1921 W-UNC Self Developing Strip Cards

[Archive]

Posted By: Josh K.

A few months ago a I picked up the Alexander pictured below from a dealer with this one and about six other players for sale. Another board member picked up several of the other cards offered by the dealer. I beleive these cards to be fairly uncommon, but I really dont know how much so. Does anyone out there have any of these cards (please feel free to show and tell if you do) or know anything about how rare/not rare they really are?

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

As you know I am the one that bought a few of the other ones. A board member bought one of those from me. I had never seen them before this small group but since they are listed in the SCD I guess there are more out there. I would consider them very rare and also am surprised SGC graded it. They won't grade my Babe Ruth Headin' Home cards but will grade these? Go figure......

[Archive]

Posted By: identify7

That seems like a pretty crisp picture for a self-developing card, or am I missing something here? Why is it in poor condition?

[Archive]

Posted By: Glen V

I picked up one of the six from Brian (of Scottsdale Sportscards - great guy). I've never seen any besides the group he had. Two or three of those were uncatalogued. As mentioned above, there are others in the SCD so there must be more out there.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

The backs all have some paper residue and minor damage but are blank anyway. I advised the person that bought the one from me not to remove the paper remnants on back as the fronts are so nice they almost don't look 84 years old. Since this group was obviously pasted in an album is at least one reason the fronts are so nice... You're right though...these are about the crispest looking self developing cards I have ever seen.....regards

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

how do you know they're self-developing?

[Archive]

Posted By: identify7

See instruction on blank back written in invisible ink.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

No question is stupid. The only way I know is that's what the Krause SCD says.....or maybe Gil's explanation was better...

[Archive]

Posted By: Josh K.

Gil,

To further answer your question, my card has two small bits of paperloss on the front and the lower right corner is missing a small piece. Still a great looking card in my opinion (though some of the one's picked up by Leon were super nice looking). That Faber is also real nice.

Leon,

I sent a scan to SGC prior to submitting and they confirmed that assuming the card was authentic, they would, at a minimum, slab the card authentic. I was pleasantly surprised that they assigned a grade to it.

[Archive]

Posted By: identify7

Josh: you may not have noticed, but the player you wound up with is considered as highly desireable in most sets. So a couple of minor blemishes really ain't such bad news.

Out of all of the 1921 w-unc. self developing Alexander strip cards graded to date, I bet your SGC10 is looking pretty strong.

[Archive]

Posted By: Josh K.

Gil,

Thanks - and no need to worry - I was very pleased to have nabbed the Alexander and think it looks just fine.

[Archive]

Posted By: identify7

I am still learning, or trying to learn about these type of cards. Please correct me where I am wrong.

This type of card typically is composed of two pieces. One piece is the negative and the other is photoigraphic paper. The actual card is produced by the purchaser of this equipment by assembling the two components and exposing them to light.

If this is true, the purchaser can make as many cards as he chooses, simply by obtaining additional photographic paper.

And if that is true, the actual card should have little value compared to the value of the negative. Particularly because one could buy vintage photographic paper today and "legitimately" create as many new cards as he chooses.

Can this status be true?

[Archive]

Posted By: david

i think this issue is closer to the R308 then the Ray-o-prints in that you just needed to wet the card and expose to light. additionally, i am not convinced these were actually issued and might be a test run. the contrast on the cards in exceptional for a self developing photo issue. i am a pretty avid collector of these types of cards and i have never seen a card with such contrast and clarity of the image, never mind an entire set of cards. i have never held one of these in my hands so it is really hard to tell but what is the evidence that these are self developing cards?

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I agree with David. I would like to see the evidence that these were of the self developing nature. They are very sharp. I am not taking the leap of faith that they were not supposed to be a series though....I would prefer to think they were until I see proof they weren't....could go either way on that though...

[Archive]

Posted By: Josh K.

Funny that this message was resurrected since Ive just recently had discussions about selling my alexander to another board member. Regardless, I like Leon mentioned above, cannot neither confirm nor deny that the card is actually self-developing and am relying solely on what is noted in the standard catalog. I will say, however, that there are a couple of things that make it more likely than not it is self-developing. First, the picture is not printed (in otherwords it does appear to be a photograph). Second, if you look closely - particularly at Leon's Hornsby, it appears that the developing process stopped about an 1/8th of an inch before it should have at the bottom of the card (cutting off hornsbys leg at the knee). Finally, the card just doesnt look like any traditional card Ive handled.

