Ongoing Auction: T206 Printer Scrap?

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt

If discussing an ongoing auction is not your thing, please avert your eyes.



The ink looks like it came from a stamp and does not have the normal crisp print of a T206 Drum. Thoughts?

My Trade/Sale Page

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff S.

Back looks peeled as well. Definitely off.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tony Andrea

The listing has been closed.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=260345603867

[Archive]

Posted By: Randall

T206 BARRY DRUM 350 REVERSE PRINTER'S SCRAP

[Archive]

Posted By: Tony Andrea

The seller must have had it double listed by mistake and canceled the second listing.
It is still up as you can see. Disregard my last post.

Thx, Tony

[Archive]

Posted By: Dave Hornish

There's no way that's real....

[Archive]

Posted By: PC

The front looks real, but the back is really weird. The surface is too rough, as if the card was skinned.

This is a wild guess, but is it possible that this was a Drum test print, printed on the back of a skinned card or sheet? That might explain why the printing looks like it bled across the fibers on a rougher surface.

But I doubt it. If it is a forgery, it is one of the oddest I've seen.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tony Andrea

All 4 corners look funny to me. Almost sculptured to look old.
It's more visible in the back scan.

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt

Tony - good observation on the corners - I didn't even notice them.

My Trade/Sale Page

[Archive]

Posted By: Jantz

The surface on the front of the card looks just as rough as the back and the borders appears strange also.

The seller also states that the corners were scissor cut.

Jantz

[Archive]

Posted By: Scott Levy

I've seen about 10 drums in person, and this card looks absolutely like none of them. The image is grainy and that just can't be explained in any fashion other than it's a repro.

-SGL

[Archive]

Posted By: David Smith

If you look at the seller's other auctions and their Feed Back you will see they KNOW about card designations (T206, E95), KNOW about grading companies and know about supposedly rare items (i.e. the "proof" cards thay also have up for auction), SO they should ALSO know about Drum backs being hard to find and grading companies grading printer scrap cards.

All that being said, then WHY is THIS card NOT graded? Even if it received a grade of AUTH then it would STILL be valuable and people would STILL want it and pay good money for it even in this economy.

In my opinion, there is something wrong with this card and the seller knows it. Otherwise, they would spend the money to have it have it graded and thus make BUYERS feel more comfortable about it and willing TO SPEND THEIR MONEY ON IT.

But that is just my take.

David

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

an underprint.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

The front looks good, the back doesn't.

[Archive]

Posted By: Mr. Moses

that the back is certainly the puzzling element and not the front - I echo the sentiments of the post that pointed to how odd a reproduction such an item would be. It's actually quite complicated in terms of design - and as a fake the idea would be poorly conceived and inadequately implimented. Additionally there is little if any realistic financial motivation to produce it. Someone willing to pay for such a rare annomally (;imited audience) of a common card would have enough knowledge to question such a card's elements and be leary - that is they couldn't fool someone who would be the buyer at any kind of real money. Does anyone know what color ink was used on the 1990's repro set for the Drum? Real or not - hard to imagine how this came about - especially with what appears as a skinned back - WERE THE FRONTS AND BACKS OF T206'S PRINTED ON A SINGLE SHEET or was it two sheets applied together? Forgive the silly question but I'm a 19th century guy - new at this - hungry to learn......... As mentioned earlier it seems the only way printing would appear on a surface like that on a legitimate card is if it was a 2 sheet production and was in fact printer's scraps.....

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

The T206s were one one sheet of cardboard. However, the front side had a pre-printing white coating, so the fronts (where there is no printed ink) appear whiter. With the genuine and unaltered T206s, the front borders are a a bit whiter and smoother than the back. This is not an unusual quality, as Topps and Bowman card fronts also had a white front coating to the cardboard. A 1951 Bowman has white boarders and a dark cardboard back. The purpose of the front coating was to have sharper and brighter front graphics. The printers didn't use white ink, and needed a bright white background for bright white whites. White on a T206 or 1975 Topps is where there is no ink.

As noted by Matt, the printing on this items resembles a rubber stamping.

[Archive]

Posted By: Mr. Moses

that it's a rubber stamp. It's primarily the reasoning behind making it and the design that bothers me. No real motivation. Also, in looking closer I would think that on such a rough surface that the ink wouldn't be as uniform. You have a lot more experience than I do - just playing devil's advocate. I think we would agree that it's always difficult to analize without the object in hand......

[Archive]

Posted By: dennis

"WHY is THIS card NOT graded?" none of this sellers cards are graded. maybe he is a collector who thinks grading is a joke. he is showing nice clear scans and a money back guarantee. so if it eliminates all who worship the slab and can not tell a real card from a fake....good. less competition for collectors.

