A T206 printing question for Bill Heitman, or anyone ?

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

BILL

In another current Thread you mentioned the re-printing of vintage cards by Gum, Inc. (the old Bowman
Gum Co.). In 1981 I visited with George Moll and I'm sure you know that he was a pioneer in this hobby.
For those who don't know of him....he started the Moll Advertising Agency which did all the artwork and
production of the PlayBall, Bowman, and their Non-Sport cards (Horrors of War being their most notable).

Anyhow, Mr. Moll showed me some of these Goudey re-prints you referred to. These cards were printed
by the firm in Philly that produced some of the PlayBall and Bowman cards for the Bowman Gum Co.
George Moll was fascinated by the 1933 Goudey set and this motivated him to have his Agency to devote
much of their time producing all those cards we collected from 1939 to 1955.

OK, that leads me up to my question to you regarding the printing of the T206 cards. We have never found
any uncut sheets....just a few vertically printed short strips of the same player repeated.

THE 5-CARD STRIP WITH WAGNER

The 5-card horizontal strip with Wagner, CYoung, etc. is not a real production piece. If you look closely at it,
you will observe that it comprises 5 individual cards pasted together.
What is your opinion about this strip ?

Finally, can you please tell us what you know about how these T206's were printed ?

Thanks much,

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Although, this Question is directed to Bill......

It is open for anyone that can provide us some worthwhile answers.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: William Heitman

Ted,

I can relate an interesting story about the Wagner strip. Sunday afternoon at the Troy, Michigan, show at the Hilton in, I believe, 1979. Wayne Varner, an old friend who I was so happy to see at this past National in Anaheim, had the strip. He had been a part of the buying team that got into the old Wagner home and he was awarded the strip(others in the group already had a Wagner), which had that crease right down the middle of Wagner. Wayne now felt he had to get a Plank, but that it had to be in just as sorry condition has his Wagner. I had two awful Planks for sale, the worst of which was an oval. That's the one Wayne bought from me. At the National this past summer, I asked Wayne about the Wagner and he said he had sold it to Halper. The best information that we always had on the printing of T206 was that they were printed in top to bottom strips of the same players. The strip Wayne had was definitely some type of proof. The word that had ciculated for many years was that the American Tobacco Trust had destroyed the Wagner proofs and provided one to Honus as proof. That kind of explains the strip that was found in the old Wagner home's attic. Virtually every set of that era was printed in strip form. Sheets with multiple columns came along in the '30's. The sheet that has been discussed as part of the 8 Wagner discussion cannot be explained when you are talking about T206s that were printed during 1909, 1910 and 1911. Its pedigree needs close examination. And that examination can't go much further back than 1980. T206 has spawned so much that is hard to explain which is why I decided to give it the name "The Monster." I think the best information comes from the people who handled T206 in very large quantities over the years. I was fortunate enough to be one of them and I think it safe to say I have known most who did. By the way, I think the discussion is very appropriate to the Doyle card as well.

[Archive]

Posted By: J Hull

I love threads like this.

The overwhelming majority of T206s seem to have come off of sheets with the same player occupying an entire column. But there were a few exceptions, like this one:

Jamie

[Archive]

Posted By: Art M.

T206 cards were printed in sheets. Here is a partial T206 sheet of 4 cards. These cards were cut from a sheet. I have first hand knowledge of this and have pieced these 4 cards back together as originally issued.



Also, the T212 Obak cards were printed on sheets. Same time period, same American Tobacco Company, same American Lithograph Company. Here is a partial T212 Obak sheet. This sheet is the original width, but has been cut short top to bottom:

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

First, thanks for the history of the Wagner strip. I didn't realize Wayne originally acquired it.
I've known Wayne, Bill Z, and Mike W. going back to 1981....great guys.

And, your answer on the printing of the T206's in strip form is consistent with what I thought,
but was laughed at when I suggested it some time ago. With all the many millions of T206's
that were produced, if they were printed in two-dimensional sheet form, some uncut sheets,
or panels, would have surfaced in all these years.

