NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you give an opinion of a person or company your full name needs to be in your post. Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
ebay GSB

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Main Forum - WWII & Older Baseball Cards > Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 10-09-2017, 10:07 PM
steve B steve B is offline
Steve Birmingham
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: eastern Mass.
Posts: 4,916
Default

High res scans would tell me a lot.
Sometimes wear is hard to tell because of how variable the inking levels were. I could probably tell if the last version was an attempted repair.

Someday I'll have to draw some pics explaining wear and inking to show how similar they can be. (And impression pressure, and the wetting of the stone/plate and .......

Steve B
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-09-2017, 10:34 PM
Pat R's Avatar
Pat R Pat R is offline
P@trick R.omolo
member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,197
Default

I only have the full version but here's one that is either the very beginning or
after it was fixed if it was.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1909-T206-Fr...IAAOSwH4NZgqXQ

And another full version
http://www.ebay.com/itm/T206-Frank-O...UAAOSwfVpYujDz
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-10-2017, 09:59 AM
steve B steve B is offline
Steve Birmingham
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: eastern Mass.
Posts: 4,916
Default

I'm almost certain that's not a repair. The screening is far too even and matches up perfectly.

Repair on the plate would be by stoning off the big spot, then redrawing the dots either by hand, or by laying down another piece of transfer. It's incredibly hard to do that and get it looking exactly right.

As an aside, the one from Deans has a transfer laydown problem on the frame at the upper left.

The transfers were made by printing with very thick tarlike ink onto basically tissue paper, then laying that on the stone in the right spot with some solvent. When it was good and stuck down water was used to remove the tissue. Some times the tissue would tear, and that is probably the cause.

Depending on how common the spot is, it could have been on the master stone, either early and later fixed by remaking the master, or more likely later when a bit of something got on the stone

Comparing the cards on Ebay, there are a couple 350's with decent scans
http://www.ebay.com/itm/T206-Owen-/3...QAAOSwDrlZfjUb

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1909-T206-Fr...EAAOSw9fNZgleV

Both are screened differently from all the 150's I looked at, it's more noticeable in the face.

A few things I haven't quite figured out on it.
The shape is interesting, being an irregular octagon. That's odd as I can't think of a way that shape was created. It's too uneven to be a nut or bolt head, and probably too uneven to be from a bit of scrap paper from an octagonal hole punch.
There's also a missing halftone dot just under the lower left of the bog dot. That could be missing, or not picked up because of whatever caused the spot, or just another bit that didn't transfer properly.

Steve B
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-23-2017, 06:08 PM
Pat R's Avatar
Pat R Pat R is offline
P@trick R.omolo
member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,197
Default

I finally did a little more research on some of the print flaws/defects
that I have been tracking and they have me leaning more towards the
EPDG printing for the 150/350 series starting at the tail end of the
150 series and I'm also starting to wonder if there were any leftover
150 fronts used for the 350 series.

I know it would be a small % of leftovers but I haven't found any
of these Flaws/defects (0-657) on a 350 back.

These are all card target sales that were listed under the specific
back and I didn't try to track re-sales on the larger number sales
like the PD150's which on average are probably around 15%.


Cicotte.jpg
PD150-5.jpgSC150-25.jpg
Sov150-2.jpg

Davis.jpg
img392.jpgDaves AMEP SC 150-649 - Copy - Copy.jpg
003 Davis Sov 150-1.jpg

Gibson.jpg
PD 150-1.jpgSC 150-30-2.jpg

Konetchy.jpg
PD150-2.jpgSC150-30-1.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-23-2017, 06:14 PM
Pat R's Avatar
Pat R Pat R is offline
P@trick R.omolo
member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,197
Default

Here are a few more

Lajoie.jpg
SC150-30-1.jpgSC150-649-1.jpg
PD150-2.jpgHindu.jpg

McGraw.jpg
PD 150-2.jpgPD 150-3.jpg

Owen.jpg
PD 150-12.jpgEPDG-2.jpg

Last edited by Pat R; 10-23-2017 at 06:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-23-2017, 06:39 PM
Pat R's Avatar
Pat R Pat R is offline
P@trick R.omolo
member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,197
Default

..
Pastorius.jpg
PD150-1.jpgSC150-30-1.jpg
SC150-649-1.jpg

Tenney.jpg
PD150-9.jpgSC150-30-2.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-23-2017, 06:51 PM
Pat R's Avatar
Pat R Pat R is offline
P@trick R.omolo
member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,197
Default

Last one
Wilhelm.jpgSC150-649-1.jpgPD150-2.jpg


I thought I found a PD 350 Wilhem with this flaw but the seller definitely
had the wrong back scan on this one
Wilhelm PD350 XXX.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-24-2017, 09:33 AM
Thromdog Thromdog is offline
J3ff
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 879
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat R View Post
I finally did a little more research on some of the print flaws/defects
that I have been tracking and they have me leaning more towards the
EPDG printing for the 150/350 series starting at the tail end of the
150 series and I'm also starting to wonder if there were any leftover
150 fronts used for the 350 series.
Awesome research as always.....

So based on your results, when you say that you are leaning towards EPDG's printed early 350/late 150, is that based on the Owens alone? I ask because in the samples you have referenced, the Owens is the only flaw that is shared on an EPDG example.

Just wanting to clarify.

Thanks
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-24-2017, 11:46 AM
greco827's Avatar
greco827 greco827 is offline
Jason Greco
member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 97
Default

It may have been in your count, as I purchased it off eBay in the last month, but I have a Pastorius PD350, which does not have the - next to the B on his cap.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg t206_Pastorius2.jpg (72.2 KB, 276 views)
__________________
****Southern League****
Old Mill (SL) PSA 3: 3/48
Old Mill (SL) PSA 4: 5/48
Hindu Brown: 1/34

****NY Highlanders Team Set****
Basic Team Set: 13/28
Master Team Set: 13/315

Last edited by greco827; 10-24-2017 at 11:50 AM. Reason: Added Picture
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-24-2017, 05:06 PM
Pat R's Avatar
Pat R Pat R is offline
P@trick R.omolo
member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,197
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thromdog View Post
Awesome research as always.....

So based on your results, when you say that you are leaning towards EPDG's printed early 350/late 150, is that based on the Owens alone? I ask because in the samples you have referenced, the Owens is the only flaw that is shared on an EPDG example.

Just wanting to clarify.

Thanks
Hi Jeff,

With the print flaws it's kind of based on just the Owen. Of the flaws I
posted Davis, Tenney and McGraw are not confirmed EPDG's and Konetchy
and Pastorius are confirmed but questionable. Both of the EPDG flaws are
found on Owen but it's still 2-29 EPDG's so if some of the 350's were
printed using front plates from the 150 series I would expect at least a
few examples out of the 657 from 350 series with some of these flaws.

The other thing as Luke pointed out is on average the close
to equal numbers of EPDG to PD 350 for the elite 11. I can't see why they
would pull them from the Piedmont 350 printing but not the EPDG so to
me the most logical reason for them being close in numbers is the EPDG
printing started during end of the 150 series and they were pulled around
the same time at the beginning of the 350 series printing and the Owen
with the same flaw indicates the 150 plates were used for at least some
of the EPDG's.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Evidence of trimming? bobbvc Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 7 04-05-2014 10:44 PM
Evidence of E90-1 being printed before E102 CaramelMan Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 8 08-24-2013 06:40 PM
The Evidence as Promised Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 7 05-01-2008 08:02 PM
Were T206's printed on sheets of 48 Subjects ? Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 64 04-27-2007 09:50 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:35 AM.


ebay GSB