Another T206 Old Mill Blue Back??
 

Hi everyone, I just posted a video on YouTube showing what I believe to be a second Old Mill with blue ink on the back. What do you guys think? I've never seen the Walsh in person but I know some of you have. https://youtu.be/p5qUHZQLeFw

It's cool looking. Nice video.

Intriguing video, Ron. Congrats on the find if this all turns out to be legit. Obviously showing it off to SGC would be the next step if you plan to send it to auction. Good luck at the National.

You showed a still image of the text "Powell" on the front, taken by the USB microscope. If possible, can you post a similar microscope image of the brown ink caption from a known real T206 from your collection? I'm curious to see if there is any difference in that area. Thank you.

I watched the whole video but did not see it. Posting a side by side of the Powell caption and another card would be perfect, if you are able.

Am I the only one that think both the Walsh and Powell look fake? I'm wrong a lot and hope you score big.

Mac

I held the Walsh in my hand along with Wonka at the 2012 Nat'l in Baltimore. We both agreed it looked real, and he in fact made a robust offer to the owner, who ultimately declined.

Cool video, looks to be blue ink, like the Walsh.

Nicely done. I normally watch Jorma Kaukonen or Roky Erickson vids on youtube, so this was something different. Like a walk-around of someone's low-mileage 1982 320i.

It looks blue and real to me, remember Mars Black is a very dark blue. I just think it's ink that is a bit lighter. I'd rather hear about your T206 Polar Bear backs and which ones you need and such.

That looks pretty good to me -- great find it if checks out!

Here are some additional photos taken with the USB Microscope. Pictures are for name color comparison. Pictures include:

Jack Powell - Sovereign 150 - PSA 2
Jack Powell - EPDG - PSA 1
Jack Powell - Old Mill Blue Back (Print Group 1) - Ungraded, in card saver
Red Kleinow - With Bat - Old Mill (Print Group 1) - Ungraded, in card saver
Wid Conroy - Fielding - Old Mill (Print Group 1) - Ungraded, in card saver

Here is my shared Google Drive link.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...HT?usp=sharing

Blue OLD MILL
 

Hi Ron

I do not find this unusual. I examined the Walsh card closely under magnification and it looked real to me.

This Powell is just another case of a printer's mistake. The printer was running PIEDMONT back print runs.
Followed by OLD MILL back run, in which he forgot to change the ink to Black. Realized his mistake upon
checking the first printed sheet and stopped the press. And hung up the Blue OLD MILL T206 sheet to dry.

Both Powell and Walsh are from the 150 series. In the future, it wouldn't surprise me if a few more T206's
surface from this series with Blue OLD MILL backs.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Sounds reasonable to me.

and it took only 100+ years for the first one to surface. in the most popular baseball card set of alltime

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

I've said it before but I am surprised no one finds it a little too coincidental that the blue Old Mill just happens to be printed by mistake 100 years ago in the same color as reprints made in the 80s. I even found examples of blue Old Mill reprints that were printed with and without the word "reprint" on them. As the old saying goes, if it looks like a duck....

lots of people find it odd. and those people actually held the card in their hands too

I know that's what I'm surprised about. It could be real and if it is I would say that's a hell of coincidence. Maybe there are red Old Mills out there too. The reprinted sets were made with that back as well, but it could also be possible someone didn't change the ink out after printing Sweet Cap cards in 1909.

The difference between the black back and this shade of blue is so subtle that it doesn't surprise me at all that these cards weren't discovered 50 years ago. Plus, lots of people have been looking since the Walsh was discovered and Powell will only be the second one found (if it checks out). So, that makes this doubly not surprising because there are so few of them. These are not neon blue backs with 10,000 examples floating around, they are nearly black backs with two floating around - not hard to believe that they were only recently discovered. Also, don't discount the role of the internet and thousands of scans for comparison at your finger tips -- this was not possible until recently.

