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.

[atx840]

SGC concluded the OM was legit then the designation makes sense to me. I do not think a slight miscut (double name) deserves a variation designation however.

[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

[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.

[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.

[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

[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?

[steve B]

All the T 206s were printed in New York and shipped to the packing plants. Same for all the other ATC cards.

The packing plants only had equipment to produce and package various tobacco products.

Even today, very few companies produce the entire product including packaging. The only one I can think of was Ford and they don't do it anymore.

Steve B

[fishpro1202]

This is a sweet caporal back in blue writing. It looks authentic and came from a large estate of similar t206 cards which all look authentic. Any ideas on where the blue back came from? Card is T206 John Hummel, Brooklyn

[fishpro1202]

What does everyone think?

[Jay Wolt]

Fish it appears to be a reprint that has been aged and the word "reprint" rubbed out on the reverse

[Blunder19]

thats a reprint 100%

[Al C.risafulli]

Sorry to say that the card isn't authentic.

-Al

[the 'stache]

Hey guys, I found this after seeing the sale of the SGC 30 Ed Walsh Old Mill Blue back on Card Target. I'm just wondering if there have been any further developments. Have any other Old Mills with blue print typography shown up on the market? Have any opinions changed about this given time to think it over? As a T206 collector, I find this discussion fascinating.

[Cardboard Junkie]

Put me down as one of the minority that thinks something is fishy with that back. We have all seen tpg's slab altered cards and give them high numerical grades. Simply put, I don't trust tpg's to get it right.

[atx840]

Some great reading Bill.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=156986
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=157764
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=157671
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=157305

[the 'stache]

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

[e107collector]

I heard through the grapevine, that the Blue Old Mill is coming up for auction again. (It is not my card)

I thought it would be in REA's fall auction, but it's not. I'm not sure what auction house has it.

It will be interesting to see what it sells for again.

Tony

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by e107collector

I heard through the grapevine, that the Blue Old Mill is coming up for auction again. (It is not my card)

I thought it would be in REA's fall auction, but it's not. I'm not sure what auction house has it.

It will be interesting to see what it sells for again.

Tony

It's coming up in a HA auction

[atx840]

http://sports.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleN...lotIdNo=261031

[David R]

What did it sell for last time? As I recall, it was less than a lot of folks predicted.

[thehoodedcoder]

jesus shi*....just when i was focusing on a drum.

i gotta be honest here and say that the borders on this card alone give me the impression that its a reprint.

like....when you look at it doesn't it just wreak of the standard cobb repint border or what have you? not trying to call it out since its slabbed but like....really?

it takes a serious nut sack for them to lay out a new 1 of 1 back.....if its NOT real.....right? to me that is your WHOLE reputation on a single card/grade.

my whole argument rests on this one sentance: how many t206's look like that from 10 feet away? im going with the answer of "only reprints".

yes. i have in fact held this card in my hand. it looks ok up front in my hand but go* da** in every image scan of this card ot just does not fit in with any other scan image i have seen.

toss in a montage of cards and i guarentee it stands out on boarder......alone. did anyone measure the inside boarders on the card and make sure the square black frame line measures proper to another portrait card? if so then you should be able to compare the overall edge to a proper card and see if this one is lager or smaller....right?

kevin

[ullmandds]

Eek gads...here we go again?!

[obcmac]

I agree with with Kevin...every time I look at it...I think reprint (based on the front). I wonder how many slabbed t206's I've seen...20K? How many of these look like reprints...maybe 5 (of the major grading company slabs...though I don't really recall any others)? Oh and it happens to have a never-seen-before back...seems legit.

Originally Posted by thehoodedcoder

jesus shi*....just when i was focusing on a drum.

i gotta be honest here and say that the borders on this card alone give me the impression that its a reprint.

like....when you look at it doesn't it just wreak of the standard cobb repint border or what have you? not trying to call it out since its slabbed but like....really?

it takes a serious nut sack for them to lay out a new 1 of 1 back.....if its NOT real.....right? to me that is your WHOLE reputation on a single card/grade.

my whole argument rests on this one sentance: how many t206's look like that from 10 feet away? im going with the answer of "only reprints".

yes. i have in fact held this card in my hand. it looks ok up front in my hand but go* da** in every image scan of this card ot just does not fit in with any other scan image i have seen.

toss in a montage of cards and i guarentee it stands out on boarder......alone. did anyone measure the inside boarders on the card and make sure the square black frame line measures proper to another portrait card? if so then you should be able to compare the overall edge to a proper card and see if this one is lager or smaller....right?

kevin

[ScottFandango]

I don't like the 4 perfectly rounded corners...all look exactly the same...
whats the chance of that in a 100 year old WORN card?

maybe that is why this card sold for less than expected...some people thinks its fake...

[packs]

I said it before, this card has the same design and back color as the known Old Mill reprints. If that is merely a coincidence 100 years after the fact, then that's some coincidence.

[Sean]

I don't like the look of the corners either.
I also wonder why someone who just bought such a celebrity card is willing to part with it so quickly.

And there is the obvious question: If these cards were produced in sheets of 36 cards (or more, but let's not start that debate here), where are the other cards from this Blue Old Mill sheet? Doesn't it seem like some more should have survived? We have found more than 2 dozen Brown Lenox, and I believe 12 to 14 Brown Old Mills. Why haven't any other Blues turned up?

