Discussion about t204 Ramly blank backs and blank fronts
 

Not sure if anyone we had ever discussed this t204 with the "blank front" that Leon had in his collection for a long time so I figured I'd bring it up since the card is with me now. A couple observations I have on it now that I've had a chance to compare it up close and side by side with some of my other t204s:

1.) This exercise is a sharp reminder about how truly fragile and thin t204s are in general! To me, even normal t204s are no thicker than construction paper or higher quality printing paper

2.) The t204 with the blank front does "feel" different. But if a normal t204 could be compared to construction paper, this example with the blank front could be compared to loose leaf notebook paper I suppose. Neither are really thicker than the other, but normal t204s do feel "sturdier" somehow.

3.) I acquired this card thinking that this was a case of a card that went through a full printing process originally, but over time, had it's front simply slide off the back somehow due to soaking or whatever. Now that I'm actually examining the t204s, I'm not thinking it's possible for these cards to be split apart in this manner. There's just simply not enough material there to consist of two separate layers for the front and back.

So my question is, as ridiculous as it sounds, is it possible that the printing process itself made the cards somewhat sturdier, although not really any thicker, through the process of mounting the photo to the back and then the subsequent color passes, gloss coating, etc...?

I should add that for the cards that I have that have normal fronts but have blank backs - those feel identical to the card I have with the blank front.

All thoughts are welcome....thanks guys....

Attachment 204262

Attachment 204263

The embossing would certainly provide some sturdiness.

I have seen several T204s that have "come apart" with the front and back halves being separate.

My suggestion is buy a good dial caliper to measure the card thickness because you probably have a lot of skinned cards by the sound of it.

I think he's got 1 card like this (it used to be mine).

Yes, but he said he also has blank backs of the same issue. Like you posted they do come apart. I would guess that most just kept the fronts. A good dial caliper will let you know if you have a full card or one missing a layer. They also come in handy to identify higher end counterfeit cards because usually counterfeits do not have the same thickness of card stock.

This blank Ramly has been examined by more than one person who has handled 1500+ Ramlys. It is half a card. I do agree with you though and I am sure a caliper would corroborate it, which would be good too. I also agree that most fakes are not of similar thickness to their real counterparts.

Honestly, I figured it was half a card when I bid on it, so no worries there. I only starting thinking otherwise when I got to look at the card and compare it to others in person. If others have seen this paper thin material split into two halves, I'll concede my point about them being too thin to do this.

So all blank backed t204s fall into this same category then I take it? I have 1 blank front and 2 blank backs out of approx. 115 Ramlys in my collection. Not a lot like someone said, but probably more partial cards in this set than I figured I had.

That is what I have been told, Brian. They are all 2 halves. Of course there could be some errors but that is my current state of thought with knowledge of more experienced T204 collectors than myself. Maybe I have misunderstood but I don't think so :).

For clarity, the vast number of T204's are one solid piece of stock. There were early cards made that were two part stock. I was told that years ago many of the old timers thought they all came that way but it has been shown that only a small percentage are truely two part cards, I have a small original group which many are markedly mis aligned. I also have seen one attached upside down, however upon close examination it was loose around the edges and was probably just stuck back together that way.

Now on to the blank backs. The true blank back cards are the same six that come with the square frames, Anderson, Bancroft, Bransfield, Burkett, Dineen and Moran. You will find these with both a glossy coated front and non-coated. My belief is that all the other blank backs not from the group of 6 are merely the front half of a two part card, I have a few of these outliers and when held up to light, these 1/2 stock cards show a thinner stock, due to the fact that it was adjoined prior to a back. Also the true blank backs will show strong embossing on the back, while separated two part cards will have weak embossing as it was applied to the back of the card and did not penetrate all the way though the two pieces. I have held the blank front shown above and feel it is only the back half of a two part card, so....somewhere out there perhaps there is a front with the same hole to match up to it.

I did misunderstand. Thanks for the clarification.