Note, I did say "if it checks out". The reprint card that people mention is the Cy Young here:

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=156986

That reprint has a pretty good back. There are also lots of reprints with cruddy blue backs that would never be confused with this one. The question is whether someone can take a blank backed T206 (one that is factory cut too --- something that I am not aware of existing), go through the whole lithography process to create a perfect match for an Old Mill back, and then print it on a few cards.

There may be a way to mimic lithographic printing that would allow for the printing without needing to create a stone, etc. (I will leave that to the printing experts - I have no idea). It may also be possible to remove the ink from the back of a factory cut card and then print over that, I am not wise in the dark arts of card alterations.

Ted -- to me the blue looks darker than Piedmont blue. Ron - can you do a side by side with a Polar Bear too?

How about a high resolution full size scan of the front? Also, as we saw with the great t213 scandal, backs alone can fool the most advanced collector. So we had the double bar overprints (?) that were fake, the t213 coupon backs that were fake, the "missing reds" which are somewhere between 90-100 percent due to adhesives and/or sun, the painted ghost images....and now blue old Mills. I don't buy it, but I hope I'm wrong.

Mac

Lack of bids in the original auction seemed pretty telling to me. Even with all the hype and expert opinions re: authenticity only one bid was placed.

I know the Old Mill Blue Back is a controversial topic and that was the reason for making the video. I didn't know what to think when the Walsh surfaced. What I can tell you is I had the card for two years before I noticed the blue ink. Under normal lighting, its different looking but very very little difference than the black ink. Just seems to have a slight tint of blue to the black but under LED lighting, there's no doubt of a color difference. Maybe they were never discovered early on because there was no LED lighting. As far as someone making the card, just to sell it for $65 as a regular Old Mill back in 2015, seems like a waste of time. But I agree, if it looks like a duck... I've seen a lot of ducks in my travels of T206 card collecting, but this one just doesn't look like all the other ducks out there. Time will tell.

Ron, Bryan makes a good point - the blue in the old mill seems much darker/richer than Piedmont blue. Anyway you can post a pic of the blue old mill next to the back of a piedmont issued in the same series/timeframe?

Did anyone asking for high res scans even watch the video?


A fake back is a bit tougher than a fake overprint, but it's doable. But I saw enough details in the microscope images to feel confident that it's not fake.


Fronts are much harder, but there's nothing in the detailed look at the caption that's on the intro to think there's any problem there at all.

Blue OLD MILL
 

I'll reprise what I said earlier. And, add to it.

Incidentally,
Here's a Lundgren with a Blue OLD MILL back, an obvious reprint (I acquired this one back in the 1990's).

http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...omlundgren.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...eyOLDMILLb.jpg
………………………….. http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...grenTenney.jpg


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

totally possible theory

Who owned the first one found and where did this card come from?

Was the first one found in 2015?

I hate to beat a dead horse BUT I think it's worth pointing out there is a shared characteristic between that Lundgren, the Walsh, and this Powell card: all three have that large space at the bottom of the card, and from what I can tell, the same space.

One is a known reprint, the other two are believe to be authentic. Again, could all be a total coincidence. That's a lot of coincidences though.

You make this sound like fact while I believe there is still a lot more info needed to conclude your opinion is correct. In a world where an infinite series of events could occur you nailed it down perfectly not withstanding down to what he had for lunch that day?

That was a cool presentation and a really fascinating find. Who knows, maybe this will turn out to be the new Brown Lenox of T206 rare backs. I am excited to see if all of this materializes into something. I would slab it!

Good luck!

Blue OLD MILL
 

I worked part-time in a print shop back in my High School days. I do know what goes on in the course of producing printed artwork.


Did you ever work in a print shop....Mr. Torres ! ?


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Ah, the photo. Compare that space on the bottom of the back on the Walsh to the same space on the Lundgren and the same space on the Powell.

In fact I did. That doesn't mean that because I have a theory, that is what happened. I am intelligent enough to know the difference. Are you Mr Zandikas !

Wow....
 

I have been on the fence with this one from the first one.......I , for the first time , not really sure???

