T206 experiment part 1

[steve B]

When we were discussing wet sheet transfers I offered to do some experimenting with a beater I had. Here's the results.

The card is a JJ Clarke SC 350.

I placed it inside a folded piece of printer paper and two boards, then clamped it in the vise on my workbench. The vise is old, but clamped down tight it probably generated a few hundred pounds of force/square inch. A bonus is that the basement is damp, so it was a decent simulation of poor storage with weight on a stack of cards. The printer paper is made to absorb ink, so any tendency to transfer should work a bit better.

I left it there about 2 1/2 weeks, a bit longer than I'd planned.


From outside the folded printer paper it looks promising, the paper picked up the shape ofthe card as well as the grain of the wood. Plus it's a bit stuck to the card. Time to open the paper and see what's happened.


Nothing at all. The card was stuck to the paper on both sides, and both the paper and card got embosed with the grain of the wood. But no transfer on either side.

Other than the obvious there are a few possibilities that would have made it fail to transfer.
It's possible that the dirt on the card surface absorbed any undried ink
It's also possible that some other drying happened, maybe heat?
It's possible that some reds won't transfer from pressure and some will.

Overall I think it's safe to say that offset transfers from SC 350 series cards are not due to pressure and humidity long after production.

Obviously I can't test shortly after production.

A further test with a cleaner card would probably rule out the dirt and heat drying theories, at this time I don't have one that I feel would be worth risking as it's likely the red just won't transfer under those conditions.


Next up for poor old JJ --- Alcohol and pressure.

Steve B

[cliftons8]

Do you think getting drunk will change the result?

[Kenny Cole]

How is one to know unless he engages in the experiment? Sometimes you have to take a hit in order to advance the cause of science.

[steve B]

No, no hits. Just alcohol.

[bbcard1]

I usually go with alcohol after pressure....

[T206Collector]

I would agree that water doesn't make T206s bleed. But I've seen some pretty crazy blurring of T206 fronts and backs caused by exposure to chemicals of some kind.

[steve B]

I wasn't expecting anything from dampness, it was just a bonus element.

The main point was the pressure. I have seen black inks transfer from pressure over 100 years after printing. Black T206 backs seem to transfer more readily than others, with red being the second most common. So since I wanted to see if it would transfer after 100 years I figured the beater nobody wanted to trade for was a good experiment. I'll probably look for a beater tolstoi or old mill to try, and pick up a couple metal plates so the cards are less wrecked by the experiment. Other good candidates would be cards with back damage and/or creases from being removed from a scrapbook. Using those would eliminate the dirt from the equation.

While it was a serious experiment I'm happy we could have some fun with my poor phrasing of the alcohol element of the next step.

Steve B

[T206Collector]

A few things to consider:

1) I've soaked dozens of T206 cards in water and pressed them for days. Never had a wet sheet transfer.

2) I've purchased T206s that were actually permanently wet with some kind of disgusting chemical from a century on the floor of a basement. Those cards literally had blurred factory info on the back.

Any future experiment should be done with isoproyl, or peroxide, or bleach, etc.

Ever use fingernail polish remover on the front of a Topps card from the 1980s? It takes all the paint off the front, leaving behind an entirely blank front. I've never had the guts to do that to a T206 card.

Here's the before....



Here's the Chris Ford RARE T206 VARIATION!!

[teetwoohsix]

Thanks for running this experiment Steve. I look forward to the next one too.

Sincerely, Clayton

[steve B]

I've removed the ink from modern cards with solvents I had in my industrial job. 111 trichloroethane would remove darn near anything, but it's been banned for a decade and it should be. Mineral spirits will do some interesting things too.
I never rubbed hard enough to remove the white layer.


The next step is with isopropyl, or similar alchohol. (Possibly after a beer or two)

Most inks back then were pigments in an oil of some sort. If it's shellac alcohol will disolve it, if it's something like linseed oil then mineral spirits will do it. I expect one of those +pressure to produce a blurry transfer. Generating a clean transfer should be harder. I'm thinking that just a bit of solvent might do it.
So the order of the next few tries
a little alcohol + a little pressure
A little alcohol +a lot of pressure
Lots of alcohol + a little pressure
Lots of alcohol +a lot of pressure

followed by a similar series with Mineral spirits.

By the time it's done, I figure the card will be a total write off. First time I've intentionally wrecked something old. (Now if I had one of those portable spectrometers they've been showing on the antiques shows on TV I could find out all sorts of things. Unfortunately 30K is outside the budget for toys.


Steve B

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by steve B

First time I've intentionally wrecked something old.

It's for the good of the hobby!

[Jantz]

"Overall I think it's safe to say that offset transfers from SC 350 cards are not due to pressure and humidity long after production"

From my experience, I believe the same can be said about SC 350-460 cards also.

Interesting experiment Steve. Please keep us posted with any other results.


Jantz

[fkm_bky]

Thanks Steve! Great information. Looking forward to hearing updates as your testing progresses.

Regards,

Bill