[Jobu]

I have given this one a lot of thought (as you are about to see) and I was wondering what I would do for my 1000th post so I may as well lay it all out here. I think that the answer is that the fronts were usually printed first but that sometimes the backs were printed first.

First I should note that I agree that it is understandable that there are no blank front cards - as Sean pointed out, who would cut that out and take it home for their kid?

"Hey dad -- who did you bring me? Mathewson or Cobb???? (looks at card) "Piedmont 350-460. I hate you dad."

FRONTS FIRST

There is far more evidence for fronts first.

1) As was also already mentioned, blank backed cards clearly had the fronts printed first.

2) There are error cards from printing flaws that occur on multple backs. I used to own a T206 Murr'y error, a card that can be found with Tolsoi, Lenox, Sweet Caporal 350-460-30, Old Mill, and Piedmont 350-460-25 backs. This for a card with about 10 graded examples, suggests to me that the fronts were printed first. Imagine a printer running off a bunch of fronts, damaging the plate without noticing it, then catching the error a short time later after a bunch of completed sheets were stacked up. Rather than searching through and then tossing a number of sheets for something so minor, they just fixed it and then carried on. However, when it came time to fill that days order for backs they had several small orders that just so happened to hit at the part of the pile where the Murr'y cards were and presto, you have a really uncommon error on a surprising number of backs.

3) Sean's Tinker is also evidence that the backs were printed last no matter which way the ink is facing. That is too bold and crisp to be a wet sheet transfer, it is likely a transfer from the cylinder (I don't know enough to rule out something else, like it having been printed on there but not from the blanket, but cylinder transfer seems most likely). No matter what it is, the ink from the back is clearly over the completed image on the front.

4) "Miscut backs." Miscuts where both the front and the back are miscut by the same amount, cards that are quite rare, were cutting mistakes. However, miscut backs, where the front of the card is perfectly centered but the back is "miscut" show that fronts were printed first. I use quotes because the backs aren't really miscut, they are misregistered just like a color shift on the front. If you think about what would need to happen for this to occur, it means that part of the image was printed in the margin of the overall uncut sheet. Drastic misregistrations like this are usually seen in a single layer on the front or in the back, which is also a single layer. If the backs were printed first and misregistered way into the sheet margin I think it is more likely that the sheet would have been tossed without printing the fronts. However, if the fronts are all finished and you print the back second and mess it up you have a more or less finished product so you cut it and ship it out. This is a little more tenuous, but I think it makes sense.

5) Wet sheet transfers. Also not rock solid evidence, but there are more WSTs of the front of cards on the backs than there are of backs of cards on the fronts. I know WST can happen after the factory and the process has some mystery around it, but if cards were printed fronts first and stacked for long (?) periods with blank backs awaiting the printing of their backs (think about Murr'y again), the fresh ink would have some time to transfer. This is especially possible for the cards at the bottom of the stack with some additional pressure on them from the weight of the pile. Once the backs were printed I would assume, perhaps incorrectly, that cards were usually cut and distributed somewhat quickly. There is more that could explain the pattern, link different ink types for the fronts and backs, greater amounts of ink overall being applied to the fronts, etc. WSTs could support the fronts first argument though are not great evidence on their own.

BACKS FIRST

1) The only evidence that I can think of that shows backs were sometimes printed either first or in the middle of the printing of the front (to me the latter is highly unlikely), is the cards that are missing several colors from the front (100% no sun or chemicals here folks) but which have backs printed on them. I am referring to the yellow browns and cards like my Bradley, which is posted here. I see no reason why a printer would scrap a sheet halfway through printing the front and then print the back before tossing the sheet. The only good explanation is that the backs were printed first followed by the fronts.

I am interested to hear if anyone diagrees with this or has anything else to add that I missed. It seems clear to me that the fronts were usually, but not always, printed first.

Boom. Post #1,000!