Poll: What is your opinion on the value of T206 WST (Wet Sheet Transfers)?

[Eric72]

As some of you know, I picked up a T206 WST over the weekend, and am pretty excited. I started a thread about it and someone weighed in about the premium (or lack thereof) placed on these cards.

Being the curious type, I figured I would post a poll here to see where people think the values on these print oddities should be.

Thanks, in advance, to all who participate. Additionally, I want to thank Leon for helping me figure out how to post a poll.

Best Regards,


Eric

[Leon]

Hi Eric
Poll Questions can only be 100 total characters long so you need to revise yours, specifically 3,4 and 5, I believe. Sorry about that.

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by Leon

Hi Eric
Poll Questions can only be 100 total characters long so you need to revise yours, specifically 3,4 and 5, I believe. Sorry about that.

Leon,

Thanks again for helping me with this. I believe the revisions have been done successfully.

My apologies for being so verbose

Best Regards,

Eric

[mrvster]

keep the hunt going.....alot of the "thrill" is seeing one pop up somewhere....the more dramatic the wst, the more the premuim is the rule of thumb....the problem is putting a number on it

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by mrvster

...the more dramatic the wst, the more the premuim is the rule of thumb....the problem is putting a number on it

Johnny,

Thanks for weighing in here. What you say makes quite a bit of sense.

Best Regards,

Eric

[deadballfreaK]

Not a T206, but I just found this one. Actually have had it for years, but I never thought it amounted to much.

[mrvster]

I love your interest



Ken
The 205 is an example of a "less" dramatic wst transfer, a really nice card and neat little wst especially a color on the back....small premuim on this card if any , unfortunately....but a neat card, sorry to use your card as an example


each wst is a case by- case eval

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by deadballfreaK

Not a T206, but I just found this one. Actually have had it for years, but I never thought it amounted to much.

Ken,

At first blush, I think that is one awesome baseball card. Congratulations!

I have not yet jumped into T205; however, feel that I will be doing so in the very near future.

Out of curiosity, when and where did you pick this up?

Best Regards,

Eric

[MVSNYC]

hopefully no one takes offense, but they have never really done anything for me. if they were actually struck or printed in error, or over-printed, that would be one thing, but simply having wet ink transferred from one wet card to another when the sheets were stacked, is not really special or desirable to me...but to each, his own.

[deadballfreaK]

Many years ago. I had forgotten all about it. I've been seeing all the misprints here and started going through my stuff to see if I had any.

[Jantz]

Hey Eric

PM on the way


Jantz

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by MVSNYC

hopefully no one takes offense...simply having wet ink transferred from one wet card to another when the sheets were stacked, is not really special or desirable to me...but to each, his own.

Thanks for weighing in on this...I truly value your opinion here. This is a new world to me and these are uncharted waters, to be sure.

Any additional information from board members is greatly appreciated.

Best Regards,

Eric

[Leon]

Not a T206 but some wet sheet transfers can be really cool...

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by deadballfreaK

Many years ago. I had forgotten all about it. I've been seeing all the misprints here and started going through my stuff to see if I had any.

Ken,

Thanks for your reply. Enjoy revisiting your collection

And please let me know if you uncover any more print oddities when doing so

Best,

Eric

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by Leon

Not a T206 but some wet sheet transfers can be really cool...

Leon,

Your Emil is quite cool. Is he a switch-hitter, or do you have a WST?



Please let me know.

Best Regards,

Eric

[Ronnie73]

Originally Posted by MVSNYC

hopefully no one takes offense, but they have never really done anything for me. if they were actually struck or printed in error, or over-printed, that would be one thing, but simply having wet ink transferred from one wet card to another when the sheets were stacked, is not really special or desirable to me...but to each, his own.

I totally agree. I voted no value change. Maybe if the front of a Piedmont card had a Drum wet sheet transfer on it, then I coud see maybe an increase in price.

[teetwoohsix]

I like the WST's a lot, the heavier the better. Even better when it's a WST of another brand on the front than the brand on the back (although it's a bit of a mystery how that happens).

A really light WST is nice, but I like the dramatic ones better. I'd pay a slight premium I guess, depending on the card.

Sincerely, Clayton

[Abravefan11]

I believe there are different types of transfers and that they effect value differently. Some, like Leon's Meusel, can add a premium, while others may add nothing.

[srs1a]

I believe there are different types of transfers and that they effect value differently. Some, like Leon's Meusel, can add a premium, while others may add nothing.

I completely agree Tim. For whatever reason, I split them by "ghost images" where the front of one card ends up on the back of another and "wet sheet transfers" where the back ends up on the front. I understand that there really isn't a difference in how they were formed, but this is how I view them in my mind.

I think "ghost images" are really cool and the strong ones should command a reasonable (strong?) premium. Weaker ones like the following Street, I'm not so sure about -- maybe a very slight premium, maybe nothing.



