T206 production/printing questions/comments

[caramelcard]

Hi Ted,

You made some good points. Thank you.

Again, I'm not suggesting that these card backs were printed at the different factories, just that it's possible the backs were printed at a different shop than that of the ALC.

Why would the letter instruct ALC to insert the cards into the packs? I thought the insertion into the packs happened at the tobacco factories.

As far as James Duke, I'm a nonsports collector and follow a lot of the Duke issues. He had issues where he used other lithography companies. Duke had a lot of friends.

Duke issues also used:

Giles Company out of NY.
Geo Harris and Sons out of Phila.
Donaldson Brothers, NY.
Schumaker and Ettinger, NY

And more. This was at the same time that he was using Knapp's services which at the time was called Knapp & Co.

Rob

[jimonym]

I was generally of the persuasion that the card backs were printed by ALC, but after coming across this passage I am now of two minds. It is from the Report of the Commissioner of Corporations on the Tobacco Industry, Part 1 (1909) pages 263-264 (I pasted the passages together for easier reading).

The text is general in its description, but it's not beyond the realm of possibility that since much of the paper packaging was being printed at the tobacco manufacturing facility that the card backs may have been printed there as well.

[Brian Weisner]

Hi Rob,
Duke wasn't using Knapps services.... He helped him form the ALC and was most likely the silent partner....

Be well Brian

[caramelcard]

Hi Brian,

In the 1880s, or in 1909? I believe you're talking about when the ALC was formed right?

Thanks Jamie for posting that.

Rob

[Leon]

My one T206 thingy....for the 1.2 millionth time....By some accounts I show this so often I should have sold it 100x by now.

[barrysloate]

Leon- as I look at the back of your card carefully I see:

1) Cy Young
2) Piedmont
3) Old Mill (which somebody pointed out was brown)
4) EPDG rightside up
5) EPDG upside down

Are those five passes everything, or am I missing something?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Leon- as I look at the back of your card carefully I see:

1) Cy Young
2) Piedmont
3) Old Mill (which somebody pointed out was brown)
4) EPDG rightside up
5) EPDG upside down

Are those five passes everything, or am I missing something?

Hey Barry
This will sound weird but I have actually just let the "print guys" figure this one out. I just stare at it . I think you might have it correct though...

[barrysloate]

Do you take any hallucinogenics while you stare at it? Come to think of it, you don't need any.

[toppcat]

It just works for me, what can I say?

[tedzan]

Regarding your......

1st....."Again, I'm not suggesting that these card backs were printed at the different factories, just that it's possible the backs were
printed at a different shop than that of the ALC. "

Again, recall Leon's Mullaney scrap card with at least two different Factory backs printed on it. Please explain how this occurred if it
wasn't printed at ALC ?
Are you suggesting it was printed at two different Factory's ? ?

2nd....." As far as James Duke, I'm a nonsports collector and follow a lot of the Duke issues. He had issues where he used other litho-
graphy companies. Duke had a lot of friends.

Duke issues also used:

Giles Company out of NY.
Geo Harris and Sons out of Phila.
Donaldson Brothers, NY.
Schumaker and Ettinger, NY "

These were great lithographic firms in the late 19th Century. By 1902 ALC had bought most of them (with the financial backing of Duke).
I, too, have many Non-sports cards from some of these firms. The Geo. Harris & Sons Litho. Co. was exceptionally good. They produced
my favorite set of cards....the 1888 N162's and the fabulous A36 (Goodwin Champions) album.

3rd....." Why would the letter instruct ALC to insert the cards into the packs? I thought the insertion into the packs happened at the
tobacco factories. "

By the Spring of 1911, ALC was running out of their T206 stock. They were beginning to produce their Gold-Bordered cards (T80's, T205's,
etc.). So, we can safely assume that they were suggesting that Factory # 30 pair off the remaning T206's with the newly printed T80's
in their LENOX and UZIT cigarette packs.


