 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1
05-04-2013, 09:42 AM
|
||||
|
||||
this is pretty much the same thing as the e222 AWH cards. They were home made by Arthur William Havens. They are recognized by the catalog and should be.
Tim Cathey wrote an article for Old Cardboard explaining the details. These were the first t206 reprint. They are still highly desirable and collected by collectors today. Probably other issues are similar and deserve an ACC designation. Burdick did a fine job with these type of issues.
__________________
T206Resource.com 
|
|
#2
05-04-2013, 01:58 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
While these cards may be considered "homemade" it appears to me that Rose & Company had to have something to do with their creation (other than just supplying blanks) because of the similarity of the name fonts, to-wit:
 
|
|
#3
05-04-2013, 02:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
It's plausible and perhaps likely that a local photography studio made the postcards for the team. Local photography studios purchased from factories their blank photo postcard paper and cardboard mounts for cabinet cards and CDVs. They usually didn't make those supplies themselves. It's plausible a studio purchased blank Rose postcards to make photo postcards for the team.
Also, it was not an uncommon cabinet card style back then to have an oval or circular area in the middle and the photographic portrait cut out and pasted in it. The image is often handcut. Last edited by drc; 05-04-2013 at 02:25 PM.
|
|
#4
05-04-2013, 03:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#5
05-04-2013, 04:50 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I don't think it matters who made them...the second "find" of these cards IMO boosts their legitimacy. Don't need an ACC number to be legit.
__________________
Looking for Nebraska Indians memorabilia, photos and postcards
|
|
#6
05-04-2013, 06:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
If we don't know who "fathered" them, then they're "illegitimate".
|
|
#8
05-04-2013, 10:01 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The Rose Co. did not manufacture any Springfield postcards, that is what I wanted to establish. These cards are in no category - every card ever made does not have to fit in a category. The ACC designation tag should be removed from these postcard's identity. That would be the happy part. But the deception continues. What more is there to prove? Correcting the description is the right thing to do, the professional thing to do and the kindest. If nothing is done the winner of this auction lot will be unhappy to find these postcards rejected by the grading service.
Jim have the other three? The definition of legitimacy in this case is belonging to the PC760 Series. Quantity is irrelevant. Images shown on lot#132 are spotted unlike the images from Mrs.E. And the Collins has a crease. I did wonder if they were poorly handled to get that way. collins.jpg collins12.jpg Last edited by jerrys; 05-05-2013 at 05:18 AM. Reason: spelling
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
