T206 Freaks Beware
 

If he can make one with a reprint, imagine how deadly he'd be with the real thing...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1909-11-T206...p2047675.l2557

Looks better than the Walsh...or at least the scan of the Walsh ;-)

I have to say- I had a thought about something like this being possible with the overprints of certain caramel cards (what's stopping someone from getting an Old Put or Toy Town stamp), as well as some of the ghost imagery we've seen on many T206 cards. Is any mechanism in place to ensure stamps (and ghost prints, etc) are genuine? I've seen cards with crazy printing freaks slabbed Authentic in the past- suppose someone buys a raw, REAL card, prints/stamps something less than authentic on it (ie- American Beauty logo, Toy Town, etc), and submits it for slabbing- the card, technically, is Authentic. Will it come back graded? Authentic? Not slabbed at all? Supposing a "fake" stamp on a real card ends up in an Auth slab- how can future buyers know it's not "real?"

I've always wanted an overprint caramel card but I have to say- this sort of thing makes me very nervous.

There have been a few tries at faking the overprints but so far I don't think they have gotten by the TPGs, except for one fake E94 overprint which was quickly revealed (and now resides in my collection as I wanted it off the market). We do know most of the currently known types of overprints have been around since before they had any real value, so they aren't a newly made-up phenomenon. Knowledge is key...And most of these particular examples have 25+ yr provenance ....

http://luckeycards.com/pe94overprintset3.jpg

Yeah, but it's really easy to replicate those stamps. Heck, I did this on my computer with MS Paint in about 4 minutes. Imagine what I could do with better software, or a strong ink stamp!

Both of the fake ones posted look really fake to me. I realize that they were quick attempts and not really intended to fool but even those that try really hard have a hard road ahead. We, as a collecting community, look at these cards really closely, more so even than people with counterfeit money. We scan them, share them and look at them over and over.

If I put a loop up to either one of those posted, once they are printed out, I'm going to see a dot pattern. And if you make a stamp, you will notice that each stamp that you create is slightly different than what you intended, letter spacing slightly off, line separation, etc. So, I don't think it would be as easy as it seems.

Our community also has a vested interest in protecting the integrity of our cards, just as the Treasury Department has an interest in protecting the value of currency. We ought to be very protective.

Hell of a nice job Paul! Now you need to photo copy his signature, so you have a rare overprint signed Cobb T206!

Anything can be done with software, getting them past knowledgeable collectors is the tougher step.

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...g%20copy_1.jpg

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...ize/jpeg22.jpg



As for what can be done with a stamp we have seen that already.

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...outh%20_2_.jpg

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=112134

A lot can be done with curent technology, but it always leaves a trace of what it is. Maybe not visible in a scan, but it's there.

The rubber stamped stuff is probably the easiest, but geting it exactly right would be difficult.

The one that amazes me the most at how much recognition it gets is toy town. It's just the rubber stamp from a game that was available when the cards were current. A tiny toy post office complete with tiny letters and stamps and a toy town rubber stamp to cancel the stamps. It could get stamped on anything, and like most stuff for kids probably did.

Steve B

Wonks, Jay, Steve B
 

+1....

THANK GOd we have a community to turn to...


:)

sgc and psa are not fast to slab a "ghost" or "overprint"....they are very scrutinous...

most of these type errors are scrap.....some are factory inserted, but most are scrap....

great thread tho:D

Tim c, Jim, Keven S. , and many others here could differentiate in person, but seeing the cards on the monitor , it's tough to tell....


but i have to say, the reprint "franken-errors" do look cool if you don't wan't to shell out multi - k for a cool t206;)

There are no scans of Walsh. I took those with my phone after it was slabbed

I chased this card for a year based on a back scan posted (front scan image link was broken) on another forum. User deleted all posts and left no details..after a lot of searching and three owners later I got in contact with the original owner of the card.

Coincidently he had earlier tried to sell me and other Net54ers a T206 Ames with a Cobb ghost on the back that looked suspicious. It was discussed on Net54 and determined to likely be a faked error. After a few calls the trail to the card ended. I was able to get a front scan from him and that he sold it to a collector for $2,500ish.

