New theory why American Beauty cards are narrower than other T206's

[tedzan]

Recently, Judson Hamlin posed the following questions on the American Beauty 460 thread regarding the 74
confirmed cards......
" Now let me ask a question: Does finding 74 AB460's mess with your sheet size theory?
If they were all single printed, we'd have two spares (6 sheets + 2) hanging out at 12 cards across a sheet.
Do you think some were double printed? Did they squeeze more than 12 on the sheet if they planned on the
cards being more narrow? 13 cards across would presumably yield 78 cards. "


OK, for some time now, I have speculated that American Litho. (ALC) printed T206's on sheet arrays that were
12 cards across by X number of rows down. I've based this theory primarily on the fact that standard lithograph
presses (circa..early 20th Century) were designed with an 18-inch press track.
Therefore......
12 cards x 1 7/16 inches width = 17.25 inches....resulting in a format of 12 cards across an 18-inch wide sheet.

Researching the settled survey data of either of the three American Beauty (AB) confirmed backs, I have obser-
ved the following......

AB 350 frame = 194 cards
AB 350 no frame = 38 cards
AB 460 = 74 cards

Add one more AB 350 (frame) card to 194 (either a currently unknown card or a double-print) and we get 195.
This number very neatly is divisible by 13. The same follows for the other two AB backs. So, what Judson has
suggested, and what I am saying......is that ALC printed their entire series of AB cards in a format of 13 cards
across an 18-inch wide sheet. This required that these cards be cut narrower by 1/16th of an inch than a stan-
dard width T206 card.

13 cards x 1 3/8 inches width = 17.875 inches

Jon Canfield has shown that the AB cigarette packs were no "slimmer" than any the other ATC packs; therefore,
I think this new scenario of "13 cards" may explain this age old mystery. But, of course another question that
arises (assuming this scenario is factual), is why did ALC print the AB cards in this format, while printing all the
other T206's in 12 card arrays ? I think that can be answered by further study of each of the other T-brands'
total card make-up.

Hey guys, just presenting some thought-provoking stuff for you to ponder. I anticipate some pros & cons here.


TED Z

I think your on to something here. The math is right and I know that my T205's are also short like the 206's. Very neat theory.

[FrankWakefield]

Timing wise, what if American Beauty 350 cards were the last of the 350s to be printed. And, what if they were the first of the 460s to be printed. Then, there wouldn't be as many transitions as to the number of cards printed across... Once from 12 to 13, then back again.

Seems to me with lithography, the various plates or stones for the fronts of the cards would be one big plate for each color pass. And to move from 12 to 13 would require completely redoing each of the plates for all of those cards. I don't think the cards were in there like pieces of removable type, I think there would have been multiple cards to a plate. If that's the deal, then 13 to a sheet doesn't seem likely to me.

It's a shame the narrow card for the cigarette package doesn't hold water anymore, that was such a nice reason.

[Jantz]

Ted

Am I missing something here?

Add one more card - "The same follows for the other two AB backs."

AB 350 frame 195 / 13 = 15
AB 350 no frame 39 / 13 = 3
AB 460 75 / 13 = 5.7692

I could be wrong, but 13 doesn't seem to work for the AB 460s.

I agree with your thoughts on sheets being 12 cards wide in the other brands and I've pretty much proven that.

Ironically, if you add 10 to those numbers ( 194 to 204, 38 to 48 and 74 to 84) things start adding up differently since 204, 48 and 78 are all divisible by 12. Possibly the number 15 could be the number we're looking for when it comes to the AB series.

Great post and worth researching.

Thanks

Jantz

[tedzan]

Jantz

13 divides into 78 very evenly......so, either four AB 460 double-prints, or possibly 4 new AB 460's might still be
found.....or, a combination of both.

Double-prints are very possible, since Crandall, Devore, Ford and McGraw are seen more than the other AB 460's.


TED Z

[Jantz]

Originally Posted by tedzan

13 divides into 78 very evenly......so, either four AB 460 double-prints, or possibly 4 new AB 460's might still be
found.....or, a combination of both.

Ted

I noted this also when I was running the numbers. Hopefully more members will have something to add to this thread since this is a subject I enjoy discussing. Maybe someday soon we can discuss the board's thoughts on the length of a T206 sheet. I don't recall, though I could be wrong, seeing it discussed before.

Jantz

[rebelsart]

I am pretty sure that the American Lithograph Company printed the T212 Obak cards as well as the T206 White border cards.
Judging from this "partial" T212 Obak sheet it seems as though 19 cards across is the correct number.


Art

[judsonhamlin]

Thanks Ted!
When I read through your threads, I'm always been impressed by the time and effort you've been able to put in. The 74 number, then, came across as odd. I like the idea of 13 card sheets for AB cards. And, it would not surprise me at all if a couple of the 460's were double printed. With regard to the other two issues, the numbers make a great deal more sense if we think in terms of a 13 card sheet.
Frank W.'s point is well taken, but if the "stones" were individual to the player images and assembled for each sheet, then that, to me, would be conclusive. If there were miscut cards of the same player with different players to the left or right, that would be substantial proof that the stones were secured individually onto the printing plates (not sure of my terms here).
Great job (again).