I Believe This Could Be A Complete Horizontal Layout For This T206 Sheet

[Jantz]

Hi Pat

Excellent work as always!

Some aspects of your sheet layout I definitely agree with, others I'm just not sure about at this time.

Plate scratches are pretty solid evidence and I need more time to research the subject.

One thing that leads me to more questions than answers is the card below which has a Piedmont 150 back.

Jantz

[MVSNYC]

Incredible. Great work, bravo.

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by Jantz

Hi Pat

Excellent work as always!

Some aspects of your sheet layout I definitely agree with, others I'm just not sure about at this time.

Plate scratches are pretty solid evidence and I need more time to research the subject.

One thing that leads me to more questions than answers is the card below which has a Piedmont 150 back.

Jantz

Hey Jantz,
I've looked at the information Pat has provided and have concluded (and I think Pat has too), that there was more than one press run for the Piedmont 150 subjects and that the layouts likely changed. To date, no two-name card in Piedmont 150 has exhibited a plate scratch.

Secondly, while I believe that in this sheet's case the vertical subjects were the same all the way down, Pat's depiction only shows four rows with the plate scratches. Other parts of the sheet vertically "could" have had a different order which would lead to the existence of the two-name Hinchman-Stovall.

Note that there is also two instances of Powell-O'Leary (both currently attributed to this sheet); Berten (Batting) also appears with Dooin as does Konetchy with Jennings.

[mrvster]

you will all be on my grading co. team someday

great work to all in involved!

[Pat R]

Thanks for the compliments everyone and thank you for the input Jantz.
I think it's important to answer and discuss the questions/opinions
like the one you have here.

Erick is correct I believe the sheet layouts and even the sheet sizes
varied throughout the whole series including the PD 150's. I will post
some of the evidence that led me to conclude this.

[Pat R]

I'm pretty confident with the layout of this sheet based on all the evidence I've
gathered. For the Hinchman/Stovall Jantz posted to work on this sheet it
would have to be a strange sheet layout.

Here is the lower scratch of Goode-Hincman-Bergen scanned together.
I had to substitute Goode for Powell because I don't have this Powell
card but it's the same exact scratch as Goode. You can see how well
they line up even where the scratch is split with two lines.

I will post scans of the Gibson-Stovall-O'Leary together but I'll
have to piece them together because Gibson and O'Leary are
in slabs.

I scan them at 1200 dpi but this is as large as I can post them here.

It's almost impossible for them to line up absolutely perfect because
of the different cuts (notice how far to left the Bergen is cut compared
to the right side of Hinchman and the right side of Goode compared to the
left of Hinchman)

[sreader3]

Pat -- Great work.

I buy the same-subject-on-multiple-sheets theory for the additional reason that some of the subjects appearing on Pat's reconstructed scratched sheet are significantly scarcer than others.

[And I would put Stovall (Portrait) and Hinchman (Cleveland) in the "easier" category].

Scot

[Jobu]

Would an estimate of sheet margin size be helpful in this discussion? I have been thinking about a way to figure that out for a few months and can try and come up with some guesses if they might help. i am thinking that an estimate of margin size combined with Pat's number of rows and columns might let us look at common sizes for different press and paper sizes.

Edited to add: And of course, awesome work Pat!

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by sreader3

Pat -- Great work.

I buy the same-subject-on-multiple-sheets theory for the additional reason that some of the subjects appearing on Pat's reconstructed scratched sheet are significantly scarcer than others.

[And I would put Stovall (Portrait) and Hinchman (Cleveland) in the "easier" category].

Scot

Thank You Scot. While working on this I've developed a great appreciation for you and all of the others that have done extensive research on this set, it
can be a lot of information to keep track of.

The answers to some of the mystery's might be hidden in these sheets. For instance... Powers is the lone 150 only subject on this sheet
and we know he's also the only SC factory 649op subject from that group.
The rest of the 150 only subjects are together on a different plate scratch
sheet with the exception of Wagner, Magie and George Brown (Chic) no
scratches have been found on these three subjects yet.

The following are together on the same plate scratch sheet.

Ames (hands at chest)
Brown, M (cubs)
Burch (batting)
Donlin (fielding)
Doyle (throwing)
Evers (cubs)
Pattee
Pelty (horizontal)
Reulbach (glove showing)

Schulte (front view) is also on this sheet and personally I still consider
this card a 150 only.