Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat R
Hi Ted,
I know your post is directed at Ed but I would like to respond too.
No offense but I don't think you understand the plate scratches. I would be happy to bring some plate scratch cards and meet with you sometime in
the future and have a discussion.
I'm not sure how they occurred but I think it probably happened in the moving
of them in the printing process.
|
Pat
I fully understand what you refer to as "plate scratches". I've followed your posts regarding your Piedmont 150 analysis.
Furthermore, when I was a teenager, I worked as an apprentice in a print shop and I am familiar with printing practices.
I respect all the time & effort you have put into your T206 project. However, we are now talking about E90-1 cards. E90
cards were printed by a Lithographic firm in Philadelphia (1908-1910). The T206's were printed by American Litho (NYC)
and it's my understanding that state-of-the-art rotary off-set presses were used to print these cards.
I took the trouble of scanning Ebay's current listing of E90-1 cards. There are 178 unique E90-1 cards listed whose backs
are visible in this listing. Only 7 of these cards exhibit "ink streaks"....resulting in 3.9 %.
The grand total (of this group and the group noted in Post #36) is
386 samples. Only
14 of these cards have "ink streaks"
resulting in a mere
3.6 %.
I repeat: such a limited sampling (plus the varying characteristics of the "ink streaks") of these E90-1 cards certainly does
not make for a reliable (or scientific) method for attempting to determine valid sheet layout, or series structure ?
TED Z
.