Quote:
Originally Posted by tedzan
1st....my research that American Litho (ALC) employed printing presses (circa 1909) whose width = 19 inches for printing their 6-color lithographic smaller projects
dates back to the 1980's. It was from a library book, which I don't recall anymore. But, my memory for numbers is very keen.
Furthermore, Steve B. (our printing expert) has informed us that the standard size of printing paper (cardboard) available circa 1909-1912) was 18" (or 19") x 24".
These dimensions are consistent with my contention of how ALC printing these cards. For example on an 18" x 24" sheet of cardboard, I depict a theoretical sheet
of the "Exclusive 12" subjects formatted as a multiple printed 108-card sheet (12 across by 8 rows). If you haven't seen it, Clayton, check-it-out............
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...=163949&page=4......Post #38
2nd....your GOODWIN example of 6 cards across this sheet essentially supports my theory. I have also considered that ALC printed the T206's formatted 6 cards
across the sheet (instead of 12).
The factor 6 is the fundamental denominator in the entire series structure of the T206 set......as, is evident in the following structural numbers.
Subjects.........Series
.. 12..............150-only
144..............150/350
204..............350-only
.. 66..............350/460......includes the 6 Super-Prints
.. 48..............460-only
.. 48..............Southern Leaguers
____
522 = total subjects
Furthermore, your GOODWIN sheet was most likely printed by the George Harris & Sons Lithographers (the American Lithographic Co. did not exist in the 1880's).
TED Z
__________________________________________________ _________________________________
LOOKING for this T206 guy to complete my EXCLUSIVE 12 red HINDU sub-set (12 subjects)
SHECKARD (glove)
.
|
Thanks for the reply Ted.
I posted the link to the LOC's Goodwin sheet just as an example of how much excess border space these printers would leave available. Earlier in this thread, using your 19" track theory, you had said (according to your sheet configuration and theory) that there would be a remaining 7/8" border space-which seems a bit tight to me. Not saying you are wrong- we are all speculating- but that just seems like too little room for error.
Someone recently posted a Cy Young portrait miscut top to bottom, and it had a huge border space at the top. It made me wonder about how much border space was actually above that, before the card was cut to size. The Goodwin sheet, with all of it's open border space made me wonder once again about the 19" track width, and if this is correct.
On top of that, we do know the ALC was printing larger advertising lithographs that could not be printed with a 19" track. I understand your sheet theory is partially based on this track width, but I really (after reading back through this thread) don't see any definitive proof that this is fact.
I have to reiterate that I am not saying you are wrong or right. Imagine I am a student-these are questions I would pose to the teacher
.
Sincerely, Clayton