Is this T206 Charlie Rhodes a print anomaly or just wear?
 

As I was scanning a bunch of cards this morning to list on the BST board, I scanned my extra copy of the Rhodes portrait, and noticed that his name did not look right. I looked at the card really closely, and the R in Rhodes definitely looks like a P. I looked at other copies of the card, and the hoop in the R on other copies looks different from my copy. But maybe I've been looking at it for too long. Thoughts? Maybe the line in the R is just worn off?

<a data-flickr-embed="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/194924255@N08/51916006898/in/dateposted-public/" title="img481"><img src="https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51916006898_47b97bf0ec_c.jpg" width="455" height="800" alt="img481"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

It's hard to tell if it was printed that way or if it's worn off.

There are some Criger's that have a similar print flaw in the R. What's the back on the Rhodes James?

Attachment 505460

Hey Pat, its a P350 reverse

<a data-flickr-embed="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/194924255@N08/51916815005/in/dateposted-public/" title="Rhodes_P350"><img src="https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51916815005_e3e71968bb_c.jpg" width="800" height="693" alt="Rhodes_P350"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

I didn't find any other Rhodes like yours James but it does look like it might have been printed that way. Does it look like it could be a tiny spot of paper loss?

The surface is smooth and it doesn't feel like there is paper loss, but its honestly very hard to tell. There look to be a few other imperfections along the name. My magnifying lamp isn't really strong enough to look close enough at the surface to tell definitively.

A lighted loupe would tell you, cool Phodes either way

Traces of defect or loss lettering appear to the H, O, E & N as well, or no?

Usually if it's a print flaw it's pretty easy to find other examples but I couldn't find any. If you're sure it's not paper loss or a small piece of excess paper stuck on the card I would keep it and see if any other examples pop up.

Here's a Gilbert I picked up recently that is missing part of the G.

Attachment 505997

When I got it I could tell it was a print flaw and in a short search I found it on 3 other backs.

Attachment 505998

Attachment 505999

Attachment 506000

Hello, James, nice card. When I enlarge your scan to 500%, it looks like there is a speck of white paper on top of the caption, that protrudes over the left side of the "H" as well as the lower right portion of the "R", making it look like a "P".

You can crop and scan at 2200 dpi and see it better. Rob

You are right. Thanks all for weighing in. I actually just took my iphone and zoomed way in on the name, and I see what looks like the faint bottom of the R. The surface is completely smooth, it doesnt feel like there is something on top of it, it just might be paper loss.

Anyway, I'm going to list this in my BST thread if anyone wants it

<a data-flickr-embed="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/194924255@N08/51923079792/in/dateposted-public/" title="IMG_3881"><img src="https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51923079792_7902028ac8_c.jpg" width="800" height="752" alt="IMG_3881"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Large scans do the trick.