Proof? T206 were printed in rows of more than twelve

[Matvoo]

Very cool thread

[atx840]

here is as far as I got with these previously, definitely requires further investigating.

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by atx840

here is as far as I got with these previously, definitely requires further investigating.

Thanks Chris... per my note to you, this is what I was doing as well. I need to sit down and take more time to do it, but I believe that the piedmont 350 sheet had five columns (maybe only four) and some multiple of four rows (4, 8 or 12) of the Bitters trade cards. I think this may the missing link to sheet size.

I think your grid may have too much space between the cards; and note that some cards will be cut to different sizes.

Do we know if sheets were cut horizontally first, and then vertically?

[HalChaseCollector]

Wow this is really cool

[Jantz]

Hey Er!ck

If I'm looking at these scans correctly, the Bitters scan has Barbeau on the left and Miller to his right.

My second scan has them the opposite.


Jantz

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by Jantz

Hey Er!ck

If I'm looking at these scans correctly, the Bitters scan has Barbeau on the left and Miller to his right.

My second scan has them the opposite.


Jantz

I believe that scan includes the cards in their same position, just flipped over. So in reality, the Miller is to the left of Barbeau from a front perspective.

[Jantz]

Originally Posted by t206hound

I believe that scan includes the cards in their same position, just flipped over. So in reality, the Miller is to the left of Barbeau from a front perspective.

Then the Bitters print wouldn't line up then right?

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by Jantz

Hey Er!ck

If I'm looking at these scans correctly, the Bitters scan has Barbeau on the left and Miller to his right.

My second scan has them the opposite.


Jantz

In your scan, the fronts are shown in C-B-A, and the backs are shown in A-B-C.

[Jantz]

Thank you for the clarification

[atx840]

Ive re-scaled the PC to the size of the Lash T206 scans. So far I get this.

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by atx840

Ive re-scaled the PC to the size of the Lash T206 scans. So far I get this.

I independently came up with something very similar... I will post it here shortly. Based on the images, there is a minimum of 14 cards per row, perhaps up to 19.

As an aside, recall that the obak sheet had 21 cards per row.

My spacing and scaling is slightly different, but we are very close:

[atx840]

Perhaps 17

I think you also need to align the Piedmont backs, which I don't think the Maddox does.

[mrvster]

blind

too much scrap in this thread

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by atx840

Perhaps 17

I think you also need to align the Piedmont backs, which I don't think the Maddox does.

I noticed that when I was aligning them. Need to take it off.

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by atx840

Perhaps 17

I think you also need to align the Piedmont backs, which I don't think the Maddox does.

The removal of the Maddox further leads credence that there were stacks of (at least) four... the only card that fits into multiple rows in the same column is Rudolph.

Also helpful that we know that Maddox is adjacent (above) Snodgrass Batting on a two-namer (Piedmont 350), which isn't contradicted on this sheet.

And we know that Bliss was adjecent to Freeman (on the left) of a ghost image Piedmont 350; also not contradicted on this sheet.