![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Ted,here is the back of my Chase dark cap-please excuse the background.I just noticed some of the 460 back scans have more of the forrest green,this one appears to be more of the apple green.
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I think there’s a fundamental point we need to keep in mind with American Beauty backed T206s. It’s the obvious one: they are significantly narrower than all other T206 cards. And that must have distinguished the way they were printed.
Think of it this way. Two horizontally adjacent cards on a sheet normally had a quarter inch of white space between them (you can measure this on any severely off-center card that shows parts of two fronts), which when cut down the middle created the side borders for two cards. So a normal (i.e. non-American Beauty) sheet was laid out something like this (the red lines show where the cuts would be made): ![]() An American Beauty sheet would have looked like this (i.e. scrunched together): ![]() Now, one could argue that ALC used the first pictured layout and made extra cuts to trim the cards down the proper size and scrapped the little slits of paper that were left (shown in red), like this: ![]() I wondered about this for a long time, until I saw the Malarkey card below. I know it’s a small image, but you can clearly see, especially if you look at the wavy brackets, that there’s no extra space between the two designs, meaning that only one cut was made to get the card to the right size. So they must have used a layout like sample sheet 2. Which means they used different printing plates to print American Beauty cards. ![]() The similarity in green inks between American Beauty and Sovereign may indicate they were printed concurrently or close in time, but they must have been printed from different plates. And to me that makes connecting American Beauty to any other brand tricky. Not impossible, but tricky. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Here is a Cycle and it too is pretty close
Smithb.jpg Clayton-your Sovereign 460 is the regular forest green.
__________________
T206Resource.com Last edited by cfc1909; 10-15-2009 at 06:05 PM. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Thanks Jim,the photo does show somewhat lighter than looking at it in actuality.This is the only Sovereign backed card I have.I appreciate the help!!
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Can you enlarge your Malarkey scan to match Jim's CYCLE scan ?
Because I don't see a measurable difference in the gap between adjacent frames of the AMERICAN BEAUTY back vs. the adjacent frames of the CYCLE back. If there is no difference, then (as you said)......"ALC used the first pictured layout and made extra cuts to trim the cards down the proper size and scrapped the little slits of paper". The designs of all the various Tobacco back's framing width is 1 1/4 inches wide. Since the AB cards are trimmed down to 1 3/8ths inches wide, this may explain why ALC eliminated the FRAME in their subsequent 350/460 and 460-only AMERICAN BEAUTY backs. On many cards, given the printing and cutting tolerances, the frame design was being partially cut out with the narrower card. The real mystery that still remains is....why the AB card's width were trimmed down an 1/8th inch ? As, the AMERICAN BEAUTY packs contained 10 (standard size) cigarettes; therefore, they were no smaller in size than the PIEDMONT, SWEET CAPORAL, etc. TED Z |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ted,
I have these packs and there is absolutely no difference in size. The mystery of the reason for the smaller AB card remains--- but is most enticing! great work best, barry |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Perhaps they were printed elsewhere? Just a WAG.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I listed your T-packs in the following order....as, they appear more impressive. I hope that's fine with you.
American Beauty Drum(pouch)......(with the Drum card) El Principe de Gales Hassan......T202 Helmar......(332 stamp) Kimball......1883 pack Mecca......T201 Old Mill Piedmont Pirate......T215 (British issue) Recruit......2 different factories related to T207 Sweet Caporal Turkey Red......T3 __________________________________________________ _____________________________________ I only have these two T-packs......to complement my T206 Piedmont set Piedmont (ATC factory 25 VA) Piedmont (L&M factory 42 NC) I'm looking for the following T-packs to complement my 4 additional T206's...... American Beauty (factory 42 NC)......near complete AB 460 subset (61 cards) Sovereign......complete (407 cards) Sweet Caporal (factory 30)......minus Plank & Wagner (otherwise 467 cards complete) Sweet Caporal (factory 649)......complete subset of 35 cards Best regards ole buddy TED Z Last edited by tedzan; 10-19-2009 at 02:57 PM. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Many thanks,Ted.
I do like your list of my T-wares!!! I notice that the Pirates pack is missing from the list--- since it's a T215, do you think it should be counted. Or do you leave out the ole T215 since it was distributed in Europe rather than here in the US. the price of the card was a bit much for me, so i framed the Pirates alone. i'll keep my eyes open for the packs that you need. please keep your eyes open for me,as well. by the way, i've seen some nice sovereign's but they tend to be way outside the T206 date range. best, barry |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The enigmatic T206 350/460 series....theory, checklist & backs | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 32 | 02-11-2009 12:38 PM |
T206....460-only Series....checklist & backs | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 12 | 02-07-2009 09:24 PM |
T206 350 series, player clear out | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 2 | 07-15-2007 10:03 AM |
in need of a Cycle Series 460 t206 | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 0 | 01-18-2006 02:16 PM |
Luther Taylor T206 Question... | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 9 | 12-17-2004 06:25 AM |