I think "wet sheet transfers" can also be interesting when they are very strong or just curious. I liked the Johnson below because of the detail in the transfer -- but, I didn't pay a premium for it.





When it is just a hint of an Old Mill that you have to squint to see (like Joss below), then I don't think that they are particularly special.

[Forever Young]

I find it interesting all the people that voted "I simply do not care". They obviously care enough to read the thread and vote. Perhaps these people should change their grumpy pants.
I think these printing mistakes are part of history and cool even though I really don't collect cards anymore. They are obviously rarer that one without the transfer. I think that the kind of transfer makes a difference though. If it is say a complete ghost image of portrait vs paint marks, it should be of higher premium because it is "pretty".

[Ladder7]

Same value as a stock card. These could be a simple means for an unscrupulous fellow to cash in.

Of course it has occured by the apprentice stacking sheets after the print run. Some of the factories were hot and humid places. But also, I've seen this same effect with other carelessly stored, antique vintage ephemera.

Im certain where the temperature and humidity vary throughout the year in addition to being sandwiched, the conditions facilitated the formation of these anomalies.

Plastic surface of a 15 pocket page and back of a c1900 photo after prolonged storage:

[ullmandds]

Ive got to agree w/steve here...way too easy to "create" these...like adding a stamp to a card?!

There are definitely some freaks...like leons...like jamies...that should command premiums...

[brob28]

Great poll Eric. While I find some of them interesting I'm not interested in paying a premium for them.

[ethicsprof]

I think they're a very interesting anomaly, particularly when I see them on
Tolstoi cards.
I'd pay a small to medium premium.
all the best,
barry

[fkm_bky]

I would (and have) paid a slight premium on them, because of their uniqueness. It all depends on the level of detail in the transfer and the situation. To me they are certainly in a separate category to ghost images and mis-prints, with the latter two commanding more of a premium. Great poll and discussion though.

Question; with the case of a WST from a different brand on a card, would people lean towards that happening at the time of production, or the case that Steve put forth, where conditions were just right (or wrong) and over time in storage the ink transferred over?

I guess I would lean towards Steve's theory, but I am not too versed on how or where the different brands were produced (same factory, same time, different brand - see example below).

Thanks!

Bill

[thecatspajamas]

Originally Posted by Forever Young

I find it interesting all the people that voted "I simply do not care". They obviously care enough to read the thread and vote. Perhaps these people should change their grumpy pants.
I think these printing mistakes are part of history and cool even though I really don't collect cards anymore. They are obviously rarer that one without the transfer. I think that the kind of transfer makes a difference though. If it is say a complete ghost image of portrait vs paint marks, it should be of higher premium because it is "pretty".

Ben,
Mine was one of the "I do not care" votes because I don't collect these and didn't want to skew the poll results with an uninformed vote. I was, however, curious as to the general sentiment, and since I couldn't see the poll results unless I voted...

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by thecatspajamas

Mine was one of the "I do not care" votes because I don't collect these and didn't want to skew the poll results with an uninformed vote. I was, however, curious as to the general sentiment, and since I couldn't see the poll results unless I voted...

Lance,

Sorry about that. This is the first time I have posted a poll and didn't know folks would not be able to see the results unless they voted.

That said; I appreciate you weighing in here and truly thank you for casting a vote.

Best Regards,

Eric

[Runscott]

I own a few, and it was on purpose, but I didn't (and wouldn't) pay a premium. If the WST was different from the back ad, then I would pay a BIG premium.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by fkm_bky

I would (and have) paid a slight premium on them, because of their uniqueness. It all depends on the level of detail in the transfer and the situation. To me they are certainly in a separate category to ghost images and mis-prints, with the latter two commanding more of a premium. Great poll and discussion though.

Question; with the case of a WST from a different brand on a card, would people lean towards that happening at the time of production, or the case that Steve put forth, where conditions were just right (or wrong) and over time in storage the ink transferred over?

I guess I would lean towards Steve's theory, but I am not too versed on how or where the different brands were produced (same factory, same time, different brand - see example below).

Thanks!

Bill

Bill - I think the 'different front and back ad' is almost certainly from cards being stuck together for a long time. But yours is very nice.

It doesn't make sense that a sheet of Sweet Caps would be stacked on a sheet of Polar Bears, since the cards are going in different packs.

[Sean]

Can anyone explain this one. I think it must be a wet sheet transfer, but I've never seen one so dark.

scan0036.jpg

[g_vezina_c55]

These wet transfer are verry cool.
For me a slight premium is corect.

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by Sean

Can anyone explain this one. I think it must be a wet sheet transfer, but I've never seen one so dark.

Hi Sean,

Ron Kornacki explained in another thread how this may have happened on the press. Keep in mind he was talking about how front images would be printed on the back, so for your card think about it in reverse.