After all, multiples of all 10 sheets of the entire 1933 Goudey set have been found. Likewise, for
some Caramel sets, PlayBalls, Bowmans, Topps, etc, etc. But, no T206 sheets, now I think we
know why.

Thanks Bill,

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: William Heitman

It was great seeing Wayne and Zimp this last summer.

[Archive]

Posted By: joe brennan

J Hull, Could that be the end of one strip and the start of another printer proof? Or printer scrap to aline the presses?

In Rememberance of James W. Brennan Sr. 1924-1982. Dad, thanks for everything you did for me.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

It looks like 2 folks are saying they didn't come in sheets and I see part of one, from a sheet, and an Obak sheet and 4 cards that were seen in strip form but now apart..Can it be both ways? ..what am I missing here?

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Yes, OBAK sheets are well known and so are E93 sheets from that era; but, no actual T206 sheets......
and the existence of these sheets just serve to make our point. If they exist, than why no similar T206
sheets ?
Your 4 cards simply represent a horizontal strip. We have also seen vertical strips of T206's.

I think what Bill and I've been saying is that there has not been even a hint of a two-dimensional array
of T206's. This is really a strange mystery, given the 10's (if not 100's) of millions of T206's that were
printed.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: J Hull

Art, many thanks for posting the image of the Obak sheet.

Joe, I don't think so. The card is machine cut and has no hint of alignment marks. It seems like it just wasn't lined up properly when it was sent through the cutter.

I'm firmly in the sheet camp.

Sheets are the only way to explain backs like these:

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

Right, Ted and Bill,

I've seen cards that are off vertically, like the one J Hull posted. I have a Mathewson that is extra long, with the name at the bottom, and a piece of his name at the top, too.

But I haven't seen a T206 that was so far off horizontally that it had a piece of another card. Anyone have such a card out there??

And Bill H, I've misplaced your email address...

Frank.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dave Hornish

I'm sorry but I do not buy the strip argument. There are misprinted T206's that show other players off to one side. Personally, I think they were printed in sheets of either 48 or 96 cards, with certain cards printed in repeating vertical strips on the sheet (but not all). I have thought about this a bit of late and it seems some cards had to be taken by each brand but they had a choice on some of the other cards. So you could have a sheet where say the left-most 48 cards were multiple-print columns and the right side is individual players, or something like that with a super-print sheet co-mingled with a regular sheet (or 2 or 3 or 4). The Southern/Texas League cards support a 48 or 96 card sheet I think, especially if Texas League was anticipated by ALC but could not close the deal in time so 6 DP cards from the other leagues in the first press run until Texas League cards were subbed on the sheet. Just my opinion.....Just think about how multiples of 6 and/or 8 play into T206 theories of distribution.

[Archive]

Posted By: J Hull

Frank, I'm sure there are better examples out there, but this one clearly has a sliver of another card on the edge.

Jamie

[Archive]

Posted By: William Heitman

Hi Frank. missinginaction5@aol.com

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

J HULL

Can you please show a front scan of the backs that you are depicting.

FRANK W

Here's the best I can do in response to your request....the card adjacent to Titus is Smith

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

Thank you, thank you.

The first T206 I saw that had parts of cards on it was a Lajoie, and I wouldn't have paid $5 for it. Now I wish I'd bought him. These cards are the best way we have of understanding what was happening 97 years ago.

Frank.

[Archive]

Posted By: joe brennan

If it was a sheet would there be more than 1 of a player? Wouldn't there be multiple Wagners on the same sheet. If the plates were on a drum and spinning, I would think that a Wagner would appear every 3rd or 4th card vertically? Am I wrong in assuming a sheet would have more than 1? In my youth late 70's I worked a summer in a printing process so I am only familiar with high speed printing.

In Rememberance of James W. Brennan Sr. 1924-1982. Dad, thanks for everything you did for me.

