1915 CJ... Is it real?

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve

(The vertical/slanted lines extend through the image portion, through the lower border on magnification, indicating a scanner issue.)







Added larger scan.

[Archive]

Posted By: bigfish

looks fake to me

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul

It's not authentic.

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

That looks like a well-worn reprint. The type for Cobb, Detroit looks like the reprint type, not original type. And the 1915 set is the one that has the most frequently found reprints.

I'd not send an SASE for that card if it were free.

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

Just check the back,

If it says "176 picture" in the back description.... the back should be printed upside down (in other words the top of the front is the same edge as the bottom of the back) for an authentic card. it would be a 1915

If it says "144 pictures" it is a 1914.

Otherwise, the scan you show has characteristics of an authentic card (Uniform blending into border). The scans are not clear enough to see if there is dots in the white border. But it also could be a homemade reprint too ??? Need better (clearer) scans to see better.

Another way to tell is the paper..... The paper stock of an authentic card is a brittle thin paper and rough in texture with no gloss or smooth surface.

Do you have the card in your hands???

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

fkw is super knowledgeable about cards. I respect his opinion, but don't share it. What he says about orientation of the backs of 176 and 144 series card is correct.

The back of 1915 reprints has the backs correctly oriented, so knowing the upside down aspect is no help in ascertaining authenticity.

I still think the card is a reprint.



Holding the card would definitely help in determining authenticity.


Frank.

[Archive]

Posted By: James Gallo

The colors are too bright.

James G

Looking for 1915 Cracker Jacks and 1909-11 American Caramel E90-1.

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt

I agree with Frank here that the scan looks good; A tell-tale sign of a fake CJ Cobb is where his pants meets the bottom white border of the card. On reprints there is usually a clear difference in the color where the printer stopped printing onto the white card stock. On an authentic one (see below) you'll see that the transition into the border is much more subtle, just as it is in the image you provided. What gives me the most pause is the thickness of the card stock that we can see because of the wear - it is certainly not a 1914.

[Archive]

Posted By: Turner Engle

My guess: It is fake.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dave S

You don't even need to look at the reverse to tell the card is clearly a fake. The type/font is the 1st giveaway but more notably, an authentic "creased" CJ will not show the amount of whiteness that this one shows. Due to the fact that the re-prints were printed on a thicker, heavier stock than the originals...here's an authentic "beater"...

[Archive]

Posted By: Matt

Dave - if yours is a 1915, then I change my vote. The cardstock in the scan the OP provided is definitely much thicker then that in the one you have.

[Archive]

Posted By: Turner Engle

I thought the same thing with the whiteness of the creases.

The "bubble" effect of the creases was also a give away for me. You can usually find them on reprints that are doctored to look old.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dave S

Yes, it's a '15...

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve

Having little experience with CJs (I still don't own one, yet). I appreciate the opinions.


I was focused in on the "uniform meets border" factor and was confident this had a good chance at being auth. Thanks for picking out the other red-flags.

Moral of the story, Try to own a common of the Issue before taking a costly plunge.

After backing out, the seller has listed the thing in spite of being directed to this thread.

I'm trying to get it pulled. Thanks gang, Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

I'm about ready to flipflop and say it may well be real... I dug out my 1915 reprints and this worn one looks 'better' than the nrMt reprint I have. And after looking at the type on the two cards, I now would not be surprised if this worn one was real.

Again, an in hand inspection would really help, and if you've held a few real ones then it would be easy to ascertain the difference. And a little black light illumination would seal the deal.

flipflopFrank.

[Archive]

Posted By: James Gallo

Frank

Not sure what there is to flip flop on. There is no way that card is real. The white marks would not be that bright on a real one. The colors both of the red and white are WAY off.

There are several reprints of this set and the scan does nothing to show scale. For all we know it could be from the 1990s mini release.

James G

Looking for 1915 Cracker Jacks and 1909-11 American Caramel E90-1.

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

The mini CJs... I'd not thought about those. I have a set in one of those little plastic folders somewhere. My recollection was that the registration wasn't that great on them. I'd doubt if one would scan and look that detailed.

Definitely a card to be held and hit with a blue light, before being bought.