I have always sided with "NO" .....but, it is plausible....

:confused:

I'm 60 % no and 40 % yes

Great discussion so far, along with humor lol. I think I had chicken wings that day. I'll try to get some large scans of the card front and back along with comparing the blue ink with Piedmont and Polar Bear ink later tonight. As I hold the card in my hand, what do I personally think? Well, if it had black ink on the back, I wouldn't question it as a 100% real T206. Now factor in the blue. Still looks real.

That being said, I believe Teds explanation is either what happened, or very close to it. Personally I've leaned more towards a poor cleanup of a mistake causing dark blue from contamination.

The time to remove the piedmont stone, install the Old mill stone, then setup and adjust would probably lead to having a mess with dried ink messing things up.


(I also worked in a print shop, one that cross trained us so I eventually got to do each step in the process for a short time. Not much had really changed between 1910 and the 1980-81)

I do not disagree it is possible. It might even be probable but it is all just conjecture. My only point was that it was written as fact and it shouldn’t be. Next thing you know you have an auction house using it in a description so on and so forth.

He then proceeded to bold font exclamation point some holiday inn type whack ass credentials in a pit bull fight type manner about how he is more right than me like a child. It is not the first time I have seen this behavior. Hey. If he wants to measure weiners with other people to make people think he has won an argument that is fine. When it happens to me I will not tolerate it and I will point it out for what it is.

So here are the results!!! 100% no question the ink is the same as Polar Bear ink. Even the Polar Bear back, under a microscope, has small black areas within the blue, just like the Old Mill Blue I have. Here are some comparison pictures.
http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/...psvfh4qc9h.jpg
http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/...pshkra0nbo.jpg
http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/...pst4kwjqzs.jpg
Here are two USB Microscope pictures of the blue Old Mill and a black Old Mill.
http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/...psryaw1vsx.jpg
http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/...psmewoifmk.jpg
The next picture is of the Old Mill Blue and a Piedmont 350.
http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/...psf6f7ls56.jpg
And finally, 2 pictures with the Old Mill Blue and a Polar Bear back.
http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/...pswupu82cc.jpg
http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/...psvftt5pak.jpg
And here are some last minute scans of the front and back in 1200dpi that were requested by Chris (atx840). For some reason they were resized maybe by the webpage. Here are the front and back links.
http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/...pst3rtbtn1.jpg
http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/...psgqutvylr.jpg
http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/...pst3rtbtn1.jpg
http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/...psgqutvylr.jpg
The proof is in the pudding... and I don't have much more pudding than the above. But will still take scanning requests and comparison photos.

I will say right now I do not believe it is real but I can be convinced by something more than guessing about how it could have happened then concluding it is real for that reason. I would like to see a full front scan before. I mean, I think that is warranted before carving it in stone as real right?

You will have to email people the larger high resolution scans. They are too big to upload here. You can post a small section of a high resolution scan though.

The links in my post for the 1200dpi scans should work. I know it won't show the pictures in 1200dpi here. I can also email front/back scans to anyone requesting them. Just PM your email to me.

If that Powell is fake I'm going to dig a hole and pull the dirt in after me because I clearly can't tell the difference between real and counterfeit anymore.

EDIT: This was based on the hi-res scans

I agree... These scans make this card look like the real deal and maybe the Walsh questionable. Wish I knew what comparisons were done with the Walsh when graded. They must have figured the blue ink came from somewhere. You would have thought that after it was graded by SGC, it should have been known as an Old Mill back printed in Polar Bear ink. That's if it's the same as my Powell.

Ron, just curious if you plan to hold onto it or sell it or not sure? If you'd rather not share that here, that's obviously fine, too.

It's interesting because being more of a collector than a dealer, you may be torn between having a nice payday or keeping a super rare T206 back oddity in your collection. Either way, it's a good problem to have.

Also, I'm not sure I could wait until the National in July. It would be hard to resist sending it off to SGC to get their opinion on it.