[Archive]

Posted By: Larry

Here is scan of Marshall, brooklyn with top and bottom name printed, maybe the horizontal direction had different players and the vertical was same player?

This card is oversized also so i do think they were sheets..this one was piedmont 350

[Archive]

Posted By: Brett

I have this one :

[Archive]

Posted By: J Levine

Here is another t205 miscut. T206, T205, T212, etc. were sheet printed IMHO.
Joshua

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

Without specific evidence otherwise, it's the safest guess that the T206s were printed in
sheets. The Old Judges, Murads, Obaks, Goudeys and Topps were printed in sheets, and there's
no reason I've seen that show the T206s were printed in another way.

How large were the sheets and what was the player placement is another issue for discussion.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jason L

Can you please post the fronts of those cards you show with other partials on both sides and top/bottom? Do the fronts also have such 2D array?

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Weisner

Hi Guys and JoAnn,
I will post lot's of pictures that support the cards being produced on sheets when I get home this afternoon. Be well Brian

[Archive]

Posted By: J Hull

Ted, Jason,
The fronts of those two cards are normal in appearance. Here's another interesting variation on misaligned backs. Seems to have been from the bottom of the sheet.

Jamie

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe D.

what is the question here? If the cards were printed on a long strip of paper?

I don't know of any printing press (especially one used to print full-color work) that could accept a paper size that small (there are minimum requirements).

So they would have had to have been printed on sheets.


Now if the suggestion is that only one strip of players was placed down on the sheet....
I would have to ask why? Especially for a freebee throw in item. Any rational person would look to maximize the units they could put down on the sheet of paper.


Its early... and I am not quite through with my coffee, so I apologize if I am just misunderstaning the points being raised about 'strip' or 'sheet'.

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve f

Reads 'COBB' across top as well. Although Steamboat Willie gnawed most of the text.

[Archive]

Posted By: john/z28jd

Here's my vote for sheets....

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Your back arrays are appreciated....and I have seen these before. But, once again....I have to see
intact FRONT arrays in two-dimensions of 4, or more, T206's.

I have no doubts that the backs were printed in large sheet arrays.

However, the complete T206's, I believe were produced in by a LAMINATE process. And, I am not
sure how this was done. But, I do have T206's that reflect this theory, as you can very carefully
peel off the FRONT of these cards that are in various stages of deterioration.

So, come on guys....please show us some semblance of a partial sheet or panel of the fronts.

Thanks,

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe D.

"So, come on guys....please show us some semblance of a partial sheet or panel of the fronts."

There is a logical reason why you would see this screwup only on the backs.

After the job was printed (and backed up pretty poorly / bad alignment) it has to get cut.
I have to believe anyone in their right mind would be cutting looking at the fronts of the cards....
and if they happened to cut through someone's face, they would be more apt to throw that away - than they would if the advertisement didn't line up on the back.

I see no logical reason you would print the backs on sheets and then go through a different process for the fronts. You have the press, the pressman, and the ink already there.... and again, this was a freebee throw in item.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I believe the T206's were printed on sheets, with a number of the players double-printed. If there were two of a player on a sheet, they appeared in a vertical row of two, like you see on that Obak sheet.

Thus, if you find a T206 with the same player's name on top, that card was a double-print. If you have an off center card where the players on the top and bottom do not match, then those two players were single-printed.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

I am not quite sure what you are saying; but, can I ask you this.....

Have you seen an uncut sheet, panel, or just 4 cards in two dimensions of any T206 FRONTS ?

And, wouldn't you like to see one as proof that these T206's were printed in sheet form ?

I'd like to continue this discussion; but, I have to leave now to go to the Philly Show.

So....carry on....guys.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Ted- I'll add that Joe D. is a printer by trade, so he fully understands what a printer would or wouldn't do.

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe D.

Ted,

I have not seen uncut sheets showing the fronts.

