Were PIEDMONT 460 factory #42 & UZIT backs printed simultaneously ?

[tedzan]

The variance in BLUE ink of the UZIT backs is very similar to that seen on the PIEDMONT 460/42 backs (many are light blue, while some others are a dark blue).

Does this suggest that the UZIT backs and the PIEDMONT 460/42 backs were printed simultaneously ?

American Litho. records indicate that the UZIT cards were printed and issued at the tail-end of the T206 press runs in the Spring of 1911. And in early 1911,
ATC transferred a part of their PIEDMONT production to the Liggett & Myers plant in Durham, NC (Factory #42).





Hey guys, this is just meant to be a thought-provoking exercise....lest, the usual (contrarian) suspects on this forum accuse me of posting some "wild--a$$" theory.

So, what's your take on this subject ?

Thanks for engaging in a meaningful discussion,


TED Z

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Does this suggest that the UZIT backs and the PIEDMONT 460/42 backs were printed simultaneously ?

On the surface it may seem as though the two backs have a connection given both are blue and appear to have a light and dark shade variation but they were not printed at the same time.

First, the Piedmont 42's do have a definite light and dark variation. With the help of Craig Wright, and the survey results from Net 54 members, I have been able to get a pretty good idea of the subjects included in the two different printings. When comparing the subjects included in the light 42 group or dark 42 group to those printed with Uzit backs, it shows they could not have been printed simultaneously.

Secondly, I'm not sure there is a definite light and dark variation to the Uzit back. I have seen light and dark Uzit's but I don't believe at this time that this was the result of a color change like the Factory 42 Piedmont's.

Just a question. Could it be possible that the paper stock is different and it has a higher acid content in one causing the fading of the ink??

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by Pup6913

Could it be possible that the paper stock is different and it has a higher acid content in one causing the fading of the ink??

In my opinion what can be seen as color variations are likely a matter of how much ink was applied to the card. The darker Uzit backs are like the darker Sweet Caporal 649 over prints where it appears the amount of ink in the earlier runs was much heavier than the amount in the later runs. As the amount of ink tapered off it resulting in a lighter looking color. In both cases a noticeable amount of paper either does or doesn't show through the printed area. I believe a careful examination of the color that is there on the lighter looking examples shows it is the same color just less of it making it appear lighter.

[tedzan]

Tim

Please realize, I am referring only to the printing of the "backs" and the BLUE ink used. There are too many light (and porous) blue backs
found on either PIEDMONT 460/42 or UZIT cards.

Your example with the Factory #649 overprints is anecdotal....the greater majority of the cards with the Factory #649 overprinted back
are found with a normal Red color. Furthermore, such anecdotal examples can be shown for all of the T206 advertising backs.
What I am observing here with the PIEDMONT 460/42 and UZIT backs is....that at a certain timeline in early 1911, American Litho. (ALC)
was printing these 2 backs with an inferior quality of blue ink....therefore, the numerous lighter blue advertising backs on these 2 brands.
Conversely, ALC also used their normal (deeper) blue ink to print these two backs. Whether the dark blue ink was first used, or the light
(porous) blue ink was first is unknown (and probably irrelevant).


Now, let's consider the timeline. In the early part of 1911, the American Tobacco Co (ATC) was anticipating their forthcoming divestiture.
ATC transferred their PIEDMONT tobacco production to the Liggett & Myers (L & M) plant in Durham, NC (Factory 42). ATC's divestiture
also directed ATC to transfer their AMERICAN BEAUTY tobacco production to this L & M Factory (#42).

OK, I have previously made the linkage between the AMERICAN BEAUTY 460 fronts and the UZIT fronts for the 350/460 series subjects.
Therefore, it is fair to say that a coincident timeline exists in the printing of these AMERICAN BEAUTY 460 (Factory 42) and UZIT cards.

Also, recall the existence of an ALC letter (dated March 1911) that tells us of the of the intermixing of a T206 UZIT card with a T80 (Mil-
itary Series) card in a UZIT cigarette pack. This letter provides us a timeline of when in 1911 (January & February) the T206 production
run was nearing its end. UZIT cards, along with AMERICAN BEAUTY 460, LENOX, & PIEDMONT 460/42 cards, were at the very tail-end of
the T206 era.

