![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Is it me, or does every Hinchman seem to be printed on a glossy and thinner paper stock than other T206s? Or, am I just getting all the good reprints...
![]()
__________________
Galleries and Articles about T206 Player Autographs www.SignedT206.com www.instagram.com/signedT206/ @SignedT206 Last edited by T206Collector; 08-22-2016 at 09:45 AM. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Just want to follow up on this. If you have a raw Hinchman, can you please check it and let me know what you think about the paper stock? Thanks!
__________________
Galleries and Articles about T206 Player Autographs www.SignedT206.com www.instagram.com/signedT206/ @SignedT206 |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I don't notice anything different on my raw Hinchman's and your
Hinchman doesn't look like a reprint. Do you have a back scan of your Hinchman? img902.jpg img904.jpg Last edited by Pat R; 11-23-2016 at 06:37 AM. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
This would almost be too good to be true, but do you have a T213-1 with which to compare your Hinchman?
__________________
Collection: https://www.flickr.com/photos/132359235@N05/sets/ For Sale: https://www.flickr.com/photos/132359...7719430982559/ Ebay listings: https://www.ebay.com/sch/harrydoyle/...p2047675.l2562 |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]() |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I'll try to post a back scan this weekend. Pretty sure it's a Piedmont. The stock of the paper feels glossy and thin to me on all of these. Maybe it's just my imagination...
![]()
__________________
Galleries and Articles about T206 Player Autographs www.SignedT206.com www.instagram.com/signedT206/ @SignedT206 |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Hinchman%202%20Back_1.jpg |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I bought this one raw and it had that nice thick feel of a T206 that hasn't been handled much:
Last edited by Luke; 11-23-2016 at 09:44 AM. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Unless its the scan it's not sharp enough to be real. The print dot defects are identical to the real one. Just by feeling the paper you should tell right away its a reprint. Look at it with a magnifying glass. I bet you will see the print dots from a laser printer.
Looking closer I can see the laser dots on his elbow. Last edited by 2dueces; 11-23-2016 at 10:33 AM. |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
is fishy with this card but I'm not sure what you see as print dots from a laser printer on his elbow. A real T206 has "print dots" that show up if they are scanned at high dpi's. Hinchman [2] crop.jpg Last edited by Pat R; 11-23-2016 at 12:03 PM. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mine actually feels like it is on slightly thinner stock as well. Definitely not a reprint and doesn't have the bright colors. But comparing it to others, it definitely doesn't feel as 'firm.'
But what I will say is I've run across a few on occasion that felt this way, too - was not only unique to Hinchman.
__________________
T205 (208/208) T206 (520/520) T207 (200/200) E90-1 (120/121) E91A/B/C (99/99) 1895 Mayo (16/48) N28/N29 Allen & Ginter (100/100) N162 Goodwin Champions (30/50) N184 Kimball Champions (37/50) Complete: E47, E49, E50, E75, E76, E229, N88, N91, R136, T29, T30, T38, T51, T53, T68, T73, T77, T118, T218, T220, T225 www.prewarcollector.com |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Yeah, I'm not sure. I have a few that feel that way but am 100% they are authentic. Not sure if it's different stock or just worn down more. But certainly have felt a few that are a little flimsier than others.
__________________
T205 (208/208) T206 (520/520) T207 (200/200) E90-1 (120/121) E91A/B/C (99/99) 1895 Mayo (16/48) N28/N29 Allen & Ginter (100/100) N162 Goodwin Champions (30/50) N184 Kimball Champions (37/50) Complete: E47, E49, E50, E75, E76, E229, N88, N91, R136, T29, T30, T38, T51, T53, T68, T73, T77, T118, T218, T220, T225 www.prewarcollector.com |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Look how fuzzy it is between the bat and his uniform. I handled 100's of T206's.
They used the same stock. Remember, these were printed to add strength to cigarette packs. Using thin stock would defeat that purpose. I guess I'd have to see it in person. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I don't think they needed to be printed to achieve a stiffening factor. They could have easily inserted blank ones and saved the time and cost of doing the printing. Also, aren't the T213s thin paper stock?
I am curious to know how this was proven to be the motivation for producing them, or is it speculation? Last edited by PhillipAbbott79; 11-28-2016 at 07:01 AM. |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
1936 National Chicle Fine Pens - are they thin paper stock? | frankhardy | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 6 | 11-08-2014 04:30 PM |
N172 Old Judge - Thin Paper Stock (help needed) | h2oya311 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 15 | 07-07-2012 05:26 PM |
Cracker Jack paper stock 1914 vs 1915 | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 1 | 08-12-2007 07:24 PM |
can anyone recommend good paper stock for making baseball cards? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 14 | 04-02-2007 08:29 PM |
Can someone explain "paper stock" to me.. | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 18 | 08-30-2002 05:36 PM |