![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I was wondering that myself Scott, but it seemed to me if it was ran through twice on one color the registration would be off (more than it is). I was wondering though if the magenta plate did come down twice though. If that is true wouldn't that mean the others on the sheet should be out there also somewhere?
I have been PMed a possible idea: "Most of these cards went through different prints and adjustments. Throughout the "lifespan" of a card you can see several different variations, primarily with the colouring. They did add pinks (buffs) and purplish (reds) to cards that you can't find on earlier versions. This might just be the case, or this was a first run with extra ink or a different pigment hue to the ink used on that one run." This scenario also makes me think there should be others out there with this print variation. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Andy, I have seen these before - I'll dig through my old card pics and see what I can find.
__________________
$co++ Forre$+ |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
I also just haven't been able to find info on what caused it. I had my own guess about it being double printed, but I couldn't think of why the printer would have felt the need to do that (and again how the register stayed fairly clean). |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The ink colors were hand mixed, and were at least into the 1980's. So a certain red would be a basic red plus a bit of some other colors to alter it just a bit. So if the press operator mixed a dark batch that day or had some leftover from whatever he did before that he decided to use up that would do it. That's the most likely explanation.
Sloppy cleanup between colors would also do that. Or if they ran red ink on the tan plate. Registration once adjusted will stay in place accurately, even from one sheet to the next. A double printing of one color is possible, but unusual. There's a few other odd things that could cause that, but they usually leave other signs that I'm not seeing. Have you got a high res scan 800-1200dpi? That will show enough detail to get a better idea of which thing happened. And if someone has a high res scan of a regular one that would help too. I don't have Groom yet. Steve B |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Here are some I've owned in the past - best res I have:
![]()
__________________
$co++ Forre$+ Last edited by Runscott; 02-20-2012 at 05:36 PM. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Right now the highest I have is 600dpi. I don't have a typical Groom. I have been wanting to add one to my collection now to compare, but I am not going to pay the prices I am seeing just for a comparison card.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Looking at the top of the hat it looks like the pink might be overinked. The presses have controls for how much ink is supplied to the rollers, and if there's too much or if the ink is too thin it can overcome the wetness of the plate and show as a smeared print. Usually it shows as blurriness at all the edges and can make screened areas seem solid.
I finally scanned the one overinked T206 I have. Not a really serious overinking, it makes most of the hat red. The black is also out of register to the left. So you can see the right side of the red and it's a bit fuzzy from the overinking especially at the top right. The Groom scan doesn't show a lot of bluriness, but the pink wouldn't show that as well especially if they're screened. The system resizes scans, so it's not easy to tell. You can always Email a scan to me. Steve B PS If you're into the printing it's worth scanning at 1200. There's so much detail and you can usually see each color. The Bush for example has alignment marks at the top for black red pink and yellow. and Black pink yellow and blue at the bottom as well as a few other layout marks. |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
My home scanner had a default of 600dpi. I looked at the close up scans (I suggest people never do this if they are under the delusion that their cards don't have flaws or are "undergraded") and enjoyed trying to figure it out.
I was going to scan it at a higher resolution on my office scanner, but forgot to bring it will me to the office today. I will email them to you when I do scan them in. You can send me your email. Thanks. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS: T201 Mecca, T205 Gold, T206 White, OM T210-3 | npa589 | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 14 | 10-21-2011 07:01 PM |
A T206 printing question for Bill Heitman, or anyone ? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 62 | 03-06-2007 02:52 PM |
T206 Question (MastroNet) | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 23 | 12-14-2005 04:55 PM |
A T206 printing question for the experts | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 12 | 02-08-2005 01:47 PM |
T206 Ty Cobb Question | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 4 | 06-09-2002 12:21 PM |