[Archive]

Posted By: Laura

For more info on clay and other coatings for printing paper, check out this article:

http://www.oldandsold.com/articles10/paper-making-12.shtml

[Archive]

Posted By: dan mckee

The seller was going to have it graded but read the T206 Doyle post here and figured it would be more likely original if it were raw.

[Archive]

Posted By: David Smith

Dennis,

Not to sound like a dick but did you even LOOK at what this seller has listed or at his Feed Back? They currently have listed for auction seven cards that are graded. In the past two weeks they have received Feed Back on 15 graded cards including a T206 Marquard which received an "A" grade by SGC.

So, I will repeat again, if the sellere KNOWS about card designations, KNOWS about things such as "proof" cards and KNOWS about grading companies, then WHY is THIS card NOT graded?

I don't currently have the money available to gamble on such a card HOWEVER if I did, I would certainly buy it (if inexpensive enough) and send it off to be graded. If it came back as an authentic card, I would immediately see if one of the auction houses would accept it because I am NOT into printers scraps but I DO know others are. So I would think a Drum backed printers scrap could/would be quite valuable.

David

[Archive]

Posted By: peter ullman

The back paper stock doesn't look right to me...looks like it was skinned...and then stamped repeatedly with a phony Drum stamp/plate of some sort?!

Can this front be found with a Drum back?

[Archive]

Posted By: ErlandStevens

The seller might have sent it to SGC, and they wouldn't touch it. That doesn't mean it's a fake. It just means that SGC doesn't feel comfortable putting it in slab. This card is out there regardless of whether it is a fake or scrap.

I'm not saying I think it's real. I just think it's plausible that an oddity can be real without being slabbed or even slabbable (sp?, word?).

[Archive]

Posted By: boxingcardman

Looks like the seller closed it entirely now. Perhaps to send to SGC? Perhaps to sell offline...

Sic Gorgiamus Allos Subjectatos Nunc

[Archive]

Posted By: dan mckee

Thanks Adam, that was kinda good ah?

And darnit! I was winning that and he closed again.

bummer! I will write him and buy it privately

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Weisner

Hi Peter,
The only Shad Barry with a Drum back that I've seen was part of the group that sold in Hunt auctions not long ago.


I have a dozen Drum's and this card doesn't look right for many reasons...

For one, the ink is the wrong color. I agree with the skinned back/stamp theory, as the ink from the stamp appears to have pooled and soaked into the untreated paper.

Be well Brian

[Archive]

Posted By: Mr. Moses

about paper making Laura - I like that it was published in 1920 (I think) - nearly contemporary to "T" card distribution is great as it's less like history. I'll get to reading it eventually

[Archive]

Posted By: dan mckee

seller is sending it to be graded.

[Archive]

Posted By: peter ullman

That back is phony baloney...and SGC should grade it accordingly...unless it went to PSA...then this will be chapter 1.

[Archive]

Posted By: Laura

Henry, clay coat stock is pretty widely used these days, and allows for printing offset on a variety of substrates that would otherwise have ink seepage into the paper itself. I hate the smell though!

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim Thierfelder

I will preface my coments by saying I know almost nothing about the printing process and only slightly more about T206 backs and their authenticity.

Modern technology makes reproducing something into a stamp fairly easy to do. Although, the ornate detail on a Drum back would be a challenge to reproduce exactly. Has anyone compared it to a known authentic Drum back to see if it lines up correctly?

It looks to me like parts of the font is pixelized, particularly on the thicker curved lines such as the D in Drum. Is this from an enlarged scan, a moderately success copy of a drum stamp, or an inkjet print of a Drum back on a skinned card.

In any case, I hope it is found to be genuinely authentic. It still wouldn't touch Leon's multi-print/ghost back but it would be pretty cool.

[Archive]

Posted By: Laura

I have a fair amount of experience in the printing industry, and frankly, without a loupe and the chance to feel and even smell the card, (I know, that sounds weird, but there it is) I cannot say definitively whether the back is offset or some other form of printing.

One can presume professional graders use loupes and know how to discriminate between rubber stamp ink and offset or chromolitho ink.

When would the card have been printed? That would help determine the technology used.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I also am no printing expert but it sort of looks like someone took a blank back T206 and hand stamped it with the drum logo. I too hope it's real as it's neat looking..regards

[Archive]

Posted By: peter ullman

Other than my graphic arts days w/the printing press, setting type and creating plates for the press in high school I have no major printing experience...BUT...that being said...collecting vintage cards is always an exercise in evaluating printing techniques, etc. And...after looking at thousands upon thousands of old cards...you just get a feel for what looks "right" and what doesn't.



