Mystery Of The T206 Honus Wagner Uncut Proof Strip

[Archive]

Posted By: David

Hello Fellow Collectors & Investigators!
I am starting a thread about the T206 Honus Wagner/Cy Young uncut proof strip in order to gather any information in regards to it's history and reprint status in order to help verify a piece that I have. There is only one known copy of the strip in existence, and I have read the articles in regards to it's journey straight from the Wagner estate. However, I am wondering how there may be reprints out there if none of the past 28 year's owners made any? Also, I was wondering if anyone one knows of some additional ways I can authenticate the piece myself so I can have a solid idea before I bring it to one of the big three authenticating houses? I am in the progress of getting a 100x microscope in order to do some further testing, and that should help shed some light on the subject.
All ideas and theories welcomed, and thanks for your time and interest. The journey has been fun thus far, let's keep it going!

Sincerely, David (Delicate Dust)

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

You don't need to have the strip in your possesion in order to create a reprint. All you need a good scan or photo of it to create one. If you have a similar strip, then all you really need to do is compare if to other t206s. Stock, printing, etc should be exactly the same.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

David- if I understand your post are you claiming to own the original? There is only one, and when it trades it's usually close to six figures. If you don't own that one, then yours is a reprint.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

I may be mistaken, but I was under the impression that one of the owners of the original strip made and sold reprints. If true or not, I've seen many reprints sold as reprints on eBay.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jon Canfield

Barry - I could be wrong but I read his post as being that he owned something similar to the Wagner strip so if the wagner strip is authentic, how can he go about authenticating his "item". I assumed he may own a similar uncut strip but with different players (maybe?)?

[Archive]

Posted By: David

In regards to the preceeding commments.......Barry, are you saying there is for sure only one proof strip in existence? How can you be so sure? Also, to anyone who has seen reprints of this Honus uncut strip, what do they look like? Is "reprint" on them anywhere? Any help and description,of any reprints seen on ebay would be great. Thanks a lot! -David

[Archive]

Posted By: identify7

David, you are requesting information, please share some in exchange. For example:

Where did you get your strip?
What players are represented?

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

I don't beleive the reprints say reprint on them. The reprints I saw for sale on eBay were clearly represented as reprints by the sellers.

The known original T206 Wagner strip, once owned by Barry Halper and pictured in the catalog, had distinct and unique wear and writing on the front which should make reprints of the card easy to identify. It's more than unlikely that two original Wagner strips would share the same creases and pencil marks.

The owner of the known original, whoever he is, probably paid around $80,000 for it. It's unlikely he would be selling it for $80 at a flea market or newspaper want ad. So if you got yours for under $100, it's unlikely you purchased the one that belonged to Barry Halper. And if your has identical 'creases' and pencil marks in the border as Halper's, it would seem to be a reprint of Halper's.

[Archive]

Posted By: T206Collector

...your piece is a reprint. I know this because you do not own the only known example and because you decided to write a post seeking to verify whether yours was authentic. People with authentic six figure cards do not have to seek information on their authenticity and anyone seeking help to authenticate a Wagner (let alone a proof Wagner strip) lacks the background necessary to actually have snagged the real deal. Is it possible you got lucky on ebay? Yes, it is theoretically possible. But you have a better chance of winning the Megamillions lottery than you do of acquiring the second known (currently unknown) Wagner proof strip. If you own an authentic T206 card you would be able to confirm this based on the quality of the cardboard, font size and color, borders, ink syle and usage, etc.

In short, if you have to ask whether something you own is a reprint, there is an overwhelmingly good chance that it is. And whether or not "reprint" was written on the back is totally and 100% irrelevant.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. I hope this does not discourage your collecting of vintage baseball cards and that you will continue to seek information from the writers on this board and through the development of your own collecting prowess.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

There is always the possibility of a second (or more) Wagner strip existing, but the one that we all know is heavily creased in a particular way. If someone else has a strip that is creased differently or not at all, then it could be a new find. But now that I think of it, a reprint of the original would exhibit the same wrinkles but would be uniformly smooth. No two strips could possibly be creased the same way, so a new one would not even need authenticating. You could tell by a glance if it were a copy or new to the hobby.

