![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Some of these are just the colors not being printed with enough ink, others are not.
some places, like the uzit backs, you are seeing the cardboard color come through and its affecting your eyes abilitiy to judge the color as the same shade. some of the card board can probably even be see through the ink to some extent, much like paint on a wall, until you put the second coat on. kevin Last edited by thehoodedcoder; 03-10-2014 at 06:02 PM. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
More orange.
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Still have to return to original question: are these cards getting anything more than a tiny premium? Should they?
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
I don't think the question of "should" can be answered. People can collect what they want and pay whatever price makes them happy. Personally, I think it's crazy.
__________________
Tackling the Monster T206 = 213/524 HOFs = 13/76 SLers = 33/48 Horizontals = 6/6 ALWAYS looking for T206 with back damage. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
My experience is that they get a very small premium, particularly the commons.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Greg- I paid about 2x premium for this card and I'll be honest, my max bid was higher. Having said that, I have never seen it as this color variation in over 25 years of collecting. My opinion is that red backed cards that come out orange, do not demand much of a premium. There is too much debate on just how orange is it? But when you have a normally red backed card that comes out a true purple, I think that enters into the equation greatly because of uniqueness. Another example I can think of is Brian's SGC 70 Manion (normally a vivid green background, this card is light blue). There are many red T206s that have orange varieties (Cobb, Abstein, Bush, Chance, etc...)
Last edited by CMIZ5290; 03-11-2014 at 03:02 PM. |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Several people have answered the original question. There is not a consistent answer, because the premiums have not been consistent.
__________________
$co++ Forre$+ |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Some cards posted here are either faded from the sun, or have been altered (either intentionally or unintentionally) with chemicals. they command no premium. cards with "mild" color variations command little to some premium (orange backgrounds, etc). cards which are clearly missing color passes, command big premiums.
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
![]() ...every card has some variance, but the card in the center is clearly darker. So much so that my wife can spot it from across the room (I know this because when she saw it sitting out she asked why it looked different and if it meant we could retire if I sold it ![]()
__________________
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bn2cardz/albums |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
There may be slight differences, if the printer mixed multiple batches of ink, but to think they vary that much....I don't think so. There are ink weight formulas to produce specific colors and a printer would use that to make sure they are not vastly different. Kevin |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ted Z- Do you have any opinions on what I was commenting on? Thanks...
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
A chemical that changes the color might only affect one of the colors. That would depend on the chemistry of the chemical and the pigment. Other chemicals could affect the carrier, usually some sort of oil or grease with lithography inks. Some oils like linseed oil eventually harden, others don't. Modern environmentally friendly inks are often based on vegetable oil and can be smudged or removed in normal handling if your skin isn't especially dry. Sports illustrated used inks like that for a while. I'm not really up on the exact pigments for most colors, but know a little about a few of them. Most black ink is colored with carbon, either carbonblack or lampblack. (A fine distinction of the process used to get the carbon pigment. And usually one that doesn't matter. ) Carbon won't fade, and isn't affected by most chemicals. Reds are sometimes done with Cochineal. And while it makes a nice bright red dye that resists fading from soap, it will fade with exposure to light. Many other colors don't fade. That's why I bought a small lot of cards with no bright red, but a known history of light exposure of around 40 years. Unfortunately a few other cards from the same batch have been slabbed as missing colors. The good look I've had at mine is to me inconclusive. One shows gloss where the bright red should be, the other doesn't. On both, none of the other colors have faded much if at all. The borders on T206 fronts won't be affected by light. Backs exposed to light might be affected a bit, but I don't have any examples. The good news is that the cardstock is probably not particularly acidic. A lot of lithography stock is coated on one or both sides. The fronts of T206s are coated stock. Probably a clay based glaze. The coating makes the inks appear a bit brighter and helps them adhere better to the surface without getting into the paper itself. The backs are uncoated. So stock that's more porous than usual will absorb more ink. I should also make clear that the ink is very thick, and won't bleed through. The depth it penetrates porous uncoated stock is very small. Maybe a layer or two of fibers. Many T206s under a lot of magnification will show a bit of fine cracking to the glaze coating on the front. And, over three years the exact cardstock and inks may have changed. As Kevin pointed out the press operators have formulas they follow. But they don't always follow them as precisely as they should. Other things during printing can also change how a color looks. The amount of ink put onto the plate can be changed, as can the amount of water. So a color can be overinked or underinked, making it darker or lghter. Or printed drier leading to small areas being filled like the drame lines on Piedmonts, or printed wet, which can prevent some areas from printing at all. Dry prints are pretty common on T206 backs, wet prints aren't common at all. I can't recall seeing one, but there's probably a few. Steve B |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Legendary Lot 72: 1909-1920s "E"-Caramel Cards and "W"-Strip Cards "Grab-Bag" | x2drich2000 | Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T | 3 | 09-02-2013 10:07 AM |
Finally confirmed - d311 print variations exist! ("bluegrass" variations) | shammus | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 8 | 09-03-2010 07:58 PM |
Looking for E90-3 Color "variations" | Archive | Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T | 0 | 03-26-2009 08:19 PM |
We all hate "What is it worth?" but...what is highest T206 reverse error card has gone for | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 0 | 06-02-2008 01:31 PM |
Observation - Variations within 1887 N172 "0" numbered cards | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 1 | 08-09-2003 07:44 PM |