T206 Paper Stock

[steve B]

Well ok, one day I had my digital calipers out so I randomly checked maybe 20 T206s.
What I found was that they were remarkably consistent. Which is a little unusual for paper produced around 1909-1911. especially with samples made two -three years apart.

I haven't checked stiffness, for a couple reasons. First it's a little bit risky. Second, so many of my T206s are beaters that will obviously not be as stiff.

That stiffness is related to fiber length and what and how much sizing was used in making the cardstock.

I have noticed gloss differences, some related to the inks themselves, others probably related to the cardstock being coated or not (actually more likely not coated much) The less coated stock will absorb the ink better giving a matte appearance and usually more muted colors. A coated stock forces the ink to sit on the surface and since the colors are semi transparent they appaear brighter.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by Sterling Sports Auctions

I ask because in my experiences I have found that there seems to be T206s that have firmer paper stock and some that seem to have a bit smoother finish than other that have been fine.

Lee

Originally Posted by steve B

Well ok, one day I had my digital calipers out so I randomly checked maybe 20 T206s.
What I found was that they were remarkably consistent. Which is a little unusual for paper produced around 1909-1911. especially with samples made two -three years apart.

I haven't checked stiffness, for a couple reasons. First it's a little bit risky. Second, so many of my T206s are beaters that will obviously not be as stiff.

That stiffness is related to fiber length and what and how much sizing was used in making the cardstock.

I have noticed gloss differences, some related to the inks themselves, others probably related to the cardstock being coated or not (actually more likely not coated much) The less coated stock will absorb the ink better giving a matte appearance and usually more muted colors. A coated stock forces the ink to sit on the surface and since the colors are semi transparent they appaear brighter.

I think I know what Lee is talking about especially regarding the firmer paper stock. I've had a few lower condition T206's that feel firmer. I purchased one a couple of months ago that as soon as I removed it from the card saver I noticed that it felt firmer/stiffer than most T206's in the same condition (sometimes cards that have been soaked in the past feel similar but not quite the same).

I also have a Beckley that I purchased recently that at first I thought someone had applied some kind of clear substance to make it shine but
when I examined it closer it didn't look or feel like it was something that was done post production and maybe it's what you're referring to about the gloss differences.

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

I can't remember the recent firmer T206 but I'll see if I can find it in my recent purchases.

[BRoberts]

Ted Z., can you please check in on this? Probably no one in the hobby has handled more T206s than you.

[ullmandds]

I would have to think how a card was stored over 100 years could affect the finish and stiffness factoring in moisture among other things.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Pat R

I think I know what Lee is talking about especially regarding the firmer paper stock. I've had a few lower condition T206's that feel firmer. I purchased one a couple of months ago that as soon as I removed it from the card saver I noticed that it felt firmer/stiffer than most T206's in the same condition (sometimes cards that have been soaked in the past feel similar but not quite the same).

I also have a Beckley that I purchased recently that at first I thought someone had applied some kind of clear substance to make it shine but
when I examined it closer it didn't look or feel like it was something that was done post production and maybe it's what you're referring to about the gloss differences.

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

I can't remember the recent firmer T206 but I'll see if I can find it in my recent purchases.

Yes, that's glossy ink on coated stock. My Konetchy is similar but hard to show since it's slabbed.

I have a feeling that the glossiness somewhat follows brands and series. But the only ones I have that are consistent are tougher backs and I only have a couple cards so not much of a sample size.

[obcmac]

I was convinced for a while that Sweet Cap 350's are lighter (weight) than other cards. If you really pay attention, you can identify them with your eyes closed. Obviously a subtle difference, but if you had 100 raw, unaltered, mixed back cards and you had to pick the 3 lightest with your eyes closed...you would pick sweet cap 350 backs. I always wondered if anyone else thought the same or if the craziness was mine alone.

[FrankWakefield]

I have occasionally encountered a white border card that I'm fairly sure was soaked. And some that I'm certain have not been soaked, at least not soaked any time in the past few years.

Why do I think this? Among white border cards that I acquired in the past couple of months was one that had a few tiny dirt (maybe tobacco) spots on there, and a bit of staining in places on the back. I soaked it for an afternoon, the front specks fell to the bottom of the glass, thew stains were water soluble and dissolved away. A (slightly) better looking card was the result. Same thing with a recent white border card that had remnants of flower paste on the back, that in places slightly obscured the Sweet Caporal design. All of that paste dissolved and the card looks better.

On cards that I'm quite sure someone else soaked, I sometimes notice they seem a bit thinner. And over the past few years of seeing that I've decided that some guys who soak cards feel compelled to physically press the card with great force to mash the water out. I'm serious in saying that those cards feel slightly thinner. I think sometimes the 'thinner' feel is due to that, soaking then over-blotting / mashing. I think enough force is necessary to have the card drying flat... but I think the goal is to have the card dry flat, not for it to be mashed flat. I haven't done this in a few years, but I recall soaking a few cards that seemed previously soaked and smashed, so that I could let them dry in a less smashed condition, and the results were successful.

So, for some of these thin cards, look at them and consider that someone super-pressed them after they soaked them.

[Sterling Sports Auctions]

Just wanted to give an update on the card I questioned.

I received the graded back from SGC and it was a 3. The card definitely had a smoother shinier stock than most T206. When the card was raw and in hand I had seen no indication that the card was not real.

Here is the card if any one is interested: Click Here

Thanks for the replies,

Lee

[BobC]

And aside from possibly being soaked, could the card at one time have been kept in a screw down holder and compressed that way as well? Could possibly account for the thinner feel, and change in stiffness also.