Thanks for the additional scans.

Not really sure what I will do with it, if it's graded real. Just being a small part of T206 history is actually enough for me. I'd probably enjoy a nice T206 Plank a bit more. As far as oddities, I have plenty to keep me busy. Owning a majority of the Sweet Caporal No Prints.

Only thing is, I'm more of a PSA guy but question if PSA would even get involved in grading it. If selling it, it would probably be easier to grade with SGC.

sure looks legit to me...congrats Ronnie!

Thanks Pete!!

When we first discussed the Walsh here in 2012, we (the ones who held it) had said it looked like Polar Bear blue (as noted, it was darker than Piedmont). Appears the same with this Powell.

This hi-res overlapped photos are incredibly detailed. Very cool analysis and presentation.

Here's one more. This is on the flatbed scanner at 1200dpi.
http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/...ps6pivxjv2.jpg

One more on the flatbed scanner. It's odd that it looks closer to the Piedmont on the Flatbed and more like the Polar Bear on the microscope.
http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/...psrqh1wzz3.jpg

That last pic is great Ron. It sure does look polar bear(ish) and pretty much proves it’s not piedmont blue.

Now I am no expert (not even close) at when certain backs are issued, so this is a genuine question - were polar bears printed with the same subjects as old mill? Does it matter? I guess my question is, as Ted suggested with Piedmont, is it plausible, based on print groups, that they could have run polar bears and then switched over to old mills without changing ink?

Interesting question. As far as I know, there were no Polar Bear backs printed in Print Group 1 but I don't know where the cut-off date Print Group 1 Old Mills were printed up to and where Polar Bears started.

Blue OLD MILL
 

Ron and Ryan

I considered the POLAR BEAR darker ink (vs the PIEDMONT blue). However, the timeline does not favor the POLAR BEAR ink.

As you know, the Powell & Walsh are 150/350 series subjects which were in OLD MILL print runs circa late 1909 / early 1910.
The first POLAR BEAR print runs were circa Summer 1910.

Great work there, Ron.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Another thought I'll throw out there... Maybe the Blue Old Mill is from a T59 Flags ink batch or even the birds and fish cards. I have a few thousand T59's and a few hundred of the birds and fish. Maybe I need to compare to some of them also.

I am far from a T206 expert, but I've seen some Piedmont back strikes that are a fairly dark blue, similar to this Old Mill in question.

I had a difficult time finding the Piedmont I scanned. Most of my Piedmonts are the Factory 42's with the light blue ink and the handful of Piedmont 350's were of the Elite 11 but I agree, there are Piedmonts out there that are darker than the one I scanned. I'll have to search around to see if I have a Piedmont 150 to compare.

I like Ron's Powell more than the Walsh to be honest. It could just be that his scans are so much nicer than the Walsh images I've seen, but it just looks better. I wish you the best with it no matter what happens.

Agree with doing a side-by-side comparison with a few Piedmont 150 cards. To my eyes, the Piedmont blue ink color differs in the 150 series(darkest), 350 series, and also the 460 series.

There are considerable variations in ink color even in the same series.

There is a light, medium and dark variation in this Polar bear lot.
Attachment 342663


A light and Dark PD350 scanned at the same time on my scanner.

Attachment 342664

Attachment 342665

What about the Young portrait? There are basically two different green backgrounds?

The inks were mixed by hand, even into the 1980's and probably beyond. So there's always some variance. Newer printing relies more on straight CMYK, and it can because the halftone can be much finer.

I can see that.


Ted and I disagree on some T206 stuff, sort of agree on others. I take a really technical approach which isn't always as useful. Ted has the advantage of having handled … Thousands? maybe more than 10,000 having been a collector and dealer for along time. I've gotten used to stuff being stated as absolute. It's not optimal for me, but works better for some. The failing I have is couching stuff I'm quite sure of in less than 100% certain terms.


It is true that we can't always really know just how something happened. But knowing how it usually happened, we can eliminate the very unlikely and focus on the more or most likely.

