Missing Ink

[cguidi]

Not sure if this has already been discussed or is of interest to anyone but there was a pretty big collection of T206 cards missing red/magenta ink being sold on eBay recently. I waited until most were gone to post this so it didn't seem like I was promoting them. I snagged a butchered Vic Willis as all the others went for pretty big premiums. I know the Niles missing red ink has been documented before but there seem to be a bunch of other folks affected. Could this be caused by something other then a printing error? Is it safe to assume they all came from the same sheet and what are the odds that they stayed in the same collection for so long.

[Luke]

I looked at a few of these, including the Willis and decided to pass because they all had glue residue on the backs. I figured that may have caused the color variation. I'm far from an expert though, and would like to hear from some others.

[thehoodedcoder]

Originally Posted by LukeLyon

I looked at a few of these, including the Willis and decided to pass because they all had glue residue on the backs. I figured that may have caused the color variation. I'm far from an expert though, and would like to hear from some others.

exactly. they all had glue residue. the seller said they bought it from someone that had them hanging up. the sun faded the red away.

sorry man. they are a no go or I would have snatched them up.

kevin

[Jantz]

So I guess the sun faded the red off of this Niles too?

[thehoodedcoder]

Not necessarily. It depends on the card. Some are actually missing the ink run and others are just missing because of fading or what have you.

There were about 9 to 12 cards in the guys lot that 'appeared' were missing red ink. Its not like the guy had a card shop, or even had more than a handful of baseball card items for sale. What are the odds? Did you buy your lottery ticket?

Not every card was missing completely. Almost all had a faint remnant of red. I discussed this with some other people and everyone was in agreement that they were printed with red and now its gone. The only question was if the grading company would slab them the notation or not.

The one in your screen shot appears legit. There is no staining on the back, no paper loss and zero evidence of red ink any where on the card.

Kevin

[atx840]

Haven't figured this one out yet, back is fairly clean, front has issues...but not sure it was glue.

[bn2cardz]

There are several threads that express the hypothesis that certain glues made red/magenta to fade. Every time I look at a card that claims to be missing a color I always look at the back. More than not it turns out there is glue residue as there is with these.

[bn2cardz]

Here is a fairly recent thread where the subject of glue comes up:

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...=173663&page=5

[cguidi]

Thanks for the link to the previous discussion. Very enlightening. I think the fact that so many cards in this single collection were "missing" red ink suggests that it happened post production. Chemical, light, etc.

[1880nonsports]

is a color that usually will fade before most others - at least that's been my experience and what I've read. No idea about the lack of red on these examples.......

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by 1880nonsports

is a color that usually will fade before most others - at least that's been my experience and what I've read. No idea about the lack of red on these examples.......

I collect printing errors and it varies from year to year and company to company on what ink color will fade the easiest. To make sure I am not buying something someone has altered. I have altered a ton of cards to know what to look for in real missing ink cards verses something someone has altered. My knowledge in mainly from 1960-2000.

[Pete Pyro]

I'm far from an expert or even a studied novice on the subject, but the orange backgrounds look like faded red. My uneducated guess is that a printing error would show as a distinct yellow in these cases. After all, was red not used in the process to create orange?

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by Pete Pyro

After all, was red not used in the process to create orange?

Good question Pete. There was an old thread about the color process, I'll try to search for it. Steve or Chris would probably know- but the thing I wonder about is- was orange created by laying down red over yellow? That doesn't sound right. I think from the yellow/brown scraps, those (along with black) must've been first. I think the color red may have been laid down last? Anyhow, hopefully our printing experts will chime in. I would think orange would be a color mixed prior to being laid down- but I'm also below novice status on this

Sincerely, Clayton

[Pete Pyro]

Originally Posted by teetwoohsix

Good question Pete. There was an old thread about the color process, I'll try to search for it. Steve or Chris would probably know- but the thing I wonder about is- was orange created by laying down red over yellow? That doesn't sound right. I think from the yellow/brown scraps, those (along with black) must've been first. I think the color red may have been laid down last? Anyhow, hopefully our printing experts will chime in. I would think orange would be a color mixed prior to being laid down- but I'm also below novice status on this



Sincerely, Clayton

Also good questions. I do know that dropping red on top of yellow is a common practice to make a beautifully bright red. I've seen it done with auto painting anyway.

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by Pete Pyro

Also good questions. I do know that dropping red on top of yellow is a common practice to make a beautifully bright red. I've seen it done with auto painting anyway.

Interesting! Here's one with an orange background, and red letters in the uniform:

Sincerely, Clayton

P.S. I can't find the old thread I'm looking for.

[atx840]

Looks like a variant of red/dark orange was added over yellow to make the Maddox orange background (first card is not mine).

[Pete Pyro]

Cards in very poor condition have a loss of color. Meaning the colors were once brighter. I'm convinced that this error/print variation craze is costful to some collectors

[steve B]

I bought mine to study.

I don't often see a supposed missing color where a big chunk of it's history is known. The recent ones from Ebay supposedly had around 40 years of light exposure. So I assume fading. I did pay a bit extra.

It's interesting to hear some passed grading.

Some of what's interesting is the differences. For example, One of the ones I got was Downey. And it looks just like the one above. No Bright red team name but a pink team name and belt.

The Oakes shown above Shows no pink where the team is, but does have it in the face and background. (Most of the backgrounds intended to be orange are done as pink over yellow.)

Both are normal as far as the pink layer goes.

That's interesting because the pink under the red makes a brighter red. And from these two subjects appears to be something changed to partway between 350 and 350-460. I'll have to look at others to see if that's consistent, as it's a fairly major change that added quality but was also a bit more expensive. That tiny bit of ink over a lot of sheets adds up.

Steve B