E90-1s have plate scratches too!

[Luke]

Great thread Ed! I have nothing to add but I'll be following along.

[Troy Kirk]

Great work, Ed! I love research on E90-1, it's one of my favorite sets. Glad to see Pat jumping in, too, really nice work on the T206 scratches. Not many scratches among my cards, but I can add four. The Joss looks like the origin of the scratches, that one is branching out all over.

[Pat R]

It's way to early to tell but it looks like Troy's Stone and McInnes line up
and possibly Mike's Miller.
img900.jpg

The miller has two scratches that would create one next to it similar to this.
img901.jpg

[Leon]

there almost looks like one on the left quadrant of this one...unless it's a crease.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1909-E90-1-A...8AAOSw9IpX1Jsl

[Pat R]

It looks like the double scratch on Demmitt lines up with both scratches on
this Joss.
Demmittper20-per20Copy.jpg
Demmitt.jpg
Joss.jpg

[Iwantmorecards77]

Here's my Wallace with a plate scratch..

[brianp-beme]

E90 Scratch fever for all you Doubting Thomas's.

Brian

As an aside...always loved the colors and action pose on the Thomas, but the face is to die for, or more accurately, to die because of.

[OLDBILL]

Although not very savvy about the T206's, are the scratches just on the backs? If so, is this related to the fact that just the fronts were coated during the lithography process?

[steve B]

Originally Posted by OLDBILL

Although not very savvy about the T206's, are the scratches just on the backs? If so, is this related to the fact that just the fronts were coated during the lithography process?

For both T206s and E90's, the scratches found so far and studied just happen to be on the backs.

They were printed from stones, which weighed a lot being 2-4 inch thick pieces of limestone. A bit of debris could scratch the stone, leaving an area that would now hold ink.


It's probable that the scratched ones were mostly backs for a few reasons,

The back stone got used for a much longer time- as we've seen, on multiple different front sheets.

Being single color, and an ad, the scratches probably didn't merit redoing the whole stone. A scratch creating a line of color on the front might have. (Plus, there were at least 6 front stones)


Not all front problems got fixed, and it's probable that each position can be identified. Generally a scratch will correspond with any flaws found on the front. A real find would be a front with a flaw that doesn't have the scratch on the back. That would mean that that particular exact subject/position was printed both before and after the scratch happened.

Pat would know better, but I don't think any have been found.

[judsonhamlin]

Joss pitching plate scratches

[Leon]

Nice info on the process...

Originally Posted by steve B

For both T206s and E90's, the scratches found so far and studied just happen to be on the backs.

They were printed from stones, which weighed a lot being 2-4 inch thick pieces of limestone. A bit of debris could scratch the stone, leaving an area that would now hold ink.


It's probable that the scratched ones were mostly backs for a few reasons,

The back stone got used for a much longer time- as we've seen, on multiple different front sheets.

Being single color, and an ad, the scratches probably didn't merit redoing the whole stone. A scratch creating a line of color on the front might have. (Plus, there were at least 6 front stones)


Not all front problems got fixed, and it's probable that each position can be identified. Generally a scratch will correspond with any flaws found on the front. A real find would be a front with a flaw that doesn't have the scratch on the back. That would mean that that particular exact subject/position was printed both before and after the scratch happened.

Pat would know better, but I don't think any have been found.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by Luke

Great thread Ed! I have nothing to add but I'll be following along.

I really don't have anything to add either, but I can't resist asking if all the scratches smell the same?

,