[Archive]

Posted By: david

Hello,
Wow, its great to see these responses. Every question keeps leading me to additional, more difficult questions. Any ideas of exactly what I should be seeing when I magnify the print up close? Anyone know what the "reprints" print looks like? How can reprints be sold on ebay without consent from the Wagner estate? I have read Cycleback's great articles on early 1900's Lithograghy and baseball cards, and that has led me to additional questions. like i said, it's a fun investigation on a really cool piece...

[Archive]

Posted By: david

A reprint would be uniformly smooth.......true creases (printing plate problems) could be similar, but not exact if they came off the press in the same manner...

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I'm not sure the Wagner estate has copyrights on the strip. I think you are free to sell any reprints, but does a modern reprint of the strip have any value?

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

First off, things would be a lot easier if you posted a scan of the strip in question. Many of us have seen the Halper strip, either in person or in catalogs, and would be able to tell you right away if what you have has any chance of being legit.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Martin Neal

I remember seing 4 or 5 of these reprints on ebay a couple of years ago. Also, didn't some kid from Florida win the Wagner strip in a Walmart promotional? I think he promptly sold for around $80,000.00

[Archive]

Posted By: tbob

There are hundreds of that Wagner strip floating around. All reprints. I have actually seen two versions, one which is really beat up and one which isn't as bad, but alas, all are reprints or reproductions.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Bob- how could there be two reprinted versions of the Wagner strip if it is made from the same original?

[Archive]

Posted By: dennis

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Haven't seen a picture of it in awhile. Four of the cards are in poor condition and the Bowerman is unblemished. That's odd. But the surface of the original would be rough to the touch because of the heavy creases. Any other example that had the same creasing and chipping and was uniformly smooth is a fake. No authenticating necessary.

[Archive]

Posted By: david

.....is it likely that the same kind of press that made the original, was used to make reprints? And if not, what is the likely dot formation of the print in the "reprints" one of the original owners made? Would the dot formations be of modern four color process? Any help greatly appreciated....

[Archive]

Posted By: Zach

A scan will help greatly in proving your items authenticity. Your strip has Wagner and Young, the SAME as the Halper strip, many reprints have been made of it. Many of which are not marked. I'm sure yours is fake, but a scan would help further that.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

As far as I know there are no known presses left in existances that are the same as those used to produce t206s. The more you keep dodging our questions, the more it's starting look like you are trying to figure out a way to create a good fake.

Instead of asking more questions, how about answering ours first.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: T206Collector

...that he is trying to generate interest in his known fake in order to solicit offers through this forum. Again, a scan and a post of the image on this Board would help offset these concerns.

[Archive]

Posted By: david

I am definitely not trying to reproduce this piece, nor am I soliciting the strip I have. If it's a reprint, I'll be very happy to just frame it and throw it on the wall in my sports office. I am on a sincere quest to find out more about the history on this piece. Like I said, it's been a lot of fun so far. I am new to the forum, and am learning how to post the scans.
The question remains out there what the dot formation would look like on the reprints.......we'll see if anyone can answer this:) Thanks,
-David

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

The dot matrix on the reprint would be identical to the original if it is nothing more than a laser copy or some form of color reproduction. Isn't the reprint just a replication of the original?

[Archive]

Posted By: Alex

Here ya go guys this is the image that appeared in the eBay auction 2 weeks ago

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

That's not even a high quality repro. I could take the original to my neighborhood photocopy shop and get better color and resolution than that. Look how blurry it is (I'll assume it's not the scan).

[Archive]

Posted By: Alex

Barry couldn't say I just happen to have posted it in another thread pertaining to it's authenticity if you check where the image originates from you'll notice it's eBay

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

It's practically impossible to make a sharp looking reprint of a T206, T206 Wagner or proof sheet using the original printing techniques. So if someone is trying to figure out how to do this, it can't be done.