[Archive]

Posted By: david

looking closely at the hornsby, the card is cropped in a funny manner and i do not believe that is the the result of an undeveloped photo since that would leave white not black. i actually think these are produced similar to oj's. from the looks of the cards images of the players were cut out, rather crudely in many cases, and then used to produce the cards. are all the cards unique or have multiples of players surfaced. this is a good discussion and an very interesting issue.

[Archive]

Posted By: Josh K.

David,

I know that some of these cards are noted in the SCD. That does not mean that they arent unique. For example, an alexander is noted as being part of the set - however, there is no way to know whether my alexander (which I acquired last year) is the example that led to its inclusion in the checklist. I know one or both of leon's cards were unknown previously. I also know that leon and I got the cards from the same source (as did one or two other collectors). Ive never seen any others from this set that didnt come from this lot (the dealer had about 7 or 8 altogether if memory serves). Whether self-developing or not, unique or not, I think it is pretty clear that there are few if any other copies floating around.

[Archive]

Posted By: Josh K.

David,

Im not sure I agree regarding the Hornsby - if you look at the johnson, there is a clear cut off but its near the bottom of the card. The Hornsby has that same sort of straight crop, only higher. I think that likely had something to do with the chemical process. Im also no expert on the photographic process used to create the cards (assuming they are self-developing), but I think if the paper was "exposed" improperly (be it to the chemicals or light) it could be black not white. You will also notice that my alexander is "developed" all the way to the border - to me that makes it look like the hornsby and johnson "suffer" from the type of inconsistent developing process you would expect from a self-dev. card (i.e. some are fully developed, some are not).

One other thing, I noted above that my alexander had paperloss on the front -Ive never actually checked that with a loupe. It will be interesting to see if that is actually paperloss or a spot that did not develop properly. If its not paperloss and is actually a result of bad development/printing.

[Archive]

Posted By: david

i think the other dave needs to chime in on how exactly self developing cards are made. my understanding, however, is that poor developing can only result in light photo areas not black. since leon can view the card better then either of us he is the best judge but i am pretty certain this is a croping issue with the hornsby and other cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: Josh K.

The scarcity of these cards has now been recognized by Old Cardboard:

http://www.oldcardboard.com/w/1921-self-develop/1921-self-develop.asp?cardsetID=1250

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

These cards are all "altered" since they had to be SOAKED IN WATER to develop.

These cards were completely blank when issued, and therefore must remain in that state to be considered "original."

[Archive]

Posted By: Josh K.

LOL Hal.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

I'm not knowledgeable about this issue, but self developing photo cards usually came as a kit-- envelope, negative, paper, etc. These may have been cataloged as self developing cards, as someone out there has seen the kit. A number of the self developing kits are obscure and are rarely seen on the market. That none of us has seen the kit, or even a picture of the kit, doesn't neccesarilly mean much. Some of the self developing photo kits had both baseball and non-sport cards (actors, etc), so some of the knowledge for these sets may have come from the non-sport hobby.

There's no question that these cards are much better developed than many other self developing photos. Which is a good thing.

[Archive]

Posted By: david

david
can you give us some info on how these cards are made. i was on your site looking for more background on these cards. should there be a thin film on the front from the chemicals etc. i dont think these are more similar to the tattoo orbits and did not come with a negative but developed when wet. was this was this technology available in the early 20's

[Archive]

Posted By: identify7

If any of the negatives associated with these cards have survived, would new cards manufactured from these "kits" be considered legitimate issues, if period materials were used?

Somehow, I think not. But I wonder if anyone could determine the date of origin.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

You can judge the age of the photo cards.

This was the exact question posed by Leon about his cards, and it was deduced that the cards were vintage. They were pasted into an album and the cards are so rare it's not as if someone's been pumping them out. For many of us, including myself, these are the only examples of the issue we've seen and had not even heard of them before.

As already noted, perhaps they aren't self developing cards but were factory made, which would mean the new cards from old kit isn't an issue.

While the Ray O Prints and Topps Magic are relatively plentiful, most of the vintage baseball self developing baseball cars are rare on the order of Leon's cards. Even some from the 1950s you rarely see on eBay or Mastro.

Some of the self developing kits included a metal frame to put the photo in, including the Ray O Prints. Obviously, it's safer bidding when the card has the original frame.

With the self developing cards, the only area where later reprints is a big issue is with the Ray O Prints where loads of high grade complete sets are floating around. There was only one negative/personality per kit, so a kid have to buy all the different kits to complete one set. With the other self developing issues, I'm not aware of a problem.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

What would you say if I told you it looks like 6 new ones have been discovered and I will hopefully have 19 different in my November auction?