If this seller really believes that this card is authentic, perhaps he could submit it for re-grading. If a TPG took another look and still thought it to be authentic that might ease some of our doubts about the card.

[ScottFandango]

I think there are some real "professional aging experts" out there and they seem to be getting more numerous....

[packs]

Here is the card side by side with a reprint that I posted earlier in the thread:

[ScottFandango]

Great Eye!

also, the blue back card seems to be missing the Dimples of Half Tones...it seems to have more of a solid ink color without the appearance of Stippling...

no print dots=not real

[packs]

I don't know if it's real or not. I just think it too much a coincidence that the newly discovered color would be a previously used design for reprints. A lot of knowledgable collectors believe it to be authentic.

[ScottFandango]

in all the OLD MILLS I have seen/own, the two horizontal lines on the back are SHADED IN.....

the blue back seems to have those two horizontal lines with no shading

check yours at home!

[vintagetoppsguy]

I have a question that may have already been asked, but I'm too lazy to scroll through 19 pages looking for my answer.

Is there any way the card could be a legit T206 that somebody bleached the back and reprinted the back as a blue Old Mill?

[packs]

I know that TPA's have been fooled before by re-backed T206 cards, though it rarely happens. My personal theory on the card is that it is an authentic T206 that could have potentially been re-backed (unless it is truly authentic). It would help it to pass the smell test and if done well enough, may fool a TPA.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by ScottFandango

in all the OLD MILLS I have seen/own, the two horizontal lines on the back are SHADED IN.....

the blue back seems to have those two horizontal lines with no shading

check yours at home!

Neither of mine are shaded.

And none of the backs are printed in halftone.

Any narrow area like the horizontal lines is prone to filling if the plate is too dry.

Steve B

[NYHighlanderFan]

Let me revisit a question asked by one of you guys last August. Where are the rest of the cards from the sheet? Nothing has surfaced in the past 12+ months?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by NYHighlanderFan

Let me revisit a question asked by one of you guys last August. Where are the rest of the cards from the sheet? Nothing has surfaced in the past 12+ months?

This is certainly one of the few times when adding to the population would increase the value. As a collector of very scarce cards I understand the "too rare" syndrome all too well. I lean towards this being a legit variety of Old Mill but am still not 100%. I am sort of partially over the fence but not all of the way there .

[srs1a]

Buried in one of the blue OM threads is a scan of my OM Walsh. I believe it is the brother of the blue one (no matter how hard I squint, I can't make the back turn blue, though ). Below are side by side scans of my card and the blue one.



There are a number of print anomalies that are identical on both cards -- a weak black border on both the right and left hand side, a red blob on the I in Chicago, and another very small red blob near his hairline above his left eye. In the image below I've circled these areas.



I believe that these similarities are reasonably strong evidence that these 2 cards were produced by the same printing plates (note that there are some other anomalies that are not shared by the 2 cards namely the small dark splotch above his collar in my card and the small red spot on the second c in Chicago on the blue back).

[T205 GB]

Is it possible that the card could have been exposed to some chemical causing the bleached look and making the ink turn on the back?

[Jantz]

Originally Posted by srs1a

Buried in one of the blue OM threads is a scan of my OM Walsh. I believe it is the brother of the blue one (no matter how hard I squint, I can't make the back turn blue, though ). Below are side by side scans of my card and the blue one.



There are a number of print anomalies that are identical on both cards -- a weak black border on both the right and left hand side, a red blob on the I in Chicago, and another very small red blob near his hairline above his left eye. In the image below I've circled these areas.



I believe that these similarities are reasonably strong evidence that these 2 cards were produced by the same printing plates (note that there are some other anomalies that are not shared by the 2 cards namely the small dark splotch above his collar in my card and the small red spot on the second c in Chicago on the blue back).

Good information Scott!

Thanks for posting this,


Jantz

[vintagetoppsguy]

Yes, but all 4 borders are wider on the OM. If it is authentic, doesn't that mean it was probably hand cut from a sheet? Otherwise, how does one explain the obviously oversize white borders?

Also, the borders are much whiter on the OM. Maybe something bleached the the card (intentionally or not) and it also turned the ink blue.

[Rob D.]

Oh, if only this card were in a PSA holder, what fun there would be.

[CaramelMan]

Originally Posted by Rob D.

Oh, if only this card were in a PSA holder, what fun there would be.

huh? inside joke?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by CaramelMan

huh? inside joke?

Most likely he is referring to SGC getting a pass on Net54baseball and PSA not getting passes (on issues such as this). This board, to me, is always a little unfair to PSA. They deserve some of the criticisms, no doubt, but they seem to get blown out of proportion. Whereas SGC does not get taken to task the same way. Hope that helps explain it.

[CaramelMan]

Originally Posted by Leon

Most likely he is referring to SGC getting a pass on Net54baseball and PSA not getting passes (on issues such as this). This board, to me, is always a little unfair to PSA. They deserve some of the criticisms, no doubt, but they seem to get blown out of proportion. Whereas SGC does not get taken to task the same way. Hope that helps explain it.

perfectly....and from the Board Owner...well said sir...
you are very fair and even tempered it seems