N284 Buchner Gold Coin Checklist Add?

[bigfanNY]

I found these two scans last night. Look at the trimmed Keefe it has a blank back and I don't believe it is in a holder. Compare it to the Gold Coin Keefe. And then these two to the Smiling Mickey Welch. I will say imho all three were drawn by different hands. And yet the second blank backed Keefe was sold as a Gold Coin. By guess Who...PWCC. It is easy to say that any blank backed card that is similar to a Gold coin is "from an Ad" but this thread is asking the question is this card an uncataloged Buchner. When there are solid examples of Buchner Ad's and they use the same images as the card.
The Welch and the trio that accompany it are interesting cards. But they are not Buchners.

[Cozumeleno]

Yeah, we can agree to disagree, Jonathan. All of these were found in the same album with other period items. Assuming the racing cards are legit, the Buchner Peoples is legit, and the others are legit, the idea that these are just some random drawn fantasy cards out of the blue to throw buyers off just seems like a big stretch.

I'll respect the opinions of others here but I don't see it. I'd have gladly bid on that album.

[bigfanNY]

The devil is in the details. The OP said they were in a group of 66 cards. All had back damage. He never said they were all in an album together I asked specifically if there were pictures of all the cards in an album together so far he has not replied. BUT He stated clearly that was an assumption on his part that they came from the same source. Even if they are period that dose not make them Buchners. You keep drawing a clear line saying they are Gold Coins cut from a Buchner Ad. That is the same mistake PWCC made with their Keefe. But there is Hard evidence that the Ads used the same cards and drawings as the known checklisted cards. If you cannot see the differences in the cards you can say we agree to disagree.
But when I bring up clear documented Facts and you bring up opinion that is something different.
The question was raised is are these cards uncataloged N284'S And I dont see any evidence that they are.
And given that they are all NY area players and the Keefe again a NYC player but from different source and drawn differently says that in the NYC area cards similar to Gold Coins were produced When ? By Who?

[1880nonsports]

"Even if they are period that dose not make them Buchners. You keep drawing a clear line saying they are Gold Coins cut from a Buchner Ad."

Maybe someone else - I'm not going back again. I feel that they are old and original representations of a base ball player in similar design to the Gold Coin issues. I'm sorry if I ever gave any other impression. My smoker's heads from Goodwin/Old Judge had two different lithographers. THERE ARE SUBTLE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THEM but they ostensibly look the same.

Whether they were found together or not only adds a tiny bit of "provenance" or reliability to the equation of real or contrived. For me an actual connection for that player to a Gold Coin product would be necessary to call it a Gold Coin anything.....

[teza11]

Thanks for the on-going feedback guys. I will verify size and post high definition scans of the requested cards once I have them in-hand. I have no pictures of the original album that the collection was in.

Anson – nice write-up about the subtle differences in the supposed “generic” N284 poses. The examples you show clearly document that the artistic details (or lack thereof) change significantly from player to player, as did the foreground and background features. I like the with or without mustache, and even mustache type variations. Page link below for anyone interested.

https://prewarcards.com/2018/03/13/1...tobacco-cards/

Also, don’t be disheartened by the lack of main thread responses. I have had received direct pm inquiries about the cards.

Jeff

[Cozumeleno]

Thanks for the kind words, Jeff - I have no doubt you've received inquiries on them. As stated, I would have been glad to win them as they are no doubt legitimate in my book. Congrats -

[brianp-beme]

124 responses are a heck of a lot more than when I posted a detailed re-examining of the E91 American Caramel sets, another group that really lacks popularity among collectors, so I think this thread has done quite well in stirring up at least a little bit of interest in this set.

I know I appreciate it...carry on.

Brian

[CobbSpikedMe]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

124 responses are a heck of a lot more than when I posted a detailed re-examining of the E91 American Caramel sets, another group that really lacks popularity among collectors, so I think this thread has done quite well in stirring up at least a little bit of interest in this set.