Finally, I think it's fair to conclude that a coincident timeline exists in the printing of the backs of the PIEDMONT 460/42 and UZIT cards.
It is standard practice that when printers are applying a certain color, they will print all jobs that require that color.


TED Z

[Abravefan11]

Ted - I too am only discussing the backs of the cards and I believe there are three key points to answering your original question:

"Does this suggest that the UZIT backs and the PIEDMONT 460/42 backs were printed simultaneously ?"

1) I do not believe there are two color variations of Uzit, just differences in the amount of the same color ink applied. The image I included in my post above hopefully illustrated that point.

2) Unlike the Uzit backs, Piedmont 42's were printed with two different color blue inks.

3) A comparison of the Uzit subjects to the light P42's or to the dark P42's show that the two were not printed simultaneously.

You included a lot of great information in your post but I don't believe there are any connections between any of the stated facts that would change the three points I posted above.

I hope that helps.

[White Borders]

Hi Ted,

Maybe I'm not completely understanding the hypothesis. If you think the light Uzits were printed simultaneously with the light P42s, and the dark Uzits were printed simultaneously with the dark P42s, wouldn't you expect them to have the same front/back combos? But from your surveys, I don't believe Uzits and P42s have the same confirmed front/back combos.

Your confirmed Uzits are here: Uzit Confirmed List

Your confirmed P42's are here: P42 Confirmed List

As for whether the light vs dark was caused by truly different colors of blue, or was caused by how much ink was applied, I have no clue by looking at them. One way to objectively determine by scientific methods might be by analyzing the wavelength. I'm not really knowledgeable about this, but with your electronic background you might be. I'm thinking every color reflects at its own unique wavelength in the visible spectrum and absorbs all others when exposed to a white light. So, if the colors are truly different blues, they should reflect different wavelengths. But if the colors are the same blue but differ in how much ink was applied, then I'd think they should reflect the same wavelength but at different amplitude (intensity). Just a thought.

Best Regards,
Craig

[tedzan]

Craig

Thanks for your response here. Perhaps, I should have used another word rather than "simultaneously", as I now see that it can be confusing.

The front/back combo coincidence, such as is evident in the AMERICAN BEAUTY 460 and UZIT cards (350/460 series), is not applicable to my
contention here with respect to the two shades of blue backs.

Your suggestion as to the use of wavelength recognition is quite interesting. However, I have been retired for several years now; and, live far
away from my old workplace....therefore, I don't have convenient access to such instrumentation.

Anyway, under high magnification of the P460/42 and UZIT backs, I have observed certain characteristic similarities in their inks. This is most
evident in the porous appearance of the light blue backs on both these 2 brands. This effect dismisses any "fading" factor, as some have said.

Furthermore, considering that these 2 backs were printed approximately the same time in the early months (Jan. to March) of 1911, suggests
to me that it is quite possible that the same barrel of (inferior) blue ink was applied to print these lighter blue backs.


Best regards,

TED Z

[steve B]

The ink wouldn't necessarily have to be inferior.

Inks were and likely still are mixed by hand for many colors. (They definetly were into the 1980's, but there may be more premixed colors available now)

It could be as simple as a different operator reading the ink recepie differently.

There are a couple other ways the light ink could happen.

The presses have some control of the ink volume, a different pressman may have run a bit less ink.

If they were low on blue they may have added a small ammount of white or a different blue base to the mix, not enough to change the color in a major way, but enough to stretch the last bit of some remaining stock.

Steve B

[tedzan]

Steve

Your points are good ones; and, any one of them may explain the difference in the light blue vs dark blue phenomena of the P460/42 and UZIT backs.

In any event, I still feel strongly that both these T-brand backs were printed during the same ink runs. Press runs with the dark (normal) blue ink and
separate press runs with the (whatever) lighter blue ink.


Thanks Steve for your post here.

TED Z

[Rob D.]

Thanks Tim for your posts here.

ROB D

[tedzan]

rob d

Your recurring snide remarks in my threads have worn out. Why don't you try to contribute some meaningful
inputs to the subject matter. Rather than your subtle mean-spirited comments.

GROW UP.....WILL YOU !

You act as if you are still stuck in your teenage years.