I'm still not 100% convinced its legit but it looks very real.

Ghost Young, Orange Cobb, Cobb red port pulled from a pack:

Paul s
 

:)

It makes total sense that bogus printing freaks and fake "scrap" are the scammers' best friends right now. As recently as two years ago, a majority of collectors who now salivate over T206 oddities would have turned up their noses at them. But now, those oddities are the flavor of day/month/year, so everyone wants one, which means you have a lot of uneducated buyers who really don't know what they're buying.

When you add into the mix that most legitimate printing oddities are one-of-a-kind, it makes it easier for card doctors to turn out more "unique" examples to unload on the unsuspecting. Because of the high prices that printing freaks and their brethren bring, you have the perfect storm for fraud.

Chris was the Ames w/Cobb a Cobb red port. on the back? If so I almost did a trade at the Balt.2010 nationals. It was slabbed as an A by SGC. I was concerened with the Cobb port. having a dot matrix and took it over to SGC and was told that it was an A because the Cobb was not an authentic ghost and this made the card altered. My $5.99 loupe has saved me a lot of $, but learning how to identify these issues came from a lot of reading the board.

I collect E98s and used to have a couple of Old Put printing stamps on the back of some but now I wouldn't touch an Old Put card with a ten foot pole after a fellow collector showed me a fake he made which looked identical to the ones I have seen.

Another thing which isn't really being mentioned is the seller on ebay who sells slabbed T206s with red backgrounds and never mentions the color variation anywhere but the scan looks very, very orange and then when you get the actual card it is a red background just like the rest. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice...... :mad:

It's so easy to create scans of real T206's with backs of real T206s overlaid, it isn't even funny. I once overlaid a black and white T206 Cy Young portrait over a real Piedmont back that would have fooled anyone. Creating the actual card is another thing, but the scammers are only concerned about your paying, based on their crafty scan.

I have noticed this with Brown Old Mill backs. There was a scan I saw recently that I was sure was brown, but looking closer I realized the edge of the card looked a bit red. So I took it into Photoshop and removed some of the reddish tint when I got the edges to more of a natural tone the back ink was now black.

Thanks. This is the best reason to keep one's cards raw and do stupid things with them. ;)

brown om
 

iv been fooled on a few brown oms, these scans are tuf....:( i dont own one.....yet....;)

Or just buy from reputable people...

Nah, too easy...

John

Is that Ty Cobb Back Ghost print for sale?

I wanted to play...

Nice Wagner ghost Andy!!!!

As the old saying goes...if it is too good to be true...

Made my own
 

This thread got me thinking about how easy it would be to make a freak. At the very least a WST.

So this morning at work when our printer was idle I ran a very quick test. I used a cobb t206 portrait and printed just the black layer.

As soon as it came out of the printer I put a piece of paper on top and pressed down on the wet ink.

Here is what I got:
http://i1118.photobucket.com/albums/...dz/CobbWST.jpg

The scanner I had quick access to didn't show it very well, so I took a photo with my phone. The photo isn't great but it gets the point across.

The left one is the first press. The right one is the second press. I looked under my loupe 8x magnifier and didn't see any discenrable printing pattern due to it just being a wet ink transfer.

My thought is that if it only took me 10 minutes to do this, how many "Wet Sheet Transfers" could be fake. Or maybe other t206 printing anomalies.

Awesome!!!! Now u should take a t206 beater and repeat your experiment on the card?!

I had thought about it.
My thought is to really make it look right the card can't have any creases or surface wear. Because if the card had creases or wear and the ink ended up in parts of the card that it shouldn't have ended up would give it away. So the card would have to be an already altered card or at the worst a VG.

Since I would never want the card on the market (or anyone else's hands) I couldn't bring myself to ruin a card just to experiment.

bn2cardz,

Instead of a T206 why not experiment on a newer card? Maybe take a real nice condition 1980 Topps common (as an example) and see if you can recreate a WST on it.

David

Did someone say Cy Young?

Good Point. If only I could find one...

This one was a bit more difficult..

http://luckeycards.com/pt206ghostmultioverprint2.jpg

Leon that must have taken at least 20 minutes ;)

An 82 Carter DK with a 2012 WST.