Discussion about t204 Ramly blank backs and blank fronts

[shammus]

Not sure if anyone we had ever discussed this t204 with the "blank front" that Leon had in his collection for a long time so I figured I'd bring it up since the card is with me now. A couple observations I have on it now that I've had a chance to compare it up close and side by side with some of my other t204s:

1.) This exercise is a sharp reminder about how truly fragile and thin t204s are in general! To me, even normal t204s are no thicker than construction paper or higher quality printing paper

2.) The t204 with the blank front does "feel" different. But if a normal t204 could be compared to construction paper, this example with the blank front could be compared to loose leaf notebook paper I suppose. Neither are really thicker than the other, but normal t204s do feel "sturdier" somehow.

3.) I acquired this card thinking that this was a case of a card that went through a full printing process originally, but over time, had it's front simply slide off the back somehow due to soaking or whatever. Now that I'm actually examining the t204s, I'm not thinking it's possible for these cards to be split apart in this manner. There's just simply not enough material there to consist of two separate layers for the front and back.

So my question is, as ridiculous as it sounds, is it possible that the printing process itself made the cards somewhat sturdier, although not really any thicker, through the process of mounting the photo to the back and then the subsequent color passes, gloss coating, etc...?

I should add that for the cards that I have that have normal fronts but have blank backs - those feel identical to the card I have with the blank front.

All thoughts are welcome....thanks guys....

lf.jpg

df.jpg