T5 Pinkerton On A Paper Mount? AUT?

[Leon]

PSA labeled this AUT. Did they just create a new variation or did I miss something?

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1911-T5-Pin...892:rk:82:pf:0
.

[petecld]

Originally Posted by Leon

PSA labeled this AUT. Did they just create a new variation or did I miss something?

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1911-T5-Pin...892:rk:82:pf:0
.

You might have. The SCD says T5s can be found with paper mounts.

SHAMELESS PLUG: Heritage took in a small collection from outside the hobby that were just found. A few are on card mounts, a couple paper mounts and a pair of photos. Some are available now, others in upcoming auctions.

[Leon]

Very interesting.... I haVe never seen one before now. It doesn't look like they would sit on a mantelpiece the way a true T5 cabinet card would. Why would they make them that way?

Originally Posted by petecld

You might have. The SCD says T5s can be found with paper mounts.

SHAMELESS PLUG: Heritage took in a small collection from outside the hobby that were just found. A few are on card mounts, a couple paper mounts and a pair of photos. Some are available now, others in upcoming auctions.

[bigfish]

Horseshit. PSA screwed up unless you can mount a photo to anything and send it to psa?

[Baseball Rarities]

Not sure if they were originally issued with paper mounts, but I have seen them pop up before. I think that Clean Sweep had a group before and here are a few that REA had:

https://www.robertedwardauctions.com...et-collection/

https://www.robertedwardauctions.com...02-addie-joss/

[itslarry]

Originally Posted by bigfish

Horseshit. PSA screwed up unless you can mount a photo to anything and send it to psa?

Is this on psa?

[ullmandds]

not sure if these were issued this way or not...but PSA graded it A...which the T5 appears to be...and they say paper mount...which it is...so I don't see the problem????

[Leon]

+1.. I call total BS too.
My guess is the photos came off of real cardboard mounts, or are W530s, and someone stuck them on paper, not Pinkerton. Until I see proof of an ad or something as to why they did it I just don't believe it. Maybe I am wrong but don't think so.

Personally, I think PSA just made this crap up or took it as a Paul Bunyan story from the web and made it true.
This W530 has a blank back. Check out the flip and tell me what that means?
I am going to paste it on styrofoam and send it to them as a styrofoam mount T5. Then maybe we can stick one on some bubble wrap and have that kind of mount. That would be cool. They look kind of amateurish to me.

That all said the one on ebay doesn't look like a real photo so I truly hope my thoughts aren't correct. Anyone seen Dan Desmond lately or know if these came from him?

Originally Posted by bigfish

Horseshit. PSA screwed up unless you can mount a photo to anything and send it to psa?

[glynparson]

T5 most definitely came on both paper and cardboard mounts. Some people need to go learn a few things before calling something bull shot. They have been known to have paper mounts for decades. Shocked Leon didn’t know this. Plenty of screw ups by tpg but obviously some of those that scream about tpgs don’t know as much as they act like they do ( not directed at Leon) I have been buying Pinkerton for a long time and have owned over 50 different in my life including several paper mounts that came from out of hobby collections. PSA and sgc both grade paper mounts and I believe bvg does as well

[Leon]

Why did they come on paper mounts? I had never even seen one until these which is fine as I definitely haven't seen everything. But it doesn't make sense. And what is your thought on the W530 flip i posted?

Originally Posted by glynparson

T5 most definitely came on both paper and cardboard mounts. Some people need to go learn a few things before calling something bull shot. They have been known to have paper mounts for decades. Shocked Leon didn’t know this. Plenty of screw ups by tpg but obviously some of those that scream about tpgs don’t know as much as they act like they do ( not directed at Leon) I have been buying Pinkerton for a long time and have owned over 50 different in my life including several paper mounts that came from out of hobby collections. PSA and sgc both grade paper mounts and I believe bvg does as well

[glynparson]

I believe they ran out of the nice mounts from what I have been told and some of the last issues came on paper. They are just like the nice mounts in that they come in several colors. It really is an odd set with tons of idiosyncrasies (sp?). I will look at your other post to se what I think about it.

[Leon]

Personally I think that story comes from the REA write up from 8 yrs ago .... What about it not being a real photo?

Originally Posted by glynparson

I believe they ran out of the nice mounts from what I have been told and some of the last issues came on paper. They are just like the nice mounts in that they come in several colors. It really is an odd set with tons of idiosyncrasies (sp?). I will look at your other post to se what I think about it.

