[Pat R]

Originally Posted by CW

The fact that you can even see or find these scratches, Patrick, let alone use them to assemble a possible sheet layout, is fascinating to me. Excellent research!

Originally Posted by stutor

Wow!!! 7 years!!! That’s absolutely relentless research Pat. Well done!!! Your knowledge of the set is inspiring…congratulations on finding the missing link. And thank you for sharing.

Originally Posted by Casey2296

Amazing research Pat, thank you. It's overwhelming the amount of time and effort you've put into this, truly impressive and so important to the history of baseball cards.

Originally Posted by Seven

Pat,

Fantastic research. I scanned through this thread in it's entirety, and its nice to see a seven year journey come to a close, with a satisfying result! Reading the old posts from Ted, makes me think that he would have loved this as well. Have a great day.

- James

Chuck, Sonny, Phil, and James, thank you for the kind words.

Originally Posted by sreader3

Well done Pat.

Do my eyes deceive or were all of the subjects based on Carl Horner studio photos printed on the outskirts of the sheets? That seems a strange quirk.

Hey Scot, I have mentioned it in some of the other plate scratch threads that there are some odd layouts of the portraits on all of the sheets. Some of the sheets have them on the ends while one sheet has all four portraits together in the middle of the sheet and If I have the layouts correct on one of the dual plate scratch sheets all the portraits on one sheet and all of the action poses are on another sheet.
This is an older image and Boweman is a confirmed scratch next to Young on the middle right image which matches up with the Wagner strip.
Plate Scratch Sheet Fronts Group.jpg

Originally Posted by G1911

Fantastic research Pat.

My math:
1 7/16 = 1.4375 inches
2 5/8 = 2.625 inches
17 cards x 1.4375in = 24.4375in + presumable border spacing
12 cards x 2.625in = 31.5in + presumable border spacing

We know that at least some 1910 T card sheets for the same client were ~51x~34. Interesting parallels here when we adjust for the sheet border beyond the cards.

Hey Greg, I think one of the difficulties with the research of the T sheets is the probability that in many cases there were different sheet sizes used within some of the sets.

There are bigger plate scratch sheets than this one and there is also no way to tell if the layout of this sheet is complete there could be missing scratches from this sheet (I think this is unlikely) or the scratch could have stopped before the end of the sheet (definitely possible).

I should also mention that on this dual sheet plus the one other dual plate scratch sheet the selection of which sheet each subject goes on is speculation on my part based on past research and my knowledge of the set.

I'm very confident on this sheet based on few things. One fact is that each scratch has a Sweet Caporal 150 factory 649 subject that matches up with a non 649 subject. Another fact is that Brian W has the 649 Sheckard/Goode side miscut and they are also linked together with the plate scratches. Although it's just speculation I think there's a very high probability that the 649 subjects were on one PD150 sheet and the non 649 subjects were on another PD150 sheet.

The other dual sheet has 10 (if you consider Schulte part of this group which I personally do) 150 only subjects connected by plate scratches starting on the left (front) of the sheet. (that's the middle two sheets in the image that I posted below where I relied to Scot".