Hey guys......
 

I like Pat's diagram (post #151).....as it is similar to some of the stuff I have been presenting on this forum regarding T206 sheet arrangements.

Although, the subject matter in this thread pertains to Piedmont 150 cards, any indicators in the 150, 350, 460 series enable us to figure out the
possible sheet structure.

For example....illustrated here is my hypothetical simulated sheet of T206's that I refer to as the Exclusive 12 subjects (460 series). My research
suggests that these 12 subjects were printed separately from the other 460 series cards. And, on a standard 19" x 24" cardboard sheet in such a
configuration.

Incidently, the length of this sheet (24") could accommodate a 9th row of T206's....which results in a 108-card sheet.



. l<..................................... 19" wide x 24" long sheet ......................................>l
http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...96cards50x.jpg



TED Z
.

One interesting side note is that while there are more than a few two name cards with Piedmont 150 in which the subjects are known to have instances of plate scratches, none of the two name Piedmont 150 cards themselves have plate scratches.

It's time for me get in on this "party"
 

Here's my Green Cobb with scratch marking right thru the PIEDMONT lettering. Are their any other such similar plate scratch markings ?
And, of what relevance does this mark have with respect to the others ? ?


http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/t...encobbp150.jpghttp://i603.photobucket.com/albums/t...dmont150bk.jpg



TED Z
.

Very nice card! I may have a scan of that one.

The same scratch can be found on Goode, and possibly others. Pat has his more organized than the scans I have.

So we can tell that Goode and Cobb green probably weren't on the same sheet, or at least were in different spots if they were on multiple sheets.
Hahn has a scratch that is similar and looks like it would be not the next column over, but the second to the right of Goode/Cobb.

It's really like a big jigsaw puzzle, we just don't have the picture on the box to go by.

With multiple subjects showing the same scratch we can also begin to get an idea how many sheets were used. I think the biggest number with identical scratches is 3 or 4, so there were at least that many different sheets. If it stays at 4, that makes a sheet with between 35 and 40 subjects more likely.

It's also entirely possible that the issue is complicated by there being two P150 plates that were both damaged. There's a couple loose groups of damage that don't appear to be equally common, but it's way too early to consider it to be more than just a possibility.

Steve B

Steve, The scratch on the Goode I have is higher up, I have Tinker as a
matching scratch with Cobb.

Ted, Here's another Cobb with the same scratch as yours.

Hey Pat
 

Very nice....talk about consistency on these plate marks.

Well, I will be on the lookout for the same scratch mark on other Green Cobb's with PIEDMONT 150 backs.

Take care,

TED Z
.

You're right, I totally blew that one.

Maybe time for better glasses.


Steve B

Chase

EDITED to remove my Warhop and Keeler mistakes.

...

It looks like the Warhop is a back scan of a Crandall card.

I agree about the Warhop, the back scan shows a pin hole that the front doesnt have. Can't be the correct back scan for that particular card.

Sorry guys, usually I pay more attention to detail than that - you are both correct. The Warhop is from a scan where the seller apparently rearranged the order of the cards when showing the backs (which I never understand; btw it is that same Crandall portrait) while the Keeler does look like the crease on the back. A cautionary tale against posting detail-oriented stuff when tired I guess. I am going to remove both from my post to avoid confusion.

No big deal Brian you're an asset to the forum and your posts are helpful
and informative.

If I have your question right it's a different Crandall.

BTW the Chase you posted is a match to the Sullivan scratch.


Patrick

This probably doesn't belong here, being a 350 series. I'm not even sure it would be considered a scratch. Maybe just a printing error. But it is unique enough, I think, that it probably could be matched up with other cards.

Attachment 184212

BTW, unreal research going on here.

It still blows my mind, with the tens of thousands of sheets printed, not one is known to survive. But, I guess, that's what makes it fun !!!

Switching off the main track to a side-track, have you guys explored other PIEDMONT series cards ?

For example, besides the wet sheet transfer (speckled red), my PIEDMONT 460 red Cobb has a plate scratch mark in the lower right corner.



http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...0redCobb50.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...redCobb50x.jpg



TED Z
.