[bigfish]

Originally Posted by glynparson

T5 most definitely came on both paper and cardboard mounts. Some people need to go learn a few things before calling something bull shot. They have been known to have paper mounts for decades. Shocked Leon didn’t know this. Plenty of screw ups by tpg but obviously some of those that scream about tpgs don’t know as much as they act like they do ( not directed at Leon) I have been buying Pinkerton for a long time and have owned over 50 different in my life including several paper mounts that came from out of hobby collections. PSA and sgc both grade paper mounts and I believe bvg does as well

Hi Glynn, I stand by my post. I don’t think either of us were there when they made these and having them pasted onto several different shades of paper is odd to me. If you have research you could provide us that would be great.

I certainly could be wrong. Just my guy opinion. Not en expert in T5s.

I also don’t think there is any upside to put these in holders. Someone could mistake these for the real deal and overpay which would be unfortunate and possibly the intended end game. There are some unscrupulous people in this hobby.

Warm regards,

T0by

[Jobu]

So, T5s are real photos but W530s aren't?

[jeffmohler]

I have owned T5s on paper mounts (almost like construction paper) and on the thicker stock mounts. I am not sure that we can definitely state that the paper mounts were issued by the Pinkerton Company, but with the number in the hobby, I think that they were cheaper mounts made at the end of the production run.

W530s are not real photos. Leon's Fred Clarke is a PSA labeling error. I have just about a complete set of the w530s and a number of dupes. I have been thinking of doing some kind of article on the interesting issues involved in this set.

Not to confuse the issue, but there is a Pinkerton subset that consists of Real Photo Postcards. So far only A's have been definitely identified, but I can't say with authority that there are not others. This subset is quite scarce.

[Leon]

Thanks for chiming in Jeff. I think it is plausible the thin paper mount T5s are legitimate and just as plausible they aren't. Until I see evidence they were produced by Pinkerton, or other ironclad evidence, I am not in that camp. Just my opinion on that.
However, the one posted in the link in the first post looks to be a photo engraved card, such as a skinned W530, and not a real photo?
One of the most experienced people I know in the hobby, who has no doubt looked at more vintage cards than almost anyone on this board. saw the linked auction and said "yuck" from the online picture. The Pinkerton RPPCs are some of my favorite cards...all of these are the same size in person.

Originally Posted by jeffmohler

I have owned T5s on paper mounts (almost like construction paper) and on the thicker stock mounts. I am not sure that we can definitely state that the paper mounts were issued by the Pinkerton Company, but with the number in the hobby, I think that they were cheaper mounts made at the end of the production run.

W530s are not real photos. Leon's Fred Clarke is a PSA labeling error. I have just about a complete set of the w530s and a number of dupes. I have been thinking of doing some kind of article on the interesting issues involved in this set.

Not to confuse the issue, but there is a Pinkerton subset that consists of Real Photo Postcards. So far only A's have been definitely identified, but I can't say with authority that there are not others. This subset is quite scarce.

[Vintagecatcher]

Here's a link to a previous T5 Pinkerton discussion.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...t=T5+Pinkerton

In addition, in 1986 Lew Lipset wrote on page 26 of his Volume 3 - 20th Century Tobacco Cards---1909-1932...

"T5 Pinkertons can vary in size, both in the size of the mount, the type of the mount and the size of the picture. Most desired and most aesthetically appealing is a 3 3/8" x 5 1/2" photograph without a white border adhered to a 4 3/4" x 7 3/4" thick mount which is embossed around the picture area. T5 photographs are often found off the mounts and can be found on less substantial backings which approach construction paper in nature. These are also believed to be "original" mounts and can only lead one to believe that the Pinkerton Company didn't care to control the quality of their product. Both the heavy cardboard and "construction paper" backings could vary with respect to color."

Patrick

[midmo]

Here are both mounts of Jake Daubert.

[Vintagecatcher]

Here is my T5 Chief Meyers Cabinet.

Patrick

[Leon]

These very well might have been end stock at Pinkerton and they ran out of cabinet cards. They also could have been mounted by an infinite number of people with an infinite number of reasons. I can't imagine getting sent that as a a Cabinet Card Premium in the mail but ok....However, has anyone cared to notice the photo pasted onto paper in the link in the first post doesn't look to be a photographic card?

[Vintagecatcher]

Hi Leon,

I agree that the Archer is not a true photo which it should be if it is an original T5 cabinet.

Patrick

[drcy]

I think the paper backed ones will always be a bit of a mystery, but, for various reasons (including the mystery), the ones with the real cabinet mounts should be more valuable.

[Leon]

Personally I think it is a newly created and fraudulent card based on the photo. I can't imagine a TPG missing that. And so far, from what I have read, there is 0 factual evidence of these T5 photographic cards on paper mounts, coming from the factory that way. They might have and might have not. But the one in the link is not like any of these other creations.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1911-T5-Pin...892:rk:82:pf:0

Originally Posted by Vintagecatcher

Hi Leon,

I agree that the Archer is not a true photo which it should be if it is an original T5 cabinet.

