red is always the first to go). I would expect a '59 Jim Bunning that was exposed to light for 5 years to be badly faded and the loss of color (besides red) would be quite obvious. I'm not denying that T206's don't exist without the red , I'm just pointing out that verifying whether these cards were actually printed that way is not a slam dunk.

Lovely Day...

[obcmac]

I'm with Iggy on this one. Any glue on the back of a missing red is a bad sign. If you look at the percentage of missing red ink cards have glue on the back, you'll see a much higher percentage than t206's in general. So yes, glue often removes the red ink...it's obvious and not even a debate really.

That said, no one cares why the red ink isn't there...they'll pay tons for them anyway. Neat looking card, I'd love to have it...but didn't come out of the factory that way.

Mac

Originally Posted by iggyman

A few observations, if I may and hopefully I am not in anyway cutting into Roberts European vacation plans.

1. Glue residue on a T206 card could conceivably cause some discoloration on the front, but the discoloration would not be consistent. In other words, we would still see some red on the front of the T206 Carrigan. A more viable theory in regards to the glue residue and something that raises a red flag in my book, is that the orange version Carrigan could have been mounted in a picture frame as opposed to a scrapbook. Thus, exposed to light.

2. What exactly does the strip of orange on the left border of the red Carrigan prove? Can someone please explain that to me. I'm a bit bedazzled with that one! My T206 Carrigan also has a small strip of orange (on the right side border as opposed to the left). The strip of orange only verifies what we already know and has already been stated by Erick in this thread.........."orange (yellow, then pink/buff) was the next to last colors used, with Magenta (red) as the last overlayed color." With exposure to light, the red gradually disappears and we are left with the color that was underneath. In this case, it's orange.

3. What is so wrong with the idea that the red on this hat and the "STON" on his uniform simply did gradually disappear by being exposed to sunlight. When I look at the card, I actually see a faint STON on the orange version Carrigan (a slightly faded pink/buff perhaps). A plausible reason for why we don't see orange behind the STON and hat, is because only pink/buff and not yellow was used. One would expect pink to fade along with the red.

Let the bullets fly.

Lovely Day...

[CaramelMan]

Originally Posted by obcmac

I'm with Iggy on this one. Any glue on the back of a missing red is a bad sign. If you look at the percentage of missing red ink cards have glue on the back, you'll see a much higher percentage than t206's in general. So yes, glue often removes the red ink...it's obvious and not even a debate really.

That said, no one cares why the red ink isn't there...they'll pay tons for them anyway. Neat looking card, I'd love to have it...but didn't come out of the factory that way.

Mac

is it obvious? please elaborate for us uninformed...i find it HIGHLY unlikely that a small dab of glue, that dries quickly, has the ability to make to most intense color (red) disappear....wouldnt you see the outline of the red lettering still on the jersey?

[Jantz]

Robert acknowledged that both Carrigans have glue residue on the backs.

So why do the fronts of these cards look so different?


Jantz

[iggyman]

Darn it Jantz, I now feel compelled to answer your question, too bad my peers will now lump me in with the long list of prior Net54ers who promise to never post again (yet continue to post) and threaten to leave the hobby (yet continue to post) due to a Wonkaticket barb.

Originally Posted by Jantz

Robert acknowledged that both Carrigans have glue residue on the backs.
So why do the fronts of these cards look so different?
Jantz

Robert also acknowledged that he was not sure if both cards were from the same collection. Plus, if you were a Doughboy in lets say 1917 and you ended-up with two T206 Carrigans; wouldn't only one of them be displayed in a picture frame or on top of your dresser, while the other might be safely tucked away in a scrapbook.

Lovely Day...

[obcmac]

Originally Posted by CaramelMan

is it obvious? please elaborate for us uninformed...i find it HIGHLY unlikely that a small dab of glue, that dries quickly, has the ability to make to most intense color (red) disappear....wouldnt you see the outline of the red lettering still on the jersey?

Well, generally you get missing red where you have glue. If the whole back was glued, then red is often missing from the whole card. I'll throw numbers out there...just guesses, so everyone can chime in if they feel like it.

10-20% of T206's have glue on the back
80%+ of missing red cards have glue/liquid staining

Do missing reds exist? Yeah...I think they do. Are a lot of so called missing reds a result of glue/chemical/water/sun? Yeah...probably. Everyone gets to make up their own mind, but I will pay a lot less for a stained missing red than a clean one.

Mac

[iggyman]

Okay, one last post before I let this thread recoil into the abyss.

In my opinion, this is not the case on the T206 Carrigan but here is a classic example of what exposure to stuff can do to the color of a card (I found this image on the Gorenet): Obviously, fading due to exposure to chemicals is very easy to spot.

t206 Beaumont.jpg

For the record, did I once try to collect T206 magenta-less cards? Sure, I have a couple, mostly beaters. In due time, I realized they were not all that rare (at least not like a W554 Ruth with an ad back). Plus, I could never convince myself that I could adequately ascertain whether these cards came out of the factory without the magenta or the lack of red was caused by some form of exposure to light.

wallace3.JPG
T206 Orange1.jpg
T206 Orange2.jpg
T206 Orange3.jpg
T206 Orange4.jpg

Lovely Day...

[Sean]

Originally Posted by iggyman

Okay, one last post before I let this thread recoil into the abyss.



For the record, did I once try to collect T206 magenta-less cards? Sure, I have a couple, mostly beaters. In due time, I realized they were not all that rare (at least not like a W554 Ruth with an ad back). Plus, I could never convince myself that I could adequately ascertain whether these cards came out of the factory without the magenta or the lack of red was caused by some form of exposure to light.


Attachment 109433

Now you've got me questioning my missing ink card.

scan0010.jpg

[iggyman]

Sean,

Your T206 Beaumont is a cool card no matter what some guy with the first name of "Iggy" states on an internet forum. On a cold winters night, what better way to spend a romantic evening, then snuggling next to your wife/girlfriend and being able to reach into your stash of T206 cards and visually showing her(?) the two different color layers of a T206 card. Sean, you are a lucky guy............doesn't get any better.

Lovely Day...

[thehoodedcoder]

Originally Posted by Sean

Now you've got me questioning my missing ink card.

Attachment 109473

you know damn well i want that beaumont card too. why would you do that to me.

kevin

[slidekellyslide]

I don't normally say this about a T206 thread, but this was a really interesting thread. I'm also perplexed why so many people are willing to pony up big cash for a card that is most likely damaged and not a factory error.

[aquarius31]

Sean, that's an interesting card. Here's another example which is now in an SGC slab graded "1" for obvious reasons. I was thinking that it would be graded "A" if there was some tampering with it but I'm really not sure. The bubbling does seem strange.