T206 Print Groups-A Quick Overview

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by steve B

As a bit of a heretic when it comes to the current print group thinking, I'll take a try at that.

The first and most important point is that for the most part, we all respect each others work and ideas. None of the current or future things we believe or know about the cards production would be possible without all those people laying the groundwork, and or adding information. That's not to say we don't occasionally have some serious disagreements, but that's the nature of things.

To me, the current print groups are sort of like a good intro to the complexity of the set. It's complex enough to be a bit of a challenge, but not so complex that most people can't grasp it.
One of my favorite catalogues in a different hobby is set up where for complex sets they show the basic set with the truly major varieties. Then there's a listing that lists different papers, gums etc along with a usually extensive listing of plate flaws that are collectible. And on occasion, they follow that up with a note that's polite but should read "if you're truly insane and have to know literally every small detail of this set you should buy this book by someone crazier"
That gives the collector a framework of how far to specialize.

In that way, the print groups are a solid foundation for further investigation. As well as a good framework for a collector to decide when to stop.

Where it breaks down is perhaps well into crazy land.
Within the current framework-
I would call the dozen or so 150 only cards print group 1.
And the rest of the 150s as either print group 2 or maybe 1A

Within the 150 group, there were at least three individual printings. As maybe the most obvious example, the Tinker hands on knees comes at least three different ways, each would have required a change to the original art, and new masters/transfers/etc.
Chicago partly visible behind Cubs
Chicago semi removed
Chicago not there at all

So that makes it at a minimum
Group 1 - 150 only, and potential sheetmates which may or may not be identifiable or have even existed at all.
Group 2- 150 but from the sheet that produced the Tinker with clear Chicago
Group 2A - 150 from sheets that produced tinker with partly removed Chicago
group 2B- 150 from sheets that produced correct cards with fewer design flaws.

And here's where there's a major branching
I consider 350s to be an entirely new set.
There are a few cards that show design changes between 150 and 350. Most are very minor. But also would have required new masters etc.

And within the 350's?
At least three more divisions.
If you want a "missing red" card, just find a Dygert without lipstick. They're common enough that I don't believe they're errors. They're readily available both with and without. And have a few cards with the same stuff going on but less obvious.

Hopefully the 350-460s and 460 only groups have fewer divisions, but I'm expecting them to be at least two each.


The other big branching spot is
were the same sheets used for all backs? Or did individual brands use their own sheet layouts and player selection?

UGH...... Since there's a couple team variations in the 350's that are only on PB, it can be pretty much assumed that at least partly brands may have had different sheet layouts and even different sheet sizes. That's both good and bad. On the bad side, it makes things 15x as complicated.
On the good side, it explains reasonably well why groups of 12 or groups of 17/34 both exist.

Confused yet?

Yes, for the vast majority of collectors, print groups as we currently explain them are just about right. And we have a few people who did some great work with access to lots of cards over several years to thank for that semi comfortable station we can stop or rest at before transferring to the crazy train lines.

As Tim pointed out the 150 only subjects were printed with other print group 1 subjects they were just discontinued early for reasons we don't know.
We also now know from the plate scratch sheets that all twelve of them weren't on the same sheet and they were also on sheets with other subjects from print group 1.

Originally Posted by Abravefan11

I do not consider the 150 Only subjects to be a separate print group. I do believe they were print group 1 subjects. They were part of the original 150 subjects and printed like other print group 1 subjects. The only difference was they were discontinued early.

[Pat R]

You can get an idea of the different print runs within the print groups by the print defects found on some of the subjects in the same print group.

Here are the stats on a few print group 1 subjects that have front print defects that are found with 350 backs. None of these defects are found with a 150 series back.

I put the EPDG's in to show that they were printed with the 150 backs and not the 350 backs you can also get an idea of what backs were probably printed together in a print run.

Stats Clarke.jpg

Stats Dougherty.jpg

Stats Hinchman.jpg

Stats Keeler.jpg

Stats Killian.jpg

Stats Schlei.jpg

Stats Tannehill.jpg

I would guess that there were 2 or 3 print runs of the PD350's and 1 or 2 print runs for the rest of the 350 print group 1 backs. The stats show that the Old Mills and SC350/25's were most likely printed together but not with the Sov 350's.

[t206fix]

Pat - what are the print errors in the above groupings of cards?

thx

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by t206fix

Pat - what are the print errors in the above groupings of cards?

thx

They're not really errors Tony, they all have recurring print defects.

The Fred Clarke that I posted has a Red spot under the G on his uniform that is found on three different backs, here is an example of each back that it is found on.

PD350-2.jpg

SC350-30-1.jpg

Sov350-1.jpg

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Pat R

As Tim pointed out the 150 only subjects were printed with other print group 1 subjects they were just discontinued early for reasons we don't know.
We also now know from the plate scratch sheets that all twelve of them weren't on the same sheet and they were also on sheets with other subjects from print group 1.

My belief is that there will be differences between the non 150 only subjects on those sheets and the same subject from different 150 sheets.

I've done some work on stuff like that, but a lack of quality scans makes it difficult. At least there's a couple sources for excellent scans, LOC and the MET. Although the met won't give access to good scans for HOFers.

[steve B]

On most subjects it's 8 colors. Blue and light blue were usually paired, as were pink and red.

Here's a corner of Batch showing the blue and light blue. Also not how the light blue has a vertical spike on the corner on one but not the other. A small difference that most likely indicates two different positions on the same sheet but may indicate a very minor change to the master. Both are the same common back.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by steve B

My belief is that there will be differences between the non 150 only subjects on those sheets and the same subject from different 150 sheets.

I've done some work on stuff like that, but a lack of quality scans makes it difficult. At least there's a couple sources for excellent scans, LOC and the MET. Although the met won't give access to good scans for HOFers.