You can make a good looking reprint, perhaps even removing or changing the creases with photoshop, but the modern printing techniques will give it away as modern.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Once again, you keep avoiding the issue of YOU posting a scan. Many of here are knowledgable enough to be able to tell you with a great deal of certainty whether what you have legit or not. Barring that, the board memebers cover a vast majority of the country and I am sure that someone living near you would be more than willing to help you out. As was pointed out, it's highly unlikely that if you unable to authenticate this it that you would have run across a legit one at a garage sale, etc.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: PC

David: in these situations, I usually ask myself "What would Terry Bradshaw think?" Then, I conclude, or do, the opposite.

Hope this helps resolve your questions and concerns.

[Archive]

Posted By: Martin Neal

I don't know if this is OT or not, please excuse.
Does anyone have a thought as to why the Bowerman on the wagner strip card is missing the B. Is it possible that the early print run of the Boston players were missing the B and that this mistake was corrected quickly. I know that some Boston players are missing the red and I think that is a different issue than some Boston players missing the team insignia. I have a Dahlen that is missing the B completely. There is no vestige of the B at all as you may find with a Sweeney no B. It looks like the Bowerman in the Wagner strip

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Not only is he missing the "B", but Bowerman's normal
background color should be GREEN.

Given that fact, then why does the Cy Young card have
it's normal GREEN background, but Bowerman does not ?

There is something very strange about this strip ?

[Archive]

Posted By: Tim James

I agree with Jay on this.There is no way there can be another strip like this without there being noticable differences in the condition of the card.All of us,knowing what the original looks like,could see quickly with a good scan if we have an addition to the hobby or not.

[Archive]

Posted By: Zach

You can ad Young's uniform being white to the list of oddities with this strip. One more thing that is very important is the text. I just finished looking through the Halper book and the text is far from the normal imo. Also, why hasn't anyone investigated this piece with the authenticating technology we have and came out with some results ? It wouldn't be the first fake item to come from the Halper collection. Hasn't anyone found it odd that the only uncut T206 strip to show in the public eye just happens to contain the world'ds most famous baseball card ? Too many red flags on this strip for me.

[Archive]

Posted By: tbob

Barry- I have seen a number of these floating around the last few years and I could be mistaken but I am almost positive I have not only seen the one shown above but also one in which the Kling upper right corner has been doctored to make the card "lose" the loss of the right top corner.

[Archive]

Posted By: David

Like someone mentioned, there is something very interesting about this strip. I am wondering like someone has mentioned what factors determined that Barry Halper's strip is indeed from 1909? Also, to Barry in the forum, like Cycleback said......you can't just run down to your local copy store and laser print this and keep the same dot formation integrity of the ancient printing presses. That is why I have questions about this......when magnified, the print is much different than the modern printing dot formation. I am wondering what kind of print the known reprints have, and also, what the original has. Do you think it would be the same as the lithography techniques used with all the other T206s? And if so, shouldn't someone be able to dismiss this piece or authenticate through the 100x magnified print? Thanks for any thoughts on this...
-David

[Archive]

Posted By: scott ingold

I wonder why getting a scan is just completly ignored ? As far as i'm concerned this should be a dead thread without a scan.

Something obviously is not right.

[Archive]

Posted By: Zach

I agree 100 percent with Scott. Give us a scan, something isn't right at all.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

I've been told that when you bite into them in the dark the real proof strips give of sparks, while the reprints don't. Amongst graders, it's known as the Velamint test.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

This also works on nickles if you have dental work like Jaws from the Bond movies, so that you don't get any wooden nickles.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Zach

Great observation about Cy Young's lack of Uniform color. That, and
my observation on Bowerman really raise doubts if this 5-card "strip"
was ever an original.