Patrick

[midmo]

I obviously have no idea of their origin, but the different mounts were at least acknowledged in the May 1976 issue of The Trader Speaks...

[ricktmd]

I also collected Pinkerton Cabinets since the mid 90's. I sold my last one in Goodwin's most recent auction (an SGC 70 Collins) . I have seen all kinds of Pinkertons but only count the actual photos or photos on mounts as described in the Standard Catalogue (which I believe to be the best source) as actual T5's. The postcards are an entirely different issue or issues . Information from REA or any auction house would be less credible than the Standard Catalogue in my opinion. Often when large groups of Pinkertons come to auction I have seen a variety of mounts. I suppose it is possible that people decided to mount the photos to non substantial paper like mounts. If the goal was to mount it to increase value, someone with that intent could find a cardboard mount and make it look closer to "real" then the paper or thinner and odd looking cardboard mounts that have popped up over the years. One thing that I look for is whether the photo is just glued at the very top of the image only which I understand is how they were distributed. If the entire photo is glued down SGC told me they would not give it a numerical grade just an A. This makes it hard to find them with numerical grades as it would seem likely that someone might add glue as the way it was mounted only at the very top is flimsy and could come loose. As far as PSA I think they graded it authentic based on their opinion of the photo being a true T5 photo which it appears to be. PSA has always been hesitant to grade Pinkertons and turned me down when I tried to submit some several years back

One thing is for sure it is a complicated set and hard to understand what is actually factory distributed and not altered or remounted. As a footnote which sheds further light on the value and desirability of Pinkertons, I walked around the 2018 National with the Collins T5 and several auction houses were interested. I showed it to several dealers including some board members. Most said it was worth 1,200.00 to 1,500.00. I thought 4,000.00 which is what Goodwin thought so I consigned to him. With the hammer it went for nearly 5k.
https://goodwinandco.com/LotDetail.a...entoryid=38184

[Baseball Rarities]

Here is an image of the T5 Pinkerton that is in question.

[ricktmd]

The photo looks real in the scan but I cant say for sure without seeing it. While PSA may not be perfect I suspect they can tell if the photo is actually early 20th century

[Leon]

Not one very experienced T5 and pre war person, who have spoken with, thinks it looks right. The picture on it could be period it's just not a T5 cabinet real photo. That is the problem. It is a different type of photo than every other one pictured, except for the incorrectly labeled W530 above, which this one actually looks a little like.

Originally Posted by ricktmd

The photo looks real in the scan but I cant say for sure without seeing it. While PSA may not be perfect I suspect they can tell if the photo is actually early 20th century

[bigfish]

Originally Posted by midmo

I obviously have no idea of their origin, but the different mounts were at least acknowledged in the May 1976 issue of The Trader Speaks...

Originally Posted by Leon

Not one very experienced T5 and pre war person, who have spoken with, thinks it looks right. The picture on it could be period it's just not a T5 cabinet real photo. That is the problem. It is a different type of photo than every other one pictured, except for the incorrectly labeled W530 above, which this one actually looks a little like.

+1 for the one on eBay and all that are glued to paper mounts. The trader speaks article mentions that paper was used to meet the heavy demands. Huh? These aren’t all that common so that doesn’t make a lot of sense.

[ricktmd]

You may be right about the photo as I cant tell for sure from the scan. It would seem odd that PSA would not be able to identify a T5 photograph. It is possible though.

After collecting and searching for T5's over a long period of time I have seen many thinner and odd looking mounts at shows, in auctions or ebay . The Standard Catalogue's description seemed to explain it. I wouldn't know if the odd mounts were distributed the same way or at the same time as the heavy cardboard ones which are more valuable.

[Leon]

If you can't tell that isn't a real photo from the large scan Kevin posted then there is no use in this conversation. Helen Keller could see it isn't a real photo. And as previously said, the paper mounts could be legit but, from everything I have read, that is a pretty big leap of faith and not a fact.

Originally Posted by ricktmd

You may be right about the photo as I cant tell for sure from the scan. It would seem odd that PSA would not be able to identify a T5 photograph. It is possible though.

After collecting and searching for T5's over a long period of time I have seen many thinner and odd looking mounts at shows, in auctions or ebay . The Standard Catalogue's description seemed to explain it. I wouldn't know if the odd mounts were distributed the same way or at the same time as the heavy cardboard ones which are more valuable.

[ricktmd]

I accept your point of view that the Standard Catalogue and Lipset used anecdotal evidence regarding the mounts, and that by looking at a scan on the internet you are can determine authenticity better then PSA . I also agree there is no reason to continue this conversation