Steve, I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Are you saying there are differences in the non 150 only subjects but there are no differences in the 150 only subjects? If so can you post examples of the differences that you're talking about.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Steve, I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Are you saying there are differences in the non 150 only subjects but there are no differences in the 150 only subjects? If so can you post examples of the differences that you're talking about.

That's pretty close.
It's one thing to feel sure something exists, and another entirely to prove it exists.
A lack of excellent scans hinders the search, as I believe most differences will be very minor.

I know for sure that at least Tinker fielding had three different identifiable printings within the 150 series.
The couple with Chicago visible on the uniform
The ones with Chicago mostly removed
And ones where it's not there at all.

Conroy has differences that are divided by 150/350, And also comes at least 3 different ways. Putting three good scans near each other makes it like one of those "spot the differences " puzzles.


The upper one has partial stripes and no gray shading at the back of the cap
The middle one has strong stripes and gray shading
The last has no stripes and does have gray shading.

There are plenty of other differences

The lack of stripes is usually a 350 thing, but the middle one has both stripes and the shading of the no stripes.
Except for that shading I'd think the middle one was earliest, as the proof has solid lines between the head/back and the background.

I did a couple experiments at organizing the visuals for a couple things and for T206 I'm going to have to learn database stuff.
Even finding good scans is slow going, since the places like LOC don't organize their cards the way any of us would, making a search a bit painful.

[steve B]

I think it's possible the 150 only subjects were only printed once, maybe twice.
If they were only printed once, they shouldn't have differences. If twice they may have differences.

[chriskim]

Originally Posted by steve B

Conroy has differences that are divided by 150/350, And also comes at least 3 different ways. Putting three good scans near each other makes it like one of those "spot the differences " puzzles.


The upper one has partial stripes and no gray shading at the back of the cap
The middle one has strong stripes and gray shading
The last has no stripes and does have gray shading.

Is it just me? I don't see any pics....

[tiger8mush]

Originally Posted by chriskim

Is it just me? I don't see any pics....

yeah, i see pics

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by steve B

That's pretty close.
It's one thing to feel sure something exists, and another entirely to prove it exists.
A lack of excellent scans hinders the search, as I believe most differences will be very minor.

I know for sure that at least Tinker fielding had three different identifiable printings within the 150 series.
The couple with Chicago visible on the uniform
The ones with Chicago mostly removed
And ones where it's not there at all.

Conroy has differences that are divided by 150/350, And also comes at least 3 different ways. Putting three good scans near each other makes it like one of those "spot the differences " puzzles.


The upper one has partial stripes and no gray shading at the back of the cap
The middle one has strong stripes and gray shading
The last has no stripes and does have gray shading.

There are plenty of other differences

The lack of stripes is usually a 350 thing, but the middle one has both stripes and the shading of the no stripes.
Except for that shading I'd think the middle one was earliest, as the proof has solid lines between the head/back and the background.

I did a couple experiments at organizing the visuals for a couple things and for T206 I'm going to have to learn database stuff.
Even finding good scans is slow going, since the places like LOC don't organize their cards the way any of us would, making a search a bit painful.

If you're talking about small differences like the ones on Conroy's hat there are similar differences on these Ames each pair also have a distinctly different blue background.

This is four different Ames cards I have, both Ames on the left are from a plate scratch sheet and the two on the right are caption flaws.

img639.jpg

img641.jpg

img640 - Copy - Copy.jpg


There is also a difference in some Schulte cards that is similar to the Tinker hands on knees.

I don't know if it's letters but you can see it clearly on the Schulte on the left but it's barely visible on the one on the rignt.

img627.jpg

[steve B]

Exactly the sort of thing I'd be looking for.

The process wasn't precise, and both Ames have a similar enough dot pattern on black that they probably came from the same master.

But the blue is slightly different, and less or more noticable, the plate scratch ones have a gray layer in the hat, while on the caption varieties it's closer to peach.
To me that along with the Schulte differences (as well as the right side of the bat having an extra line if it's not a different color shifted) would confirm two different press runs.

The next steps would be comparing different brands, and comparing ones that we know are sheetmates from the plate scratch sheets that did carry over into the 350 series to see if there are differences there.

It's entirely possible there are transitional ones too, where front sheets for Piedmont and SC 150 were used to print Piedmont and SC 350.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by steve B

Exactly the sort of thing I'd be looking for.

The process wasn't precise, and both Ames have a similar enough dot pattern on black that they probably came from the same master.

But the blue is slightly different, and less or more noticable, the plate scratch ones have a gray layer in the hat, while on the caption varieties it's closer to peach.
To me that along with the Schulte differences (as well as the right side of the bat having an extra line if it's not a different color shifted) would confirm two different press runs.

The next steps would be comparing different brands, and comparing ones that we know are sheetmates from the plate scratch sheets that did carry over into the 350 series to see if there are differences there.

It's entirely possible there are transitional ones too, where front sheets for Piedmont and SC 150 were used to print Piedmont and SC 350.

Really interesting information Steve. I scanned ten of my Conroy's with different backs at 1200 dpi's (boy does that eat up your computer memory).
You can clearly see the difference in the 350 backs and 460 backs.

The 350 backs have a lot of peach color around the Washington logo while the 460 backs has very little. You can see other differences in the two series with the large scans but the heavy peach on the 350's is what stands out the most.

What's nice is you can tell which series the assorted backs were printed with for instance the EPDG was printed with the 350 backs and the Polar Bear and Tolstoi were printed with the 460 backs.
I didn't scan the Old Mill but that was also printed with the 460 backs so the EPDG was the only assorted back that was printed in one of the 350 print runs.

[IMG][/IMG]