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

What would you say if I told you it looks like 6 new ones have been discovered and I will hopefully have 19 different in my November auction?

Pretty impressive...both 6 newly discovered cards of a very rare issue, and the fact that embers on this thread took 15 years to rekindle into a burning flame.

Tell us more!

Link to Old Cardboard listing for this set (it was posted previously in the thread, but after 15 years it deserves a totally pointless update by me).

https://oldcardboard.com/w/1921-self...cardsetID=1250


Brian

[Leon]

I would say that will be pretty cool...

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

What would you say if I told you it looks like 6 new ones have been discovered and I will hopefully have 19 different in my November auction?

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

The second the contract is signed I will post details. I can tell you that the new additions to the checklist include Zach Wheat, George Sisler, George Kelly and Rabbit Marranville.

[brianp-beme]

Here is an image of the Ty Cobb from this set, as seen in the Old Cardboard listing. A fantastic photo of him.

Brian

[brianp-beme]

As Leon's post shows us, there is a Christy Mathewson in the set. I also noticed this checklist on the prewarcards.com site:

https://prewarcards.com/2016/10/03/1...trip-card-set/

This list also indicates that an Ed Murphy card exists, which makes it 15 cards that have previously been identified as part of the issue.

Also Anson in his article mentions that the self-developing aspect has never been confirmed. I have some doubts that these cards were self-developing, as their images are much too strong compared to other self-developing cards (for example the Tattoo Orbits).

Brian (having fun with obscure cool set)

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Anson is actually writing a new entry about the find tonight!

[ValKehl]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

As Leon's post shows us, there is a Christy Mathewson in the set.

Better yet, there is a WaJo in the set.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Figures you would already have one Val.

Any idea what you paid? Trying to find sales data is a nightmare

[ValKehl]

Scott, I'll respond here, rather than via a PM, as this info is available to anyone. I won it in the August 2015 Heritage Auction of Leon's fabulous type collection. I paid $454.10.
https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball/1...ription-071515
As this was 6 years ago, I doubt this pricing info will be of much use to you.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by ValKehl

Scott, I'll respond here, rather than via a PM, as this info is available to anyone. I won it in the August 2015 Heritage Auction of Leon's fabulous type collection. I paid $454.10.
https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball/1...ription-071515
As this was 6 years ago, I doubt this pricing info will be of much use to you.

6 years is one of the most recent results I can find. I'm not signed up for Heritage so I couldn't see the result, thanks!

[ValKehl]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

6 years is one of the most recent results I can find. I'm not signed up for Heritage so I couldn't see the result, thanks!

Scott, while I am a registered bidder with Heritage, I didn't "sign in" when I went to Heritage's web site to get this piece of auction archives info. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I assume/think that anyone can access Heritage's auction archives. If I'm wrong about this, someone kindly let me know.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Signed contract! There are 20 cards in the lot, 19 different missing 2 cards from the previous checklist but adding 6 to it, so it looks like maybe it's a 20 card set? Or maybe there's still more to find, but 20 sounds reasonable anyway. As soon as I have them in hand I'll post close up pictures. Definitely some new territory for me (well for everyone actually) in the pre war auction this year! First the Rose Co. find, now this!

[abmchenry]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Signed contract! There are 20 cards in the lot, 19 different missing 2 cards from the previous checklist but adding 6 to it, so it looks like maybe it's a 20 card set? Or maybe there's still more to find, but 20 sounds reasonable anyway. As soon as I have them in hand I'll post close up pictures. Definitely some new territory for me (well for everyone actually) in the pre war auction this year! First the Rose Co. find, now this!

Add one more to the checklist!

https://prewarcards.com/2021/08/27/h...rds-checklist/

After reading the article about this find I messaged the author (@prewarcards on Twitter) to see if this mysterious Heinie Groh card I had owned for years was part of this set. I now finally understand why I've never been able to locate another example of it!

[brianp-beme]

It is really fun to see that there is still more to be discovered in our vintage world...nice Groh card!

Brian

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by abmchenry

Add one more to the checklist!

https://prewarcards.com/2021/08/27/h...rds-checklist/

After reading the article about this find I messaged the author (@prewarcards on Twitter) to see if this mysterious Heinie Groh card I had owned for years was part of this set. I now finally understand why I've never been able to locate another example of it!

Congrats, very cool! Of course that brings the total checklist to 21, so odds are there are more. I was thinking maybe it was a 20 card set and you ruined it