T206 Doyle N.Y. +++ let's see your "Y" and "."

[Sean]

I just got this DOYLE, N.Y. .

It has a small mark that seems to be all that is left from the NAT'L that was removed from the printing plate. This is as close as I'll ever come to owning a Doyle error card.

I'm sorry for the poor scan. The mark is quite noticeable in person.

scan0001.jpg scan0002.jpg

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by Sean

I just got this DOYLE, N.Y. .

It has a small mark that seems to be all that is left from the NAT'L that was removed from the printing plate. This is as close as I'll ever come to owning a Doyle error card.

I'm sorry for the poor scan. The mark is quite noticeable in person.

Attachment 319847 Attachment 319848

Congrats on the pickup Sean.

Here's a better scan of your new card and a crop of the caption area.

Doyle partial letter.jpgDoyle partial letter - Copy.jpg

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Sean

I just got this DOYLE, N.Y. .

It has a small mark that seems to be all that is left from the NAT'L that was removed from the printing plate. This is as close as I'll ever come to owning a Doyle error card.

I'm sorry for the poor scan. The mark is quite noticeable in person.

Attachment 319847 Attachment 319848

Hi Sean

I acquired one of these Joe Doyle cards 12 years ago. I refer to them as the "poor man's Joe Doyle Nat'l" card. I posted this Joe Doyle "printer's mark" in this 2007 thread...... http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...slow+joe+doyle

Over the years, I have run a survey on this "printer's mark" (200+ T206 Joe Doyle cards), and if I recall correctly approx. 6 % of these cards exhibit this mark.
I will dig up my survey and post it.






TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[Sean]

Hi Pat, and thank you so much for the enhanced scan. After I retire and have a lot more time I'm going to get a new scanner and learn how to really use a computer. Until then I appreciate all the help that I can get.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Hi Sean

I acquired one of these Joe Doyle cards 12 years ago. I refer to them as the "poor man's Joe Doyle Nat'l" card. I posted this Joe Doyle "printer's mark" in this 2007 thread...... http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...slow+joe+doyle

Over the years, I have run a survey on this "printer's mark" (200+ T206 Joe Doyle cards), and if I recall correctly approx. 6 % of these cards exhibit this mark.
I will dig up my survey and post it.






TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Ted, do all these "poor man's Doyle Nat'l" cards have a Piedmont back? That would make sense.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Sean

Ted, do all these "poor man's Doyle Nat'l" cards have a Piedmont back? That would make sense.

Hi Sean

The Joe Doyle card was printed with seven T-brand backs, this "printer's mark" appears with 4 of them. Here's my old survey from 5 years ago
with 282 unique samples.

I am still searching for my more recent Joe Doyle survey (300+ samples) which indicates approx. 6 % of these cards with this "printer's mark".



Printer's Mark....................l.... (remnant of "N" in Nat'L)



UPDATED as of Feb 6, 2013


T-brand.............Mark.....No-Mark

Piedmont 350........10............90

Sweet Cap 350.......7...........122

Polar Bear..............3............20

Old Mill..................1.............7

Sovereign 350.........0...........14

Tolstoi....................0.............5

EPDG.....................0.............1

Unknown back.........0.............2
____________________________

Totals................. 21 ........ 261



Joe Doyle cards with this printer's mark = 21/282 = 7.4 %



If anyone on this forum has not previously reported their Joe Doyle card with (or without) this printer's mark,
your input to this survey would be really appreciated.

And, please identify the T-brand back of your card.

Thanks,


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[Sean]

Ted, does this indicate that the backs were not printed consecutively, but rather in a more random fashion? If only 10 % of Piedmonts bear this mark, then the plate must have been corrected after the first 10% were printed. But if a few Sweet Caporals and Old Mills have the mark, then they would have been printed after the 10% of the Piedmonts, but before the 90% that don't have the mark.

So the printers didn't just print all Piedmonts, then all Sweet Caporals, the all Old Mills, etc.?

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Sean

Ted, does this indicate that the backs were not printed consecutively, but rather in a more random fashion? If only 10 % of Piedmonts bear this mark, then the plate must have been corrected after the first 10% were printed. But if a few Sweet Caporals and Old Mills have the mark, then they would have been printed after the 10% of the Piedmonts, but before the 90% that don't have the mark.

So the printers didn't just print all Piedmonts, then all Sweet Caporals, the all Old Mills, etc.?

Sean

I'm not quite sure I understand your question here. But, I'll say this.....my research indicates that through-out the printing of the various series, American Litho (ALC) printed
the PIEDMONT backs first (since it was the "flagship brand" of ATC). Followed by SWEET CAPORAL, then the other brands as requests to ALC arrived from the various Tobacco
Factories. From my survey data, it appears that the EPDG, SOVEREIGN, and Tolstoi backs were printed after the printer's mark was completely cleaned off the printing plate.

I found my updated Joe Doyle "printer's mark" survey; and, I will include it in my next post.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[Pat R]

Sean/Ted, I don't think that the Doyle with this mark would have been
corrected or "cleaned off".

We have learned over the years that most if not all T206 sheets were
printed with multiples of the same subject in vertical columns meaning
only a certain percent of the Doyles would have the extra part of the letter
on it. For example I will use one of the plate scratch sheets and substitute
Larry Doyle as an example.

The plate scratches have established that this sheet is at least 15 wide
by 11 high (I think it was actually bigger but I need more evidence to
support that) so if the Joe Doyle that had the mark was on a similar
sheet lets say it was the fourth vertical subject from the bottom of the sheet
only one out of every 11 Doyles that were printed from that sheet would have that mark
without factoring in any other things that could affect the %'s.

C-D Sheet A - Copy.jpg

When print flaw is found on a non Piedmont back it's found in much
higher %'s. I will post a detailed explanation one reason I think this
might be when I have more time.