Hi Ted,

I have seen a few in the 350 series but nothing like the 150's. I lost most
of my data when my computer died around a month ago but there are about
250 different scratches on 105 (could be more but I have to re-do the list)
of the 156 PD 150 subjects, some have multiple scratches in different locations on the same subject for instance Young (Bare Hand) has six different scratches).

Your red Cobb looks like purple ink from the star stamp and not a scratch
to me.

Patrick

Better scans of the six Young (BH) scratches.

I think that's just ink from the back stamp and not a plate scratch

Pat R
 

Patrick

Sorry, but I have to differ with you. The scratch line on my Cobb starts above the "V" (VA) and continues up to the "Y" (QUALITY). This line
traverses a path that is virtually identical to the scratch on your Cy Young depicted in Post #178 (lowermost right Piedmont 150 back scan).

Yes, there is a hint of purple ink in the scratch on my Cobb that most likely migrated from the stamp.


TED Z
.

Ted, The plate scratches are the same blue ink as the piedmonts. The mark
on your Cobb is definitely purple.

+1

Pat R
 

I fully realize that the scratches are blue....I'm not color blind.

What strikes me about this line on my red Cobb is that it coincides quite accurately with the line on one of your Cy Young backs (Post #178).

So, I don't understand why you posted the image you did in your above post, when I pointed out the lower right-most image in Post #178.

Please post this particular Cy Young back image next to my enlarged Cobb back image shown here so we can compare.....thanks.



http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...ackRedCobb.jpg . http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...redCobb50x.jpg



Pat....I don't fully understand why this line on my Cobb's back ended up with the purple ink from the star stamp. But, what I do see (under high magnification) is
a very straight fine line that could NOT have resulted from random, stray purple ink splash.



TED Z
.

Hi Ted,

What if the star stamp was a wooden block type stamp? Perhaps the line could be one edge of the actual stamp?

Ted,

I think Steve is right it's probably ink from the outer edge of the stamp.

Here's the Young scratch next to your Cobb you asked for.


Patrick

Pat R
 

Thanks for posting the pertinent Cy Young backscan and my Cobb back scan together.

I would find it to be quite a re-MARK-able (excuse the pun) coincidence that these lines are not related....as you are alluding to.

Incidently, the line on my Cobb does not extend beyond the Y in QUALITY as the Cy Young's line does, because there is a bit of paper loss above the Y.

Steve's explanation does sound plausible. However, the exactness of the alignment of these two marks is incredible.



TED Z
.

Ted, I think it is the block stamp also. It's at the correct angle to be square with the star. The two lines (Cobb's and Young's) don't match up. Looking just at where they go through the triangle portion of the scrolling you would think so but they don't go threw the Y at the same place.

Ted, If it's exactness you're looking for this Doyle/Stone combo is a good example they both have the same unique plate scratches, the same spot
missing ink and the same extra ink spots.

Hi Pat,

It looks like maybe this Doyle was the card directly above the version in the Doyle/Stone combo? The line extension seems to match...

Yes it is Steve. Here's both the Doyle and Stone that line up above each other.

Really, really great work Pat!!!

Test
 

Very nice

Donlin/Elberfeld
 

Here's another pair with the same plate scratches that indicate they were in the same sheet position on different sheets.

Here's one of the sheets I'm working on. The back plate was used on two
different fronts on this sheet so there are two subjects for each scratch
one is a SC 150 Fact 649 and the other isn't for each scratch so I think
it's possibly the layout for one of two sheets used for the 649 printing.

There are three different scratches or partial scratches on this sheet that
I randomly marked on the template I made. So far there is no way to tell
what vertical row each scratch was in or how many vertical rows there were.

The scratches in the bottom row are bolder than the other two and
easier to find but the two upper scratches are faint and hard to spot
so I'm still looking to confirm a large number of subjects in the two upper
scratches.

The X's on the template indicate if one or both subjects have been confirmed for that particular scratch.