But I do think to get to the answers you are looking for, you have to begin asking "why" and not so much "how".

why. not how.

I know we cherish these items, but they were freebees and not the actual product being purchased. Why would any printer (or tobacco company commissioning a printer) go out of their way to make this an extremely difficult and expensive process? Especially if you are conceding that the backs were printed in sheets.

Printing paper comes in sheets, printing presses print on sheets, printers always try to reduce the number of sheets needed to run by maximizing the number of units that could be put on a sheet. Tell me why you think this would be circumvented for a freebee product?

I completely enjoy this conversation... and will talk with you more about it in Philly (look forward to meeting you).

Maybe I am not understanding the whole strip theory... so I would love to hear more.


See you there.

Regards,
Joe

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Weisner

Hi Ted,
Have fun at the show, and be on the lookout for the Hindu Slers I need to finish my set.

Hi Joe,
I'm not a printing Pro like you, but I have had quite a bit of printing experience in the past and believe you are right on the money.

Here are a few pics for you:





Be well Brian

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Brian- how did your three cards stay together? If they were cut ca. 1910, they would have gone in three different directions. Don't tell me you picked them up one at a time!

And if they remained together as a group, when were they cut?

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe D.

I could be wrong... but it looks as though the Howard doesn't belong with the other two. It could have been on the same sheet, but I don't think it is the next unit over (as you have it displayed).

Color on the front left doesn't match, and there is more missing from Piedmont "T" on the back than should be (based on the other two).


of course - I could be wrong.

Either way, very cool cards... don't separate them.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

Joe,
I was thinking the same thing. Also the back printing is signficantly stronger, which does not really make sense if they were on the same sheet.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Weisner

Hi Barry,
I purchased all 3 of them from the same seller on EBAY, along with 10-12 cards with HUGE boarders a few years ago. I have a few more that are miscut from this group that I believe I can put together, but I'm not 100% sure.


Here are a few photos...

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Weisner

Hi Joe and Jim,
I have also gone back and forth on Howard, due to the back, but in person under a loop it looks spot on. He is not as perfect as the Livingstone and Stanage, but I do think he fits in somewhere. Here is another card from the collection that I've narrowed down to a few players. LMK what you guys think. Thanks Brian

[Archive]

Posted By: Judson Hamlin

I think that the Rossman looks like a better fit, at least on this end of the internet. How do the backs compare?
Peace (to a point)
Judson

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Weisner

Hi Judson,
I don't think pictures of the back will help, as I know these card weren't ever attatched. I was simply trying to identify which players would fit best with Stephens, and it looks like Rossman may be the best combination. Thanks for your help. Be well Brian

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

It's amazing they all stayed together!

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Weisner

Well Barry,
They did come from New York, so it's possible that another worker from the American Lithograph CO walked out with the miscuts and some scrap and they finally came out of the attic. I can say that I have never found so many T206's with borders this large without seeing another name at the top.... Be well Brian

PS I also found an UNC error in the group, but I will not make it known at this time. Maybe by the next Newmania party.....

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

You sure don't see many big borders like those any more. I think the Rossman looks like the right fit too. Very cool.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

You know Brian, a line in the episode of Newman's millennium party is a famous Seinfeld error. When Jerry asks Newman when his party is, Newman tells him Dec 31, 1999. Jerry replies "well that's too bad, because the new millennium starts in the year 2001. So it looks like you're a year late." He was, in fact, a year early. I'm not sure how they missed that.

Now that I shared that error, I think you should share yours

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob Dewolf

I wonder what Christopher Cross is doing these days.

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Weisner

Hi Barry,
I was wondering if anyone else caught that error... I guess Jerry needed the chairs and the ballons in the APT for a few before parties.

Be well Brian

PS I had some great Chinese food tonight, but it wasn't pea pods and it wasn't delivered by Ping.... But Brian does like spicy chicken...

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Weisner

Chris Cross is still blaming video's for ruining his life.....