1910 COUPON Rossman....with EPDG wet-ink-transfer....and it's significance

[steve B]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Although I differ with some of you, I appreciate everyone's opinion posted here.

G1911
American Lithographic printed all the white-bordered and gold-bordered cards (fronts and backs). These sheets were hung up to dry, then cut-up into cards and shipped
to the various Tobacco Factories.
Sheets of cards were NOT shipped to the Factories. Where do you get that from ?

Furthermore, many presses were operating in the process of producing Millions of these Tobacco cards. Stacking sheets of various brands of T206's is a well-known fact,
as we have seen quite a number of "wet-ink-transfers". Simply due to the rush to get these cards cut-down and shipped.

The EPDG impression is very faint, and perhaps my scan isn't sufficient to provide an accurate judgement without closely examining this card. If I come to the National,
I will bring this Rossman card with me for further discussions with you guys.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

I just can't see this being caused during production.

Sheets being hung up to dry would be very unusual. That may be done at a small art printer producing a handful of sheets a day, but not at a commercial printer. The press automatically stacks the sheets on an outfeed platform, and some air remains in between (It's called "windage", or was where I worked. And it's necessary for drying and handling. ) The ink layer is often thin enough to mostly dry with only minimal air exposure.

Obviously stacking of sheets was done, since that's how the sheets come off the press. But from things like the existence of blank backs, we can be fairly sure the fronts were printed then the backs.
The press would typically print only one color.
The cards printed with EPDG backs would be part of one individual job, to meet a particular order. So they would be stacked together. Too little windage, pressure on the stack (Like from an employee leaning on it - Heard about that one for 2 years ) Or the ink being too "wet", or conditions that didn't lead to appropriate drying would lead to WST or more properly "Offset transfers" - Either term is ok, the latter is just more technical.

Stacking one order on top of another smaller order, especially one done on a different paper stock isn't something that makes sense. (I'm assuming the overall order for Coupon was much smaller than that for EPDG. I think that's a safe assumption)
It's also entirely possible that a large outfit like ALC would leave presses set up for different stock thicknesses, so the press printing EPDG and the one doing Coupon wouldn't be the same press, and may have been in an entirely different location.
And those presses may have even been printing sheets of an entirely different size. Printing say 100,000 of something vs 20,000 would be very different. Too much setup time for too small of a run would be inefficient and wasteful, and no printer could get to the size of ALC without being efficient.

Ink formulas then were essentially trade secrets for the larger companies.
Some formulations were better than others, but most were a colorant in a fluid medium that dried or hardened.
Linseed oil was a common base for some types of ink, but probably not used by ALC, while it gets "dry" fairly quickly, it may not truly dry for years. I have a printed item that caused a post production offset transfer in shipping - well over 100 years after it was printed!.

Conversely, since lithography requires the rejection of oil based inks by a damp stone or plate, water alone shouldn't cause a transfer. I tried with a T206 a few years ago, and at normal temperatures I couldn't force a transfer using just water. Embossing wood grain onto the card yes, any sort of transfer no.
Heat and or some chemical involvement would be required, eventually I suppose I could duplicate what would cause it, but haven't the time, budget or inclination. (It would also vary depending on the exact ink, and there may be different carriers for the colorant... )

[RedsFan1941]

come on ted

[Exhibitman]

Hey, give Ted a break. He was only 4 when he pulled the Rossman card from the pack.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by steve B

I just can't see this being caused during production.

........................

Conversely, since lithography requires the rejection of oil based inks by a damp stone or plate, water alone shouldn't cause a transfer. I tried with a T206 a few years ago, and at normal temperatures I couldn't force a transfer using just water. Embossing wood grain onto the card yes, any sort of transfer no.
Heat and or some chemical involvement would be required, eventually I suppose I could duplicate what would cause it, but haven't the time, budget or inclination. (It would also vary depending on the exact ink, and there may be different carriers for the colorant... )

Hi Steve

I appreciate what you are saying here. You speak from a Printer's experience. I, too, have had some Printing experience in a small Print Shop back in my High School years.