This is just a work in progress so I'm sure there are mistakes but there is also good evidence for most of this sheet layout. There are a few examples where
more than one pair or group are in the same order on two different scratches on this sheet.

If anyone would like to check there PD 150's for the unconfirmed scratches
the template would give you an idea where to look for them for each subject.

The scans come up to small to see the detail so here's the subjects L-R
on the template.

Turner/Griffith (port)-Pastorius/Weimer- Criger/H.Davis-Hahn/Wilhelm-Murphy/G. Davis-Conroy/?-Lake/Williams-McKintyre/?-Goode/Powell-Hinchman/?-Bergen/Manning-Powers/Shaw-Konetchy/Liebhardt-Ganley/JJ Clarke-?/?-Johnson/Stovall-O'Leary/?

Re: Plate scratches
 

Awesome work, Pat; just awesome.

Thanks Ed,

I really need to thank Steve B for pointing this out and starting the two
threads on the plate scratches. It is a lot of fun doing the research and
has become an obsession for me.

I'm amazed at how far this has been taken. And really glad someone has picked it up. Making any serious dent in the monster has and will take the effort of lots of people. Not just to put together the data, but even just reporting one new find.

I'm also amazed it's been taken this far so quickly. Plating stamps took the guys that did it nearly their entire collecting lifetime, and that's with known plate sizes and blocks or strips readily available.

I'm also glad Pat has been linking front flaws with particular portions of the scratches. That's the next big step since that will lead to figuring out how many were in a column. And how many different sheets there were.

Steve B

This Cicotte scratch has a pink mark on the left below his belt. The plate
scratches indicate that Seymour is to the left (front) of cicotte so there
might be a small chance of finding a Seymour that is miscut left to right
with part of this mark.

Pelty/Young (portrait)
 

Another matching pair (same sheet position).

A couple matching Waddells:

Luke, Here's the waddell scratch that's under your Waddells.

Awesome!

Donlin

I finally figured out how to load an image big enough to show how scratches
on the same subjects line up in multiple places. It takes a minute to load
but when it does you can click on the image to enlarge it.

Based on the crop mark on the Oldring scratch in the bottom right this should
be part of the right hand side (left front) of a sheet that I'm still working on.

http://photos.imageevent.com/patrick...20-%20Copy.jpg

Nice Pat, great work.

I was going through my Polar Bears and spotted this scratch on the back of my Mullen.

Nice Luke!

There are a few other players with Polar Bear backs that this line appears on. Almost in the same location as well.

Thanks for posting the Mullen.


Jantz

Another Oldring

Oldring has a crop mark and a weak WST too, quite a bit happening there.

Does that mean it was at the end of the sheet and different? card was in the same spot on the next sheet? I'm quite new to the prewar stuff.

It's a corner crop. I posted these two with the same scratch earlier in
this thread.

I hope you are enjoying learning about these - I can attest to how addicting it can be. I commented because I think it is always good to point things out and not assume that everyone knows what is being shown.

As Pat showed, this is a corner crop. The edges of the sheets had margins that were trimmed off after the cards were printed. Oldring appears to have been at the bottom right of his sheet (at least for Piedmont 150) as you can see by the location of the crop mark.

Here is one for your studies: Nicholls, Phila. Amer. Hope this helps!

<a href="http://imgur.com/dwAYHyp"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/dwAYHyp.jpg" title="source: imgur.com" /></a>

<a href="http://imgur.com/uDATx80"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/uDATx80.jpg" title="source: imgur.com" /></a>

Camnitz

It Does help thanks for posting the scans, this scratch is in one of the sheets
we are working on (there is a link in post #205). There is part of a second
scratch on this Nicholls (through the T and Y in quality and part of the scroll)
that matches up with a second scratch on one of the Jacklitch scratches and
it shows up a little clearer on yours.


Luke, I saw that Camnitz when it was listed. Good price on it but I already had
one in a little rougher condition.

