Which of these two Minor League sets has the fewest remaining examples?

[wonkaticket]

Interesting to note that on two of the Weavers mine and the back damaged one. The bats appear on the right whereas most T4’s the bats appear on the left. I have identified 5 T4’s where the bats are on the right the bulk of the rest are all on the left.

The 5 with bats on the right are Spencer, Weaver (2), Moskiman, Shehan (1).



Doubt it’s of any major significance but thought it was neat.

Cheers,

John

[baseballart]

I can't comment on the numbers between the two groups, but on the T4s, I've never seen a Victoria or Vancouver example. I believe the standard catalog lists a Victoria player (Dashwood?), but I don't know anyone who has ever seen one as well.

Max

[Vintagecatcher]

John,

That's a beautiful Buck Weaver T4!

Even the cropping and tilt of the photo is different on the Weavers T4s.

I would be willing to bet that each was created individually once the company received the 50 coupons and the request for a particular player.

I noticed also that the color on the background cardboard surrounding the oval comes in a wide range of colors or shades of grey.

Thanks again to all for your responses.


Patrick

[Vintagecatcher]

If you look closely at the bottom right of my Berry Cabinet you will notice a couple of very small marks. What it is is the top of the number 74, which is the number used on the Obak Coupon for Berry.


Patrick

[Michael Peich]

Thanks for starting this thread, Patrick. I'll weigh in with one more example of an OM cabinet. I agree with Barry, John, and Leon--I think the OM cabinets are much scarcer. That being said, John's Obak cabinets are gorgeous, especially the Weaver, which I have had the privilege of examining.

John's point on variations is interesting and can be traced, perhaps, to different poses being taken for the same player. I am fairly certain that photographers took multiple photos of each minor league player, and then sold their photos to the cigarette manufacturers: Old Mill, Red Sun, Contentnea, etc. (See the T209-II article that I wrote with Tim Newcomb in the latest Old Cardboard) The result is that a photo of a player in one set might have an almost imperceptible visual difference from another photo of the same player in a different set. There could even be alterations to the same photo. I have included my OM cabinet of Simmons along with the T209-II and T210-7 versions of Simmons. In each card the same photo is reproduced. Upon closer inspection you'll see that the ball in the T209 version lays on the ground, outside his glove (I think the original placement), while the OM and 210-7 show the ball in his glove. Moving the ball could have been achieved with a crude version of alteration, i.e., physically moving the ball in the photo--the ball looks fake in both the OM and 210-7. My point is that the differences are often slight, but, I am certain, go back to different, but similar photos being used, and in some cases altering the original photo. Enjoy.

Cheers,
Mike

[wonkaticket]

Mike very cool, the stuff you guys have picked up on T209 is really great. For those who have hadn't had a chance to take a peek at Mike's article on T209's please do its a great read.

[Brian Weisner]

Hi Mike,
Nice... Here are my three of Richardson: No ball T209, both feet on ground,R on cap, glove... lots of differences...



Be well Brian

PS I have a list of the Old Mill Cabs that I will post in a bit... I'm pretty sure they are tougher than the Obak's....