TIM NEWCOMB....re..M116 set

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Thanks for an excellent, and well-written article in the current OLD CARDBOARD on the M116
set. I have a question for you regarding the printing of the M116 cards. You said they were
printed in series of 12 cards. This 12 card format is consistent with my theory on the printing
of the T206 cards. Furthermore, it is known that the E91 cards were printed 12 across (a 12
card E91 strip exists).

This 12 card format is further reinforced by an article I read on early 20th Century Lithographic
printing presses....that spoke of a 19 inch printing press track width. Well, 12 x 1.5 inch width
of these cards certainly jives with this track width.

So, were the M116 - 12 card series in strip form ? Or, were they in a 4 x 3 sheet array ?

Thanks again,

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Tim Newcomb

Hi Ted,



Thanks for the kind words on the article. As far as printing formats go, the only evidence I have is two sheets of Series 1 that look like ad sheets (posters)-- they are printed 2x6. Scan of one is below. I can send you a bigger scan via email upon request.

Best,
Tim

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff W.

E91 Uncut Strip

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Thanks for displaying the E91 12-card strip.

Can you tell me if this strip shows evidence, or some sort of hint, that cards were below it ?

My thinking is that American Caramel printed each of the 3 Series of this set on 36-card sheets.

Thanks,

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Thanks much for the scan.

The 2 x 6 format also confirms that my recent thinking regarding the printing of the T206 cards
could have been in rows of 6 cards across on a sheet.

This theory is based on the fact that the Subject count in each of the three major Series (150,
350, 460) and the Southern Lge. series all have a lowest common denominator of 6.

But of course, these 4 series in the T206 set can also have a higher common denominator of 12.
Therefore, it still remains a mystery as to how the printed sheets were formatted.

Yes, please send me a larger scan......tedzan11@comcast.net

Thanks again,

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff W.

It is very obvious, on the E91 strip, that it has been cut/trimmed on both the top and bottom. However, it is not very obvious that it has been cut on the sides. Therefore, I believe that your observation is correct that these were printed 12 cards wide. Let me double check the auction that I bought this from because they had other strips that we could look at to verify your theory.

Edited to add: That the theory has been shot down. I bought this strip in a mile high card company auction that also had several other E91 strips available. The size of the strips range from 12 cards wide to 16 cards wide. Below is the link to the auction, the E91 strips are lots #33-40.

http://www.milehighcardco.com/Catalog.aspx



Jeff

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I have 3 of those e91 strips. Let me know if ya'll need more intricate info, that might not be seen from the scans...regards

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Whenever convenient, can you please scan your E91 strips here.

Thanks,

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

Thanks for the scan you sent.

When I was collecting this set (early '90s) I found it interesting to compare the M116
pictures with the T206 portraits. Any thoughts on why SL didn't use the same portrait
of Wagner that was in the T206 set......but instead, chose the one American Caramel
used in their E90-2 set ?

Thanks again,

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Tim Newcomb

Hi Ted,

I really have no idea why that pose was chosen-- I suppose you could say that the E90-2 pose was untainted by tobacco, and therefore Wagner was OK with re-using it for M116, but that's total guesswork-- you probably know more about this kind of question than I do--

Best,
Tim