Great detective work Ron! I saw this video on youtube yesterday and had no idea it was your card. Knowing it's yours and not some random person trying to make a few bucks lends a ton of credibility to it. And it's hard to argue with the scans.

"I've gotten used to stuff being stated as absolute."

unwise

Qualifying this post (again) with fact that I have a mere fraction of the T206 knowledge many others have on this board, I have some thoughts. However, first let my qualify my comments -- I want this card to be real, and if it is, I would love to own it!

Old Mills and Polar Bears had different print groups, which makes an ink-switch error unlikely. Thus, even though the blue in the Powell Old Mill looks "PBish", it is unlikely a case of failing to switch the ink after Polar Bears into Old Mills.

Contrast that with the Brown Old Mill. The Brown OM, I believe, has the same print group as the Brown Hindu -- the southern league. This makes the forgetting-to-switch-the-ink (from Hindu to OM) more (indeed very) plausible in the case of brown old mills. Then take the facts that (i) the brown in the hindu is very close to the brown in brown OM, (ii) all brown OMs are hand-cut, printers scrap, which never made it into cigarette packs - meaning the printer likely realized the mistake immediately cut up the cards, fixed the ink and moved on, and (iii) there are 10-20 known examples of Brown OMs and rarely a duplicate, meaning that likely only 1-2 sheets made it through the printing process. Based on these facts, the theory looks extremely sound that Brown OMs are real and were the product of a printing/ink error between Hindu and Old Mill on Southern Leaguers.

Can we assemble a similar chain here between the blue old mill and some other blue-backed T206? It must be Piedmont, because we seem to have ruled out Polar Bear and it cant be UZIT (and tolstoi and Carolina Brights are black, no?). Were Powell and Walsh in the same print group and is it likely, or at least possible, that they were on the same sheet? Why was the Walsh blue old mill not hand cut, like the Brown Old Mills? What is the story of the Brown Lenox, which also were not hand cut, and we can use them as anecdotal evidence in this case?

Obviously having a TPG look hard at the card to inspect its authenticity is key (and I think SGC is totally the way to go here over PSA). But TPGs make mistakes all the time (PSA more so with T206 than SGC), and so it would be great to come up with a plausible theory behind how blue old mills could even exist in the first place.

We know that a purported T206 Evers Yellow Sky Brown Hindu is fake. We know thus because we know he was printed in the Red Hindu and there are no fronts with both red and brown hindus. So we know for a fact that I really sound-looking, "i held it in my hand and it looked real", Evers Yellow Sky Brown Hindu is a fake, because that card does not come in brown hindu. In the case of the Blue Old Mills, can we put together a plausible case that explains how it is possible that both Walsh and Powell could have a blue old mill back?

Thanks Luke!!

Ryan,

Yes, Powell and Walsh are both 150-350 Series subjects and it's very plausible they were on the same sheet. When I get a chance I'll look at Pat's Plate Scratch research to see if he has either or both players placed on sheets.

Also, the back of the Blue Old Mill Walsh shares multiple little print flaws with other Walsh Old Mills. Some people have said that the Walsh could be re-backed with a blue reprint. That is not the case. I'm not saying I know the Walsh is legit, just that it isn't as simple as a re-back.

Those USB microscope scans are really, really cool.

It's certainly not outside the realm of possibility that the card is authentic. We've seen every manner of freaky print error on the fronts of T206s over the years.

A second blue back certainly makes me feel better about the first one.

-Al

Question about the Kleinow you posted. The back lower right print seems to have a blue tone to it compared to the rest of the back. It could be my eye sight.

Also, I thought I heard that you could not actually make a black that they are all really dark blues to make black. Is this true?

The other question i have is about Old Mill backs that look brown but are just an off black. Is it possible this could be the case with these OMs?

Lee

Powell and Walsh both have plate scratches but they were on separate sheets but I think it's fair to assume that they could have been on the
same Old Mill sheet because the 150/350 subjects were printed with Old Mill backs during the 350 printing and the sheet layouts changed.

