T206 Blue Old Mill

[Exhibitman]

My [limited] understanding is that any card made 20-30 years ago uses paper that has titanium dioxide in it, which will fluoresce very white under UV light. That's one way of outing counterfeit Fro-Joy cards. Perhaps the focus of inquiry should be the paper [front and back] and not the ink.

Assuming the card is legit, however, my view is that it would be best classified as a printing freak or variation, not as a legitimate new back type. I'd treat the other accidental back color variations as such too. Doesn't mean it isn't desirable...

[Rob D.]

Having seen the card in person, I would not be as quick as some who haven't seen it to classify that blue as "Polar Bear" blue. It might very well be, but it's not a slam dunk -- especially when one draws that conclusion based on a scan or photo. One of my first thoughts upon seeing the card was that the printing on the back is not "Polar Bear" blue.

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by Rob D.

Having seen the card in person, I would not be as quick as some who haven't seen it to classify that blue as "Polar Bear" blue. It might very well be, but it's not a slam dunk -- especially when one draws that conclusion based on a scan or photo. One of my first thoughts upon seeing the card was that the printing on the back is not "Polar Bear" blue.

Interesting point Rob D.,,,

I was discussing this thread with my wife, and looking at my Polar Bear backed cards, and she said "these are blue?"....I told her they(PB's) always have seemed more "black" to me,but they've always been described as "blue". My eyes aren't the best anyways.... Thanks for your input on this card, by the way.

Sincerely, Clayton

[edhans]

Originally Posted by Rob D.

Having seen the card in person, I would not be as quick as some who haven't seen it to classify that blue as "Polar Bear" blue. It might very well be, but it's not a slam dunk -- especially when one draws that conclusion based on a scan or photo. One of my first thoughts upon seeing the card was that the printing on the back is not "Polar Bear" blue.

+1 It didn't strike me as "Polar Bear" blue either. Count me in the camp of believers.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by edhans

+1 It didn't strike me as "Polar Bear" blue either. Count me in the camp of believers.

This Old Mill really looks blue to me. Like you, I never thought of Polar Bear backs as blue, until someone on the board said so.

I would love to get a first-hand look at this, with a loupe; however, I respect the opinion of those who have seen it, even though it makes little sense.

As far as back-collecting, given this example, I'm just glad I'm not one.

[teetwoohsix]

I agree Peter, the amount of experienced/veteran collectors who have seen this in person and said it looks legit seems to carry more weight about it's legitimacy (in my eyes at least) than the fact that it's graded- and out of the major TPG's I tend to trust SGC the most.It's hard to go against the grain when you look at the wisdom of the respected people of this hobby who have had the chance to view it in person, even with a loupe.

I, unfortunately, am skeptical in nature about most things. Sometimes I hate that about myself. I'm always trying to complete a puzzle that can't be completed

Thank goodness we are all entitled to our own opinions, and allowed to express those opinions here. I guess I'll be skeptical until another surfaces. With that being said- the T210 Old Mill set, with 640 cards(?) and 8 different series- every card having an Old Mill back- I wonder why we don't have a Blue Back showing up in that set?

Sincerely, Clayton

[steve B]

Ok, so here's a theory- Or just a crazy guess if you want to call it that.

T206s are being printed, a batch of fronts are done and backs are being printed. Polar bear on one press, Old mill on another. It gets late in the afternoon, and the guy running the Old mill press realizes he's going to run low on ink a bit before quitting time. So he asks the guy next to him who's runnning a dark blue if he'll have any extra. He will, and shortly before quitting the first guy adds that extra to his ink reservoir. Blue mixes with the black he's running, making some very dark blue backs, and transitioning to a color close to the blue but not quite, maybe just a bit darker.
The day ends, the presses are washed down removing the days ink, and the handful of sheets slips by QC if there is any because the colors are close until the last few sheets. They're cut and distributed, probably not even getting into the same carton.

-Most pressmen do their own QC in the time I was at the print shop I only did QC once. And that was on a program for an event where we had to look for perfect copies that would be presented to the dignitaries presenting papers. Try finding 50-75 flawless copies out of 5000 of anything.

Steve B

[freakhappy]

Steve,

Unless Old Mill was printed in Ohio, I don't think your theory is possible....right?

[the 'stache]

Thank you as always, Chris. I'll check those links out.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

My [limited] understanding is that any card made 20-30 years ago uses paper that has titanium dioxide in it, which will fluoresce very white under UV light. That's one way of outing counterfeit Fro-Joy cards. Perhaps the focus of inquiry should be the paper [front and back] and not the ink.

Assuming the card is legit, however, my view is that it would be best classified as a printing freak or variation, not as a legitimate new back type. I'd treat the other accidental back color variations as such too. Doesn't mean it isn't desirable...

That's a brightening agent used to make the paper more white. Un-brightened papers have been available all along, and a few modern cards won't flouresce. Most brown papers and cardboards won't either.

So while flourescing is a sign of a modern paper lack of it isn't.

Steve B

[ullmandds]

Based on all of the respected members on here who saw this card in person...and say it's real...I believe them!

Most fake t206's are very obviously fake...in fact...other than photocopied fakes...I don't think I've ever seen a fake that was good enough to pass by so many experienced collectors.

I don't think this "find" will change the backs collecting dynamic very much as only 1 example is known...so only 1 wealthy collector will own it someday.

Those things being said...it's still odd to me that such a discovery this late in the game has just occurred...and if someone told me 2 months ago that a new t206 back color would be exposed at the national...I wouldn't have believed it.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

Based on all of the respected members on here who saw this card in person...and say it's real...I believe them!

Most fake t206's are very obviously fake...in fact...other than photocopied fakes...I don't think I've ever seen a fake that was good enough to pass by so many experienced collectors.

I don't think this "find" will change the backs collecting dynamic very much as only 1 example is known...so only 1 wealthy collector will own it someday.

Those things being said...it's still odd to me that such a discovery this late in the game has just occurred...and if someone told me 2 months ago that a new t206 back color would be exposed at the national...I wouldn't have believed it.

I'm not surprised. I also collect stamps and specialize in stamps made for the various cabinet level departments from 1873-1878. One of these was made in huge quantities, from 6 different plates. Two plates were used on an experimental press and are actually quite uncommon. To the point that no stamp that could be proven to be from plate 40 was known. That's 139 years in a hobby that thrives on tiny details. two weeks ago I found a stamp with a clear bit of the plate number showing. Plate 40

So I'm really not surprised that in a hobby that typically rejects any difference that isn't horribly obvious and only a handful of sets have been explored in much detail until recently.( Burdick had some lists, like the existing backs. And decent lists were around in the 70's - So only around 40 years of somewhat basic study and maybe 20 of advanced study. ) There are new discoveries.

Steve B