TED Z

[rebelsart]

I have always believed that the T206 cards were printed on the fronts first. Then the sheets were divided up and printed with the different back brands. I believe the finished cards were then shipped to the corresponding tobacco/cigarette brand factories and inserted into the packs/polar bear pouches/etc.
Just cannot imagine the American Lithograph Co. dealing with anything other than the printing. Pretty sure they were not involved with inserting cards into packs.
Art

[judsonhamlin]

And, adding to what Ted and Art M. have posted, I could never see a tobacco factory dedicating the floor space and storage space for an entire line with workers to the task of printing and cutting the cards in house. It would be much easier to have a couple of workers inserting the individual pre-cut cards, newly arrived from ALC into the packs as they came off the line.

[canjond]

About the sheet of uncut backs... are we sure this isn't being confused with the sheet of uncut Piedmont boxes that was found? I may be wrong but just cant recall the sheet of uncut backs...

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by rebelsart

I have always believed that the T206 cards were printed on the fronts first. Then the sheets were divided up and printed with the different back brands. I believe the finished cards were then shipped to the corresponding tobacco/cigarette brand factories and inserted into the packs/polar bear pouches/etc.
Just cannot imagine the American Lithograph Co. dealing with anything other than the printing. Pretty sure they were not involved with inserting cards into packs.
Art

Frankly, I think they may have shipped sheets to each factory, not cut cards. Just a hunch but the uncut Piedmont box sheet (found in the Carolina's I believe, not NYC) seems to indicate the factories could cut them.

[tedzan]

In a previous post I speculated that ALC printed the boxes, but shipped them in uncut sheet form to the given Factory,
based on the uncut sheet find in North Carolina.

What I do not understand about this recurring discussion is that we have pretty well arrived at certain facts where the
cards were printed, how they got to the various factories, where these factories were located, and what was done at
these factories.

We settled all this several times over back in 2006, again in 2007, then again in 2008, and as recent as 2009. But, here
we go again, mulling it all over for the umpteenth time. You can check it out by using the SEARCH function....this func-
tion is one of the great features on Net54. Simply type in "American Lithographic" or whatever will get you the info that
you are looking for.

Doesn't any one ever access the Net54 search function, anymore ?


TED Z

[Jantz]

Based on visual evidence alone, I believe neither the fronts nor the backs were printed first. Maybe when the print run began in 1909, yes one side or the other was printed first, but as the print run progressed and more tobacco brands were added, I think they were printed according to what was needed.

I believe this because some printing mishaps are back specific and some are not. Here are two examples:

1. The Lundgren recently found by Jamie (Blunder19) appears to be a back specific printing mishap - Piedmont 150 Fac.25. Three board members posted that their cards all had this same back. So in this case, I guess one could say that the backs were printed first. This also applies to other printing mishaps in this set as well.

2. The Murr'y printing mishap on the other hand, appears to be a non-specific back mishap since it is found with 4 different backs - Lenox, Sweet Caporal 460, Piedmont 460 and Tolstoi. Please correct me if I'm wrong here, but didn't the Tolstoi brand appear in 1910 and the Lenox brand didn't appear until 1911. I'm going with what I read in "the Monster", but it looks to me that this printing mishap jumped from one print series to the next, which could make one think that the fronts were printed first and the sheets were stored until later needed and then the back advertisements were added.


I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong in whatever they believe about the printing process of this set, I'm just pointing out some of the small discoveries that I've made since collecting these cards.

Jantz

[bijoem]

Originally Posted by Jantz

Based on visual evidence alone, I believe neither the fronts nor the backs were printed first. Maybe when the print run began in 1909, yes one side or the other was printed first, but as the print run progressed and more tobacco brands were added, I think they were printed according to what was needed.

I agree completely.

I have to believe the cards were produced in the least expensive, most efficient way possible. Which would mean different methods depending on what was best that hour, that day, or at the time.