I have Walsh on the left corner of sheet 2b and Ames has the same scratch and is on the left corner of 2a.

Attachment 342705

Attachment 342700 Attachment 342701


I have Powell in the left of middle of Sheet 1a and Goode has the same scratch
and is in the left of middle of 1b.

Attachment 342707

Attachment 342702 Attachment 342703

I will say they certianly look good. It is possible and even probable but the coincidences are way too convenient and I am very highly skeptical still.

It is not like this beat up card has to be looked at under a microscope to see it is blue.

This would be a whole new back given they are factory cut cards. Give pause and soak that concept in for a moment. It is not just a little blue. It is really blue.

I know that depending on the angle you look at the picture on some monitors will change the color a bit. Viewing it under the microscope shows no sign of blue. The blue Old Mill does show small black pigment spots everywhere and the same on Polar Bears. If Polar Bears were printed in Print Group 1, it would practically be a open and closed case.

So here are my latest pictures. The first is under the microscope of a Piedmont 150 and the Blue Old Mill. The second is a scan of 5 cards at 1200dpi. From left to right: Blue Old Mill, Piedmont 150, Polar Bear, Piedmont 350, and Old Mill Black. The Piedmont 150 has a few microscopic black ink pigment areas just like the Blue Old Mill. So what do you guys think? Seems to match up with the Piedmont 150 better than the Polar Bear.

http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/...psbpsyv105.jpg


http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/...psxcao53wr.jpg

Blue OLD MILL
 

Ron

Comparing the blue ink with a PIEDMONT 150 back's ink was the smart thing to do. Your analysis is spot on, Ron.

This confirms what I suggested earlier in this game. And, in my opinion it is an authentic T206.

agreed...matches with the p150 the best! incredible photography!

Personally I wouldn't consider it a slam dunk that it's PD150 ink there
are darker PD350's than the one Ronnie posted. In my opinion if it
is a case of using the wrong ink I personally think there is more evidence
that it would have been during the PD350 printing.

The two multi-strike scraps being one of the things to consider they have
150/350 subjects on the backs with EPDG and Brown Old Mill printed
over top of PD350.


http://i.imgur.com/vOj6n19.gif

Attachment 342819

Closer to the reverse. Black is incredibly easy to make. It's generally carbon black or lampblack, both Carbon in different forms. Mix with a carrier or some hardening oil, and you've got black ink.

Blue is marginally tougher. Early blues were often ground Lapis Lazuli in the same carrier. Later ones were a chemical dye. 1910 ish, it's a coin toss as to which one was used.
My chemistry set had one experiment that made a chemical blue that could be changed to black and changed back to blue. It was a long time ago, and I don't recall what it was made of, but it was in a kids chemistry set so it wasn't difficult.

That's true, I meant it mostly in the context of how each person presents something. And just because it's presented as fact doesn't mean I automatically go with it.

You may not but others do. Especially people with no or less knowledge. As time moves on newcomers are less capable of getting the context required to distinguish between the two.

You then are left with historical factoids and stuff people copy and paste around cementing a hypothesis or myth.

That is pretty cool looking. The card back in question is blue, no doubt. I am in the authentic camp.

Blue OLD MILL
 

Whether it was after a PIEDMONT 150 run or a PIEDMONT 350 run where this alleged printer's mistake regarding the OLD MILL occurred, it's
something we will probably never know. However I think Ron has done sufficient analysis of this Powell card which provides us a high degree
of probability that this card is an authentic T206.

Furthermore, I can imagine that Dave (the original owner of the Walsh blue OLD MILL) feels vindicated with this new find. I have known Dave
since the 1980's (we've done many large-lot T206 deals over the years), and I recall all the flak he had to dodge over that Walsh card.

Who knows where (or when) the next blue OLD MILL T206 will surface ?
Only the "Monster" knows ! ? :)


TED Z

T206 Reference
.