"I'm not sure of the exact printing method that was used back then. Maybe it was offset printing where a plate image transfers to a blanket cylinder and then onto the paper. If the paper is not fed, the blanket image will transfer to the impression cylinder. If that happens, a reversed image would print on the back side of the paper the same time the image is printed on the front. Normally the impression cylinder would be cleaned if a misfeed happened before feeding another sheet in to avoid the error reverse printing. This is most likely the reason for how detailed some wet sheet transfers are. Its because Tim's card is actually an impression cylinder transfer and not a wet sheet transfer."

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Abravefan11

Hi Sean,

Ron Kornacki explained in another thread how this may have happened on the press. Keep in mind he was talking about how front images would be printed on the back, so for your card think about it in reverse.

"I'm not sure of the exact printing method that was used back then. Maybe it was offset printing where a plate image transfers to a blanket cylinder and then onto the paper. If the paper is not fed, the blanket image will transfer to the impression cylinder. If that happens, a reversed image would print on the back side of the paper the same time the image is printed on the front. Normally the impression cylinder would be cleaned if a misfeed happened before feeding another sheet in to avoid the error reverse printing. This is most likely the reason for how detailed some wet sheet transfers are. Its because Tim's card is actually an impression cylinder transfer and not a wet sheet transfer."

Great stuff - missed Ron's post. I have one of these (not a great one) and always wondered how they were created.

[Sean]

[QUOTE=Abravefan11;1098910]Hi Sean,

Ron Kornacki explained in another thread how this may have happened on the press. Keep in mind he was talking about how front images would be printed on the back, so for your card think about it in reverse.

"I'm not sure of the exact printing method that was used back then. Maybe it was offset printing where a plate image transfers to a blanket cylinder and then onto the paper. If the paper is not fed, the blanket image will transfer to the impression cylinder. If that happens, a reversed image would print on the back side of the paper the same time the image is printed on the front. Normally the impression cylinder would be cleaned if a misfeed happened before feeding another sheet in to avoid the error reverse printing. This is most likely the reason for how detailed some wet sheet transfers are. Its because Tim's card is actually an impression cylinder transfer and not a wet sheet transfer."


Tim, thank you once again for some helpful information. I think you've put more work into my set than I have these last two months. Now I will have to distinguish between a wet sheet transfer and this Tinker "impression cylinder transfer." But at least I understand how it happened. Sort of.

[Ronnie73]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Great stuff - missed Ron's post. I have one of these (not a great one) and always wondered how they were created.

Hi Scott, Here's the post Tim was talking about.

T205 Print? Oddity
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=164688

[Eric72]

Wow!

Nearly 100 votes…and the views are approaching 1,000.

I would like to take a moment to thank everyone who has participated in this thread thus far.

Regardless of what your stance is on the value of a T206 WST, I appreciate all those who weighed in here and truly value all of your opinions. It has been a tremendous learning experience.

Keep up the great discussion.

Best Regards,

Eric

[mrvster]

You are what makes this board great

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by mrvster

You are what makes this board great

Johnny,

Thanks for the kind words, bro. Glad to know I am making a contribution here.

Be well, my friend...and please know that I find your enthusiasm for this hobby to be incredibly addictive.

Best,

Eric

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by Ladder7

Same value as a stock card. These could be a simple means for an unscrupulous fellow to cash in.

Of course it has occured by the apprentice stacking sheets after the print run. Some of the factories were hot and humid places. But also, I've seen this same effect with other carelessly stored, antique vintage ephemera.

Im certain where the temperature and humidity vary throughout the year in addition to being sandwiched, the conditions facilitated the formation of these anomalies.

Plastic surface of a 15 pocket page and back of a c1900 photo after prolonged storage:

Steve F,

The evidence you present is quite compelling.



Thank you very much for posting this picture...It is truly appreciated - and, in my humble opinion - adds great value to this discussion.

Could T206 WST cards held by many of us be nothing more than byproducts of poor storage...well after the original printing? An interesting question, to be sure.

As always, I welcome the opinions of everyone here.

Best Regards,

Eric

[ullmandds]

I would think it wouldnt be too hard to simulate this? Maybe stack a few beater t206's and put them in a sauna...or use a steamer on them and see if it bleeds.

If i had some id try it! Anyone have a sauna at home?

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

I would think it wouldnt be too hard to simulate this? Maybe stack a few beater t206's and put them in a sauna...or use a steamer on them and see if it bleeds.

I think recreating storage transfers would be really difficult. Even if we were lucky enough to get the right amounts of temperature, pressure, light and moisture, the most important ingredient I think is time.

Honestly I couldn't bring myself to sacrifice the cards to find out if it's possible.

