1910 COUPON Rossman....with EPDG wet-ink-transfer....and it's significance

[robw1959]

Originally Posted by Luke

Amazing card! It's definitely a post-factory transfer as Scott pointed out.

What makes you think so, Luke? How can the factory wet ink transfer theory be totally ruled out?

[G1911]

+1 for after-production wet transfer.

In addition to the points already made about the damage clues, it doesn't make sense to me that Coupon and EPDG sheets would be stacked on each other in any scenario. I think Polar Bear is obviously T206, and T213-1 was produced alongside T206 in the same time frame (agnostic on if it should be rebranded from Burdick's numbering), but this doesn't fit. Sheets for different brands would go to different factories, and I doubt a press was running a sheet of EDPG, then a sheet of Coupon, etc. to be stacked on top of each other and mixed like this. That Coupon used an entirely different stock would also make this much less likely; it is far more likely that Coupon was its own production run as the evidence suggests was standard for the ALC/ATC partnership sets. Most cards with a wet sheet transfer of a different brand are probably after-the-fact in all of these issues.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by G1911

+1 for after-production wet transfer.

In addition to the points already made about the damage clues, it doesn't make sense to me that Coupon and EPDG sheets would be stacked on each other in any scenario. I think Polar Bear is obviously T206, and T213-1 was produced alongside T206 in the same time frame (agnostic on if it should be rebranded from Burdick's numbering), but this doesn't fit. Sheets for different brands would go to different factories, and I doubt a press was running a sheet of EDPG, then a sheet of Coupon, etc. to be stacked on top of each other and mixed like this. That Coupon used an entirely different stock would also make this much less likely; it is far more likely that Coupon was its own production run as the evidence suggests was standard for the ALC/ATC partnership sets. Most cards with a wet sheet transfer of a different brand are probably after-the-fact in all of these issues.

Although I differ with some of you, I appreciate everyone's opinion posted here.

G1911
American Lithographic printed all the white-bordered and gold-bordered cards (fronts and backs). These sheets were hung up to dry, then cut-up into cards and shipped
to the various Tobacco Factories.
Sheets of cards were NOT shipped to the Factories. Where do you get that from ?

Furthermore, many presses were operating in the process of producing Millions of these Tobacco cards. Stacking sheets of various brands of T206's is a well-known fact,
as we have seen quite a number of "wet-ink-transfers". Simply due to the rush to get these cards cut-down and shipped.

The EPDG impression is very faint, and perhaps my scan isn't sufficient to provide an accurate judgement without closely examining this card. If I come to the National,
I will bring this Rossman card with me for further discussions with you guys.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Although I differ with some of you, I appreciate everyone's opinion posted here.

G1911
American Lithographic printed all the white-bordered and gold-bordered cards (fronts and backs). These sheets were hung up to dry, then cut-up into cards and shipped
to the various Tobacco Factories.
Sheets of cards were NOT shipped to the Factories. Where do you get that from ?

Furthermore, many presses were operating in the process of producing Millions of these Tobacco cards. Stacking sheets of various brands of T206's is a well-known fact,
as we have seen quite a number of "wet-ink-transfers". Simply due to the rush to get these cards cut-down and shipped.

The EPDG impression is very faint, and perhaps my scan isn't sufficient to provide an accurate judgement without closely examining this card. If I come to the National,
I will bring this Rossman card with me for further discussions with you guys.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

I am not saying that complete sheets would be shipped to a factory for cutting, I am saying that it doesn't make sense to intersect sheets from different jobs going to different places into one mixed stack. Doing that would create far more work and have to be undone while cutting and then boxing them up for delivery, adding a higher margin of error and effort for no gain.

I am well aware that they used more than a single press, but again, it doesn't make sense to me that they would just carry the sheets from every press over to one spot and stack them intermixed. That would create far more work than simply keeping them separate from the get go. Without direct evidence, I think the safest assumption is generally the simplest.

We have a number of wet ink transfers, but that does not mean they happened at the factory. The E90 Bender with a T206 wet ink transfer above is just one example that some of these are 100% after-production transfers. I don't see any reason to assume this card happened at the factory, when there is an easier explanation.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Although I differ with some of you, I appreciate everyone's opinion posted here.

G1911
American Lithographic printed all the white-bordered and gold-bordered cards (fronts and backs). These sheets were hung up to dry, then cut-up into cards and shipped
to the various Tobacco Factories.
Sheets of cards were NOT shipped to the Factories. Where do you get that from ?

Furthermore, many presses were operating in the process of producing Millions of these Tobacco cards. Stacking sheets of various brands of T206's is a well-known fact,
as we have seen quite a number of "wet-ink-transfers". Simply due to the rush to get these cards cut-down and shipped.

The EPDG impression is very faint, and perhaps my scan isn't sufficient to provide an accurate judgement without closely examining this card. If I come to the National,
I will bring this Rossman card with me for further discussions with you guys.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

I just can't see this being caused during production.

Sheets being hung up to dry would be very unusual. That may be done at a small art printer producing a handful of sheets a day, but not at a commercial printer. The press automatically stacks the sheets on an outfeed platform, and some air remains in between (It's called "windage", or was where I worked. And it's necessary for drying and handling. ) The ink layer is often thin enough to mostly dry with only minimal air exposure.