I know I appreciate it...carry on.

Brian

Agreed Brian,

I've thoroughly enjoyed this thread, both sides arguments and opinions. I wish all the details were known at this time but it seems we will all need to be patient as more is unveiled. When Jeff gets the cards in hand, posts better scans, hopefully gets them in front of Jay to examine in person. These things will come in time, but it's fascinating to follow all the debate so far.

[1880nonsports]

real and not contrived items but possibly not specific to Gold Coin. I have a couple of examples of non-sports "N" cards that are replicated on unattributed advertisements for a clothing line and another for racing silks....Just like going to a jobber today - the lithographer would have many generic plates and images available for use - "stock images".
A poster cut (or a cut from any medium) is just that at least to me. If it comes from a Gold Coin poster it's a GC poster cut. If it comes from a Duke tobacco album it's a Duke album cut. Not proven to be represented by something specifically Gold Coin makes these just pieces of paper cut from something with a base ball player on it. I have a few different renditions and iterations of the Old Planter (Ginter icon) from the company and some unrelated (including an 1800 sterling and enamel matchsafe with the image - it's from a painting). I still want them as part of my collection but they are only what they are and nothing more. I suppose the next step would be the "what is a card" discussion.

KNEW Jeff might have posted the wrong back

OK Jon. Now at least we are getting to the reasonable discussion. Hard to accept your argument that there were made for some illicit purpose by someone will evil in their heart or whatever conspiracy might be in your mind. It's obvious whatever they are that they are contemporaneous to the other things found in the book in style and substance. Sometimes like with the 1880's Between the Acts cards and contemporaries - MULTIPLE LITHOGRAPHERS were used -0 In cigar boxes and cigarette packs (and other printed ephemeral situations) SIMULTANEOUS requests may go out to different companies for their take on a given campaign (therefore different "hands"). This makes the most sense to me. To suggest they are anything but old and original lacks any real basis for me as I expressed much earlier. I DO appreciate that you are looking out for "us" - the collectors...…..Whether here or at an airport we should always point out something we feel is suspicious :-)

[buchner]

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

I found these two scans last night. Look at the trimmed Keefe it has a blank back and I don't believe it is in a holder. Compare it to the Gold Coin Keefe. And then these two to the Smiling Mickey Welch. I will say imho all three were drawn by different hands. And yet the second blank backed Keefe was sold as a Gold Coin. By guess Who...PWCC. It is easy to say that any blank backed card that is similar to a Gold coin is "from an Ad" but this thread is asking the question is this card an uncataloged Buchner. When there are solid examples of Buchner Ad's and they use the same images as the card.
The Welch and the trio that accompany it are interesting cards. But they are not Buchners.

I'm confused (which isn't hard to do), are you saying that the larger blank back card of Keefe is not a Buchner? If its thick its from a ad poster, if thin not sure, but the thick and thin one are the same drawing. The poster "spats" were done by a different artist than the regular issued "spats."

[teza11]

Hi. The cards arrived in today's mail. Very pleased! Hi resolution (600 DPI) of Welch and Toole attached. Also included is a side by side of all 4 to show any size variations. If Net54 restricts the size of the scans, feel free to pm me your email address and I will send pics direct.

Jay - please pm regarding your schedule to meet.

Jeff

[packs]

Call me crazy but I'm just not seeing what I expect to see in a Buchner. The Peoples card you posted above looks like a Buchner to me. It's got what I call the "cream" you usually see in the coloration. I suppose these cards could be faded or dirty, but they look off to me still.

[steve B]

That printing does look old.

So the question would be if they are Buchners, or something that was done at the time that was nearly the same.

[michaelural]

A bit off topic here. Does anyone here have or know where I could get a Lawrence Ural card? Last year I learned he's my great great grandfather and I've been trying to acquire his trading card.

Thanks,
Michael Ural

1887 Buchner N284-3 Gold Coin Jockey Set Lawrence Ural #29