I singled out your last paragraph, because I, too, have for years tried to simulate "post-production" printing ink transfers with T206 cards. By simulating heat, humidity, and
with various solutions. I have NOT been able to get the ink to transfer from one card to another (even after lengthy periods of time). And especially regarding the ink on the
backs of these cards.....absolutely no transfers.

Apparently, American Lithographic used some very high quality (no-run) ink to print these cards. What is your thinking regarding this ?


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[RedsFan1941]

lol. good move.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Hi Steve

I appreciate what you are saying here. You speak from a Printer's experience. I, too, have had some Printing experience in a small Print Shop back in my High School years.

I singled out your last paragraph, because I, too, have for years tried to simulate "post-production" printing ink transfers with T206 cards. By simulating heat, humidity, and
with various solutions. I have NOT been able to get the ink to transfer from one card to another (even after lengthy periods of time). And especially regarding the ink on the
backs of these cards.....absolutely no transfers.

Apparently, American Lithographic used some very high quality (no-run) ink to print these cards. What is your thinking regarding this ?


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

There have been more than one occasion where a seller has sold a group of cards with many of them that had storage transfers on them.

Storage transfer.jpg

[steve B]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Hi Steve

I appreciate what you are saying here. You speak from a Printer's experience. I, too, have had some Printing experience in a small Print Shop back in my High School years.

I singled out your last paragraph, because I, too, have for years tried to simulate "post-production" printing ink transfers with T206 cards. By simulating heat, humidity, and
with various solutions. I have NOT been able to get the ink to transfer from one card to another (even after lengthy periods of time). And especially regarding the ink on the
backs of these cards.....absolutely no transfers.

Apparently, American Lithographic used some very high quality (no-run) ink to print these cards. What is your thinking regarding this ?


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

How a post production transfer can happen is a very complex puzzle. The try I made was a fairly worn common soaked in tap water, put in a folded paper, and clamped in a vise between boards for about a week (Maybe longer? I don't remember)
That didn't cause a transfer, as I assumed it wouldn't. It also didn't do any major damage to the card. Pressed in wood grain, which took it from a potential 1 to a for sure A... Not that a grade would really matter for a beater common.

The inks used would have to be studied at a level I don't have the resources to get to.
A slow drying ink like something with linseed oil as the carrier/hardener, could harden at different rates depending on temperature. Cards stored in a hot attic would "harden" faster, and probably wouldn't transfer after a fairly short time. (People who collect vises -yes, that's a thing- regularly coat with boiled linseed oil and bake them creating a nice hard glossy finish.
Stored in a humid cool environment? Those might not harden for decades.

And there's the catch. We can't usually know the long term storage, and don't know the makeup of the inks.

Adding to the complexity is that era saw a bunch of technological changes all at once.
The switch from stones to plates
The rise of chemical rather than natural ink colorants
Plus a couple others.
Both of the ones I mentioned would have probably required totally reformulating the inks, possibly with different hardeners and carriers.

One specific thought is that bright red was traditionally done with Cochineal, or carminic acid, which is derived from it. One is soluble in water, one isn't.
That's interesting, because the bulk of the post- production transfers we see are from red backs. SC and EPGD.
I think it's possible that some red ink was used that was one rather than another, and the colorant will dissolve and transfer, while a similar card wouldn't.

There's a group operating in the stamp hobby that's using various spectroscopy to determine ink make up. So far they've found some interesting stuff. Like dark red inks that were believed to be made using rust powder, but have now been proven to contain exactly no iron whatsoever...
And a group of stamps produced by three different companies on a few different types of paper, and are far more complex than the catalog indicates.
Like company A switching to a different paper just before the contract was given over to company B and is way more similar to the paper of company C several years later.
But until now there was no way to prove a stamp was actually company A but on that late use soft paper..... Enter the spectroscope, which says Company A had no white in the ink to get the right shade of green (or other colors) AND the sizing on the paper was different. So those stamps can be conclusively identified. And yes, they aren't common.
And yes, us stamp guys are sometimes insane enough to care that a particular copy is rare, even if the machine to know for sure costs thousands.

[steve B]

Forgot the link....

https://iacmcolor.org/color-profile/carmines/

[atx840]

I bought a lot of 30+ beaters and most had WSTs on them that are definitely after the factory. SC on Pied, Tolstoi on Pied