|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Should be labeled as "Missing red ink" | |||
| Yes |
|
18 | 26.47% |
| No |
|
50 | 73.53% |
| Voters: 68. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
chemical reaction probably...the discolored gold border is the giveaway...if it was just missing the ink, the border would still be more "golden." But the border looks oxidized. I have a t-80 that is very similar.
the bright red back might be different as well. I am fairly certain that the inks used on the front were different from the inks on the back and tend to survive soaking better. Or another theory...this was soaked prior to the back printing, meaning something spilled on the sheet before the back was printed (I am fairly certain the backs and fronts were printed separately). Joshua |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
I'm going to hijack this thread for a little bit, because I think it is related to the original spirit of the post. So the T206 Beaumont is actually a "faded red?????" Is that correct???
sussi3001.jpg Okay then, a couple of questions...... First question, since the T206 Beaumont has an obvious pin-hole, one would assume this card was exposed to light for a longggggg period of time. Would direct light and/or exposure to moisture alone make the red disappear???? Is that even possible??? Or perhaps, it was in a shed with exposure to chemical fumes??? Would fumes alone eliminate the red without impacting any other color??? Second question, when I first saw the card, I assumed that the "red" circle around the pinhole was perhaps caused by a thumbtack, which maybe held this card in a prominent place on a boys bedroom wall. But under a loupe, it is obvious that the red around the pinhole was made at the factory. I made the grand assumption that when originally printed, the red ink was running way low and only printed on that spot (which would make it a bullseye for a kid with a thumbtack), while the rest of the card printed orange. Is this theory even possible (for only a spot on a T206 card to print red while the rest prints orange)??? Any info would be lovely. Lovely Day... |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
It doesn't really seem to benefit the grading companies to start listing errors on their slabs unless they are absolutely sure about it... just opens up a can of worms for them.
If the error is so clear, I'm not sure why it needs to be on the label anyway. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Steve B |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Thank you Steve! I was hoping you would chime-in. This sure puts a damper on "orange" background T206's for me
. If the color red can fade so easily when exposed to light, one can never be 100% certain that orange background cards came out of the factory looking that way. Afterall, some T206 cards were and still are placed in picture frames with no protection from sunlight and no visible thumbtacks. I'm guessing the supply of T206/T205 orange background cards will increase as time marches on. Bummer! Guess that is a "no" vote for me. Lovely Day... Last edited by iggyman; 08-25-2011 at 01:28 PM. |
![]() |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Vintage baseball card missing links? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 30 | 06-20-2008 01:03 PM |
| Caramel/Tobacco cards that are missing a color layer.... | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 17 | 10-11-2007 08:05 PM |
| E94 Doolan missing ink back from SGC | Archive | Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T | 5 | 06-24-2006 07:37 PM |
| Possibly unique E94 missing ink error-Taking Offers | Archive | Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T | 6 | 05-07-2006 05:09 PM |
| T206 colors missing scraps versus issued cards | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 15 | 02-10-2006 01:59 AM |