Hey, pennant guys

[ooo-ribay]

Originally Posted by thetahat

Speaking of weird screening textures ... came across this while continuing my inventory. There was apparently a brief period - perhaps 1960-61 - when the print had a velvet-like feel to it. I can date these by the picture pennants of the era, I know Phillies, Pirates, and Orioles all have it. Also this simple Phillies pennant below. Additionally, the 3D pennants have it. For whatever reason, it didn’t last long.

I wonder if that "velvet-like" feel would be known as "flocking"? Flocking is applying very short fibers to adhesive. I have a similar pennant without the velvet feel. I always assumed mine was 1970s and should have been licensed but was not.

P.S. this is not a pennant you see very often. I can't remember the last one I saw...

[bocca001]

Nice pennant, Rob. I've never seen that one in my 5+ years of Giants pennant collecting. I know that design is more common for some teams and rare for others. The Oakland A's version sold on ebay earlier this year for decent money, and I think I recall seeing an Oakland A's version that was specifically for Vida Blue.

[Domer05]

Originally Posted by ooo-ribay

I wonder if that "velvet-like" feel would be known as "flocking"? Flocking is applying very short fibers to adhesive. I have a similar pennant without the velvet feel. I always assumed mine was 1970s and should have been licensed but was not.

P.S. this is not a pennant you see very often. I can't remember the last one I saw...

If a pennant's graphics exhibit a raised velvet-like feel, then yes this is what they marketed as a flocked pennant. The process was used by a small handful of manufacturers beginning in the 1940s. Two companies in particular made it their signature design element: Collegiate Mfg. Co. and Chicago Pennant Co.

Collegiate of Ames branded pennants made using their flocking process as "Chromtone" pennants and marketed their pennants under this snazzy name. Chipenco followed suit; except they dubbed their flocking method "A Silvet Process." Despite the two names, they made their pennants the same way. Essentially, you screen on a base layer in white that's sticky. Then you dump a bunch of white "flock," i.e., ground felt dust, atop the pennant. The flock is then cured to the pennant via a heat treatment. The excess flock is removed. Finally, the secondary colors are applied via block-out stencils to the design.

The main advantage to flocking is that the graphics will never crack like they will on a screen printed pennant, using screen printer's paints.

Today, Collegiate Pacific still utilizes this premium production method on all of their felt products.

[thetahat]

Originally Posted by Domer05

If a pennant's graphics exhibit a raised velvet-like feel, then yes this is what they marketed as a flocked pennant. The process was used by a small handful of manufacturers beginning in the 1940s. Two companies in particular made it their signature design element: Collegiate Mfg. Co. and Chicago Pennant Co.

Collegiate of Ames branded pennants made using their flocking process as "Chromtone" pennants and marketed their pennants under this snazzy name. Chipenco followed suit; except they dubbed their flocking method "A Silvet Process." Despite the two names, they made their pennants the same way. Essentially, you screen on a base layer in white that's sticky. Then you dump a bunch of white "flock," i.e., ground felt dust, atop the pennant. The flock is then cured to the pennant via a heat treatment. The excess flock is removed. Finally, the secondary colors are applied via block-out stencils to the design.

The main advantage to flocking is that the graphics will never crack like they will on a screen printed pennant, using screen printer's paints.

Today, Collegiate Pacific still utilizes this premium production method on all of their felt products.

Great post Domer ... though I’ll add my 3D Giants and Yankees have light cracking in spots.

[Fballguy]

Originally Posted by ooo-ribay

I wonder if that "velvet-like" feel would be known as "flocking"? Flocking is applying very short fibers to adhesive. I have a similar pennant without the velvet feel. I always assumed mine was 1970s and should have been licensed but was not.

P.S. this is not a pennant you see very often. I can't remember the last one I saw...

Sweet Giants pennant Rob. I'm sucker for anything with stars.

Rob

[thetahat]

Originally Posted by ooo-ribay

I wonder if that "velvet-like" feel would be known as "flocking"? Flocking is applying very short fibers to adhesive. I have a similar pennant without the velvet feel. I always assumed mine was 1970s and should have been licensed but was not.

P.S. this is not a pennant you see very often. I can't remember the last one I saw...

Never saw Giants before, very nice! Here are Expos and Phillies ...

[Domer05]

Any chance these flocked pennants from the 1970s are in fact Mitchell and Ness reproductions from the 2000s?

Other than M&N's pennants, all of which were reproductions, the only other MLB pennants I can think of made with flocked graphics were the four 3-D pennants made by Collegiate of Ames in the 1950s for the Yankees, Dodgers, Giants, and Red Sox.

I just find it odd that this manufacturer would make a flocked version for one or two teams; then screen print the others the conventional way for the remaining teams.

Additionally ... I don't recall the Dodger version of this style--which I recall being screen printed--featuring tassels. Do the tassels on the above Expos and Phillies pennants not resemble the M&N tassels we discussed last week, i.e., placed closer to the center?

[thetahat]

Originally Posted by Domer05

Any chance these flocked pennants from the 1970s are in fact Mitchell and Ness reproductions from the 2000s?

Other than M&N's pennants, all of which were reproductions, the only other MLB pennants I can think of made with flocked graphics were the four 3-D pennants made by Collegiate of Ames in the 1950s for the Yankees, Dodgers, Giants, and Red Sox.

I just find it odd that this manufacturer would make a flocked version for one or two teams; then screen print the others the conventional way for the remaining teams.

Additionally ... I don't recall the Dodger version of this style--which I recall being screen printed--featuring tassels. Do the tassels on the above Expos and Phillies pennants not resemble the M&N tassels we discussed last week, i.e., placed closer to the center?

These Expos and Phillies pennants are not Mitchell and Ness, the material is a cheaper paper-like felt. Genuine from early-mid 70s. The printing is standard of the time.

I can definitely attest to the 1960-61 Trench pennants as having flocked graphics. I’ll see if I can take a close up.

[thetahat]

This is my 1960 Phillies picture pennant.