[Exhibitman]

Depends. The 'best' WST is the ghost image of the card front black ink on the back. Those get big bux and always have. It goes downhill from there. Some print haze from a color on the back I don't think has much value

[teetwoohsix]

I was looking at Steve's SC image in the 15 pocket page, and wondering if that was an old 15 pocket page. I recall buying these sleeves and seeing them promoted as "acid free, no PVC" and thought if those sleeves were old, maybe that transfer was from the acid or PVC in the plastic?

The Chase dark cap Sov.460 I have has an EPDG image on the front (I've posted it before), for some reason I can't post the photo anymore. It's hard for me to imagine it's from being stacked, because there's no bleeding of the ink on the surface, and no type of WST or colors on the back.

Sincerely, Clayton

[steve B]

I did try to create a WST using a beat common.

Water, wrapped in paper and clamped in a vise for about a week, maybe a bit more.

Nothing at all except pressing the woodgrain pattern into the card.

When I have time I'm going to try alcohol and/or mineral spirits.

One of those will probably get it done, the plasticizer in the old sheets is oil based, as are most lithography inks which is part of what causes the ink migration. I can see front and back inks helping each other to transfer.

And since we're on the topic, here's something I've been needing to scan for everyone. The ink used is similar, but likely linseed oil based. The exact formulations were closely held trade secrets at the time.
6 cent post office card proof on the left, 6 cent Justice dept card proof on the right seen from the back(Justice dept are purple and have lincoln on the 6cent) Both bought from a seller in the UK and mailed in the same package, same tiny envelope inside. Neither had any offset before shipping. The seller had very nice scans of both fron and back.
The last printing of card proofs was around 1900. So approximately 100+ years after printing the ink was still "wet" enough to transfer.

Steve B

[atx840]

Neat Steve.

A while ago I took a high res scan for board member, it does appear to be under the Piedmont ad and "printed" more so then a transfer from another sheet.

[Ronnie73]

Originally Posted by atx840

Neat Steve.

A while ago I took a high res scan for board member, it does appear to be under the Piedmont ad and "printed" more so then a transfer from another sheet.

Thats a nice clear scan. Seeing that tells me the fronts are printed first and the backs last. Thats an impression cylinder transfer and not a wet sheet transfer. The only thing I have not been able to understand yet is why it's always the same color pass that shows up. Maybe the guy that printed that color didn't pay much attention to his printing press or maybe only a couple sheets got past inspection and all others were caught and destroyed. Has anyone seen any odd T206's with front colors on the backs? I think the next step would be to make a list of all impression sheet transfers with their backs also listed. Most likely many are from the same sheet. I know theres blank backs and Piedmont 350 backs. Are there any others? Doing this could help us learn what cards are on the same sheets and when adding the findings of this to other research, we may be one step closer to learning a sheet layout. One thing I should mention, during the printing, if a full sheet was not fed, then the next full sheet would have the transfer. If a sheet fed late into the press, then the next sheet would only have the transfer on the top section of the sheet. Most likely the sheet that fed late would have been pulled and destroyed but the next one printed with the half transfer would of slipped by. One last thing that I question is why on many impression cylinder transfers do the names, border, and part of the design transfer but on others, its just the design that transfers. Are they actually two different color passes? Maybe its a Brown and/or Black color pass. This would also have to be documented if a list was put together. Maybe someone needs to start a new thread and quote my thoughts and questions. I would love to do it but i'm busy with the T205 website and regular life stuff.

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by Ronnie73

The only thing I have not been able to understand yet is why it's always the same color pass that shows up.

Ron - The impression cylinder transfer of Chance above is the black color pass which includes the outside border. The one's I posted in the other thread are the brown color pass and include the team captions. So that's at least two different colors for the fronts and Sean's Sovereign Tinker is a good example of an impression cylinder transfer of a back. Maybe some others will surface.

[Ronnie73]

Originally Posted by Abravefan11

Ron - The impression cylinder transfer of Chance above is the black color pass which includes the outside border. The one's I posted in the other thread are the brown color pass and include the team captions. So that's at least two different colors for the fronts and Sean's Sovereign Tinker is a good example of an impression cylinder transfer of a back. Maybe some others will surface.

Thanks Tim, Thats what I figured. I thought I remember seeing one with the border and the player name but then that would be a brown and black transfer error and the chances of that happening to the same sheet with a misfeed in front of it would be like finding a Honus Wagner with a Drum back. I checked my downloaded scans folder and it was actually a couple of T212 Obaks that had the border, player name, team, and player that I remember seeing.

[tiger8mush]

didn't fellow board member Kevin Saucier do some experimentations with this stuff? I haven't seen him post much lately, so I'm not sure if he's still around or if I've just missed his posts. I remember him being very knowledgeable in the land of alterations and always seemed happy to help other members detect that sort of thing.

[atx840]

I used to own this one, different pass possibly. It's missing the bottom portion and some PL.