Wagner's and Brown's and Kling's uniforms are the correct color; so,
there appears to be problem here why Young's is NOT. The 4 - color
lithographic process did not print each player individually. It was a
process which applied each ink color on all the cards on a sheet,
simultaneously.

I think we have a real mystery developing here regarding this "strip" ? ?

[Archive]

Posted By: Martin Neal

The original also has the "B" missing from the Bowerman card.

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Weisner

Hi Zach and Ted,
Actually none of the cards on the proof strip are in finished form.
1. Brown is missing the blue around the collar of his uniform.
2. Wagner's background is much more Orange than the usual card.
3. Bowerman is missing his blue collar and the red processing for the B
4. Young's uniform is white instead of the normal grayish color
5. Kling is missing the blue around his collar.

While none of the cards are in "finished form", the Wagner is the closest in the group and may have been a proof they wanted Honus to sign off on. If it did truly come from his Estate then that would be a plausible explanation. Has anyone here handled the strip? Be well Brian

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

While cataloguing the Halper collection I got to see it regularly. First, keep in mind it is blank backed and thus not a finished product. And it seems that each of the five players have some color missing- would this lack of color be consistent with the strip simply missing its final color pass? Some, such as Ted Z., know a little more about the order in which the colors were applied. Having seen it in person, it does look ca. 1910, not inconsistent with what you would expect it to look like. Admittedly, it is an odd piece but being odd does not sign it off as a fake. You know, it could be examined by a major grading company for authenticity. Finally, for those who talked about copying the dot matrix pattern, if you make a good color photocopy of anything it will pick up exactly what it sees. So if an original has a dot matrix, the copy will look identical. I've made many color copies and cards look so real it is scary.

[Archive]

Posted By: drcycleback-.

Proofs are tests prints before the final printing. They are used by the printers to see how the card looks and determine what should be changed to make the card look better (ala 'needs more red.') It's the equivilent of a first or second draft of a article you are writing ('proof reading'). If a proof has differences from the final cards, that is not unexpected.

[Archive]

Posted By: david

....for finally stating this, as it seems many people don't understand this concept. Cycleback, is Barry correct in his statement that you can make an exact repoduction of any print with modern machines. I understand it according to your article that it may appear to be the same, but when magnified it is considerably different. Barry doesn't seem to believe this...

[Archive]

Posted By: david

There are people here so worried that I haven't included a scan yet. The scan from alinchitown is my original from ebay. I want to include another scan, but it says my file size is too big. Any ideas of what I may be doing wrong? Thanks.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

Computer printers are intended to make quality copies at the naked eye hang-on-the-wall level. There is no intention to duplicate at the microscopic level.

An elemental example is when I scanned and computer printed out a copy of an original 1920s baseball photo I owned. The computer copy made a scarily good looking print, but under strong magnification the reprinted image was made up of the multi-color dot pattern. This dot pattern identified it as a reprint, as real photos have no dot pattern (they aren't printing press and ink prints). The reprint would be easy to identify by anyone with a microscope and who knows photos don't have a multi color dot pattern.

When I was originally made my guide on judging the authenticity of cards severa years aago I made reprints of T206 cards on my laser printer (blank backed, on shiny computer paper). The high quality of the reprints was scary. So, I know first hand that computer printers can make nice images.

As a longtime collector and seller of photographs, I can identify most printing press versions from the naked eye level as the printed versions lack the clarity and depth of of a real photo. If you cut out a modern magazine picture, an avid photo collector looking at it at the naked eye level will likely know, or at least have a strong sense, it's not a photograph.

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

This post is funny. The well known authentic Wagner proof strip is a "one of a kind", especially with the unique creasing. The small photo Dennis posted is the authentic strip, the photo Alex posted is of a reproduction. I have seen a couple dozen of the reprints advertised on eBay in last few months. If Im not mistaken the authentic strip was last sold for $79K in Aug. 2002.

PS lets try to get this post well over 200 like that crazy soaking and pressing post JK please dont