Below is (not mine) an upside down Doc White. Since it is upside down the back should be from a column equal columns from the center. For instance, given columns ABCD a typical A back would be a D when upside down. If we can match this back to a right-side-up player we have another data point on sheet width. If both players can be linked by a multi-column horizontal scratch that terminates in a side crop then I think algebra would give us the sheet width. Not a lot to work with here but I think there is scratch between "u" in Subjects and "Pi" in Piedmont. Add in a few stray distinctive marks and someone might recognize it.

Great, glad I could help! The sheet image you directed me to is INCREDIBLE detective work. Thanks for your efforts - BRAVO!

Piedmont 150 plate scratch(es) progress
 

I previously owned that card... I don't believe there's a plate scratch on it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Erick, I think Steve is referring to the short mark I circled in red but you
had it in hand and got a better look at it than what can be seen in the
small scans.

When you originally posted scans of this card I was looking at trying to
find a PD 150 subject with the mark I circled in black, it looks like it's
some kind of print mark.

I just did a quick scan through all of the images in this thread and didn't see another WaJo portrait (though I may have missed it).

We do have that Johnson Bryan but the scratch on the one you posted is a
little darker so it shows up better.

There are three different Johnson scratches so far.

I never thought I would say this in response to a bunch of pics of Johnson scratches, but: awesome!

I believe I have one of these. It's listed on eBay right now. Ends in less than 12 hrs. Would be cool if it actually is for the winner

I was at a show yesterday and saw a F. Smith with a scatch on the back. Didn't pick it up, so no scan.

Jason, Do you remember if it was one of these two scratches?

A different Young card with the same scratch has already been posted, not sure about Schaefer.

Pretty sure it was Smith 1.

Thanks Jason.

Bryan- I don't know if the Schaefer has been posted here, we do have a
couple of examples with that scratch but it's always good to have new ones
posted. (So far that's the only scratch on Schaefer).

Upside down White & Doyle
 

I can confirm that upside down White & Doyle have matching backs. It might not be super clear in the scans but I have both in hand and they match. This means that these two cards are in opposite positions, equal rows and columns from the center, sides, top/bottom, horizontal axis, etc. If we can link either of these two to a center/side/each-other via scratch we could make a lot of progress quickly. I look forward to seeing any scratches, neighbors, two-namers, etc that you have. Another piece in the sheet-size puzzle...

Nice work Steve,

Doyle is on one of the sheets that has two different subjects with identical scratches indicating the back plates were used on two different fronts.

Stone is a match for Doyle and I think the sheet with Stone on it would
have been the one that White was on because Doyle is a 150 only subject
and White isn't, so we should eventually find a Stone with the same partial
scratch that Doyle and the upside down White have.

Here's the sheet I'm referring to if you click on the link you can magnify it
and get a better look. We are still working on this sheet but I think the
Cobb/Tinker belongs on the right (back of sheet) not the left.

There are a few spots where the second subject with a matching scratch haven't been found yet and if/when a White scratch is found it will probably be a match to either Pattee, Reulbach or Burch.

http://photos.imageevent.com/patrick...et%20C-D_1.jpg

That sheet is incredible Pat. If White does match one of those subjects that would indicate single subject columns. If he is found with a different set then this sheet would be one half of a huge two subject per column sheet. If he is never found with scratches he may be on another half of a two subject column that was never scratched. So many possibilities.

Jantz stated in this BST thread that he thought these Stone and Elberfeld
name at tops came from the same sheet and I agree with him. They are also along side each other on the plate scratch sheet in the link I posted above.
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...ight=elberfeld

This Young has already been posted but this is a much better scan (of a different card).

I'm not sure if this will help in any manner.

In fact, I'm not quite sure if it's a printing mark, or just added ink.

Attachment 196213

Attachment 196214

A couple new ones. No idea if they're already recorded or not. Walsh is questionable, but figured I'd post it. The P150 is Schaefer.

http://www.jvscauctions.com/ItemImag...ck1027_lg.jpeg

Bought this guy off ebay just so I could be part of this thread... sad I know

That's a great card Dennis. That pose is one of my favorites.

This Stovall has a scratch, and an over-inked back.

This scan should show it better. It looks like extra ink pooled up in a couple spots along the scratch.