Why I think Cobb wasn't printed with a Brown Hindu back

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Would the T206's and other cards have been printed on these Steve?



Here's the patent information on the multi color press that Hett invented and sold to American Lithograph.
https://patentimages.storage.googlea...e/US637603.pdf

I believe that some were. Most of the missing color cards are missing two colors. And a lot of cards show pairs of colors in registration with each other but not other colors.

The cards with the nail mark on the other hand are almost for sure a product of a flatbed press, as the nail would have been in the impression cylinder, and there's no reason a press with metal rollers would have a nail.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by steve B

I believe that some were. Most of the missing color cards are missing two colors. And a lot of cards show pairs of colors in registration with each other but not other colors.

The cards with the nail mark on the other hand are almost for sure a product of a flatbed press, as the nail would have been in the impression cylinder, and there's no reason a press with metal rollers would have a nail.

I thought about that card when I asked the question and it's one of the many reasons I think different presses and or facility's might have been used on some sheets.
[IMG][/IMG]

What do you think about the possibility of some sheets having the fronts printed on this type of press and the backs printed on a different type press?

[steve B]

It's possible.

Personally I'm surprised they didn't print the backs first. There's always some damage and wasted sheets and avoiding wasting sheets you already put at least 8 colors on seems a bit crazy.

The only reason I can think of it using the same fronts, "stocking" a lot of them and printing backs as needed for different brands.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by steve B

It's possible.

Personally I'm surprised they didn't print the backs first. There's always some damage and wasted sheets and avoiding wasting sheets you already put at least 8 colors on seems a bit crazy.

The only reason I can think of it using the same fronts, "stocking" a lot of them and printing backs as needed for different brands.

I think there's to much evidence that they didn't do this.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Pat R

[/B]

I think there's to much evidence that they didn't do this.

Well, that's the rabbit hole of T206....

To me there's some evidence they did it with some brands, especially in the 350's where there are shared groupings of prints/no prints.
The big brands, Piedmont, SC and maybe a couple others were probably produced almost continually, while others like the SL groups were probably on-offs at first.

That's why a ton more study of the tiny details is needed.
For example, on a simple one.
The Hindu and original OM Sl players were probably printed from a common set of fronts. If we examine a lot of fronts closely, we will either see no difference making a point for a single front press run getting two different backs. If we can tell the difference, that would almost certainly prove each brand got its own front plates.

There being probable different presses and locations makes it all the more complicated. But the place to start is with the more finite groups.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by steve B

Well, that's the rabbit hole of T206....

To me there's some evidence they did it with some brands, especially in the 350's where there are shared groupings of prints/no prints.
The big brands, Piedmont, SC and maybe a couple others were probably produced almost continually, while others like the SL groups were probably on-offs at first.

That's why a ton more study of the tiny details is needed.
For example, on a simple one.
The Hindu and original OM Sl players were probably printed from a common set of fronts. If we examine a lot of fronts closely, we will either see no difference making a point for a single front press run getting two different backs. If we can tell the difference, that would almost certainly prove each brand got its own front plates.

There being probable different presses and locations makes it all the more complicated. But the place to start is with the more finite groups.

But I think there's to much jumping around with the backs when you start comparing them. there are some subjects when compared to another was printed with all the same backs except 1 or 2 if they were done with pre-printed fronts what happened to the one or two backs one of the subjects wasn't printed on?

On the other hand if you're saying that they printed up a bunch of fronts one day and then used those sheets to print 3 or 4 different backs the next day and then the process started again a couple of days later I do agree with that.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Pat R

On the other hand if you're saying that they printed up a bunch of fronts one day and then used those sheets to print 3 or 4 different backs the next day and then the process started again a couple of days later I do agree with that.

I'm not sure how long the time would have been, but yes. Smaller orders like Drum would have been done on whatever current front sheet was being run.

The cutoff for a brand getting their own plates or ordering too small of a quantity is probably right around Polar Bear who had their own fronts for at least one sheet.

I believe some of the more difficult groups and at least one of the very rare combinations are from leftover fronts being used up.