Obviously stacking of sheets was done, since that's how the sheets come off the press. But from things like the existence of blank backs, we can be fairly sure the fronts were printed then the backs.
The press would typically print only one color.
The cards printed with EPDG backs would be part of one individual job, to meet a particular order. So they would be stacked together. Too little windage, pressure on the stack (Like from an employee leaning on it - Heard about that one for 2 years ) Or the ink being too "wet", or conditions that didn't lead to appropriate drying would lead to WST or more properly "Offset transfers" - Either term is ok, the latter is just more technical.

Stacking one order on top of another smaller order, especially one done on a different paper stock isn't something that makes sense. (I'm assuming the overall order for Coupon was much smaller than that for EPDG. I think that's a safe assumption)
It's also entirely possible that a large outfit like ALC would leave presses set up for different stock thicknesses, so the press printing EPDG and the one doing Coupon wouldn't be the same press, and may have been in an entirely different location.
And those presses may have even been printing sheets of an entirely different size. Printing say 100,000 of something vs 20,000 would be very different. Too much setup time for too small of a run would be inefficient and wasteful, and no printer could get to the size of ALC without being efficient.

Ink formulas then were essentially trade secrets for the larger companies.
Some formulations were better than others, but most were a colorant in a fluid medium that dried or hardened.
Linseed oil was a common base for some types of ink, but probably not used by ALC, while it gets "dry" fairly quickly, it may not truly dry for years. I have a printed item that caused a post production offset transfer in shipping - well over 100 years after it was printed!.

Conversely, since lithography requires the rejection of oil based inks by a damp stone or plate, water alone shouldn't cause a transfer. I tried with a T206 a few years ago, and at normal temperatures I couldn't force a transfer using just water. Embossing wood grain onto the card yes, any sort of transfer no.
Heat and or some chemical involvement would be required, eventually I suppose I could duplicate what would cause it, but haven't the time, budget or inclination. (It would also vary depending on the exact ink, and there may be different carriers for the colorant... )

[RedsFan1941]

come on ted

[Exhibitman]

Hey, give Ted a break. He was only 4 when he pulled the Rossman card from the pack.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by steve B

I just can't see this being caused during production.

........................

Conversely, since lithography requires the rejection of oil based inks by a damp stone or plate, water alone shouldn't cause a transfer. I tried with a T206 a few years ago, and at normal temperatures I couldn't force a transfer using just water. Embossing wood grain onto the card yes, any sort of transfer no.
Heat and or some chemical involvement would be required, eventually I suppose I could duplicate what would cause it, but haven't the time, budget or inclination. (It would also vary depending on the exact ink, and there may be different carriers for the colorant... )

Hi Steve

I appreciate what you are saying here. You speak from a Printer's experience. I, too, have had some Printing experience in a small Print Shop back in my High School years.

I singled out your last paragraph, because I, too, have for years tried to simulate "post-production" printing ink transfers with T206 cards. By simulating heat, humidity, and
with various solutions. I have NOT been able to get the ink to transfer from one card to another (even after lengthy periods of time). And especially regarding the ink on the
backs of these cards.....absolutely no transfers.

Apparently, American Lithographic used some very high quality (no-run) ink to print these cards. What is your thinking regarding this ?


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[nineunder71]

I have a few of these. And while I have also always been of the understanding that they are post-factory transfers, I struggle to say Definitely.

Here is a Tolstoi back with a Polar Bear transfer on the front.

[Jobu]

Here are a few examples I have saved over the years that show the WSTs definitely happened when cards were in the hands of collectors. These do not, of course, mean that WSTs could not have happened during the printing process, but they do prove that they happened after it.

An E90 Bender with a T206 Sweet Caporal transfer and a T206 Waddell with a T205 gold transfer.

[Pat R]

It's post factory as I originally said when I pointed it out to you that your
Rossman had a EPDG transfer.

Originally Posted by Pat R

Ted, What's the transfer on your Rossman coupon? I think it might be an
EPDG transfer.

Originally Posted by Pat R

It looks like paper addition on the front but with the smaller scan it's hard to tell it could be paper loss but either way it looks like it was stuck to an EPDG
at some point.

Attachment 341678

Attachment 341679Attachment 341680

Originally Posted by tedzan

Pat

Here are larger front/back scans of the Rossman card. Rossman is an EPDG no-print; therefore, how can it have an EPDG transfer ?

The Rossman card was printed with very few backs. Most likely because he was traded by Detroit to the St. Louis Browns (August 20, 1909).
Plus, his Major League career ended Sept, 3, 1909.



TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Originally Posted by Pat R

Ted, It's a "storage" transfer not a factory transfer.

Originally Posted by tedzan

Pat

You have a better eye than I.

Nice catch on the EPDG transfer on my Rossman card.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[nineunder71]

Who erased the ‘88’ pencil mark on the back? Haha

[oldeboo]

Originally Posted by Jobu

Here are a few examples I have saved over the years that show the WSTs definitely happened when cards were in the hands of collectors. These do not, of course, mean that WSTs could not have happened during the printing process, but they do prove that they happened after it.

An E90 Bender with a T206 Sweet Caporal transfer and a T206 Waddell with a T205 gold transfer.

Even though it's technically damage, that's a pretty neat card to look at.