After comparing the "scrap" to a real drum back...I have no doubts it's fake...the color/appearance of the stock, the thickness of the letters, lines...and the quality of the "strike" are just not right. Whoever did this...got most aspects of it right...and I don't care about technology...you just can't re-create old type/print that easily.

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Weisner

Hi Peter,
Agreed.... Let's not point out all of the flaws or they will continue to get better.

Be well Brian

[Archive]

Posted By: robert a

Nice try, but this one is fake.

This is a bit scary due to the fact that they got the text on the front right as far as color and font, but there's a lot of obvious problems.

I'm not going to repeat everything that's been mentioned, but look at the top of each letter of the DRUM back.

For instance, the top of "U" and "M" should go to almost sharp points. The top of the letters in the card in question are almost block-like.

Check out the real Drum back lettering:

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

hello all,

i hope i don't offend the seller, but this is a perfectly good scrap t206 card that has been stamped!!

i would really need to see this in person, but i have seen enough..i beleive it will come back authentic but altered....

it's a shame, why would some get me so excited??!!
lol!!

Leon, i need your multi print scrap!!
btw Leon,
from the seller u bought the multi print i snagged a scrap from his lot that was hand cut, i hopefully can get a scan but its Mclean hand cut missing some color..very nice!!

johnny
hi Dan, i knew u were bidding!!LOL

= )

[Archive]

Posted By: Art M.

I am not sure what to make of this T206 Barry, Milwaukee with misprinted Drum back. This have seen a Barry, Milw. with Drum back in the past and this is a confirmed front/back combination. However, I have never seen the Drum back misprinted. I have seen Old Mill and Broad leaf backs double printed (see the scan below) so I believe that it is possible for the Drum to be likewise misprinted. Just have never seen any examples before.
Art

[Archive]

Posted By: judson hamlin

I thinks the "s" in scrap was meant to be silent on this card...

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt

Art - those are two interesting backs - the Old Mill has the smooth printing you would expect to see, but the Broad Leaf has some of the rough pixelized look that the Drum does. Is the Broad Leaf yours?

My Trade/Sale Page

[Archive]

Posted By: Art M.

Matt,
I do not own either card. The Old Mill card appeared in February 2003 and the Broad Leaf in December 2003. I think the Broad Leaf was on Ebay and the Old Mill scan was sent to me by the owner? I am pretty sure both the Old Mill and Broad Leaf cards were original.
Art

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

A rubber stamp generally has a bold dark rim around the graphics that typically is visible to the naked eye or light magnification. When you press the inked stamp surface to the paper the ink is pushed to the edges creating the rim of heavier ink. A different type of process, lithography generally doesn't have such a rim. T206 lithography has a microscopic rim due to the ink used, but this rim is visible only under the microscope not the naked eye or around the house magnifying glass. Printing details will be harder to identify the rougher the surface, with the back of T206 being fairly rough. You can only see the microscopic lithographic rim on the smooth front of the card, not the back. Though I would suspect that most rubber stamps would be obvious even on back, as the rubber stamp rim tends bold and very noticeable.

[Archive]

Posted By: 1880nonsports

so what are you saying about it? I can be a bit thick......

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Leon, I just saw your post and laughed.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

Laura mentioned how one would tell the different between a rubber stamp and lithograph.

I already said the back doesn't look good, and wasn't trying to further anything on that front. There's not much to argue further about the back. It's not just that something looks wrong, but that nothing looks right. The printing appears highly dubious and the paper doesn't resemble any T206 paper any of us have seen. Printing + paper, that's all a back is.

[Archive]

Posted By: Laura

When I look at the two samples, especially the typography, it's interesting to note the differences in type. The serifs on the one in question are all wrong (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serif), missing, pixelized, or otherwise incorrect. Having a good sample to compare to makes the decision for me. Not Right. Not sure why, (don't know the seller and certainly am not here to cast aspersions on his or her character), but plainly not genuine, if only when it comes to the type.

In particular, look at the serifs on the top of the U in Drum, the weight at the base of that U (too uniform), the lack of serif on the 3 in "350", the coarseness of the dingbats (or decorative images) in the corners, the roundness at the bottom of the stroke in the J in subjects, and so on (let me know if you want a complete list of what I see that is wrong typographically.)

Bottom line, Not Right. Don't know why, and find it interesting that the double printing overlap covers some of the most sensitive typographical elements. But definitely Not Right. IMNSHO.