T206 ed walsh blue old mill sgc 30!

#1 09-27-2012, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I could not make a judgment off an atrocious photo like that.

Next time I will get some professional equiptment for pics then.

For all you Nay Sayers I can say probably 100% of you have not even seen more than a pic. I have personally held the card raw, louped it, and hit it with a black light. Unless someone recreated the lithograpy spot on I will stand behind SGC and everyone else that handled the card. All that have seen it say its good. That solidifies it more than the guys looking at a computer screen saying no.

packs · #2 09-27-2012, 01:21 PM

I think people have a bigger issue with the lack of a reasonable explanation for how such a card could have been made in a sole individual printing. As I said every printing anomaly, even the most extreme of them, seem to have at least one other example except this card.

teetwoohsix · #3 09-27-2012, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by packs

I think people have a bigger issue with the lack of a reasonable explanation for how such a card could have been made in a sole individual printing. As I said every printing anomaly, even the most extreme of them, seem to have at least one other example except this card.

+1 Yes

Sincerely, Clayton

#4 09-27-2012, 05:00 PM

By saying you need more than one for proof you are saying all single example cards are discredited. The hobby has left no stone unturned looking for the Tango Eggs Cobb and finally one surfaced after Several years of heavy debate and discussion. So that card is fake also till another surfaces?

Yes I smelled the card. Sounds weird but the simple fact I use a wrap around loupe the card(s) are always extremely close to my face. You also can't deni the fact that the card has the floral lithography characteristics. The simple fact that by SGC slabbing this card would destroy their reputation if it came out to be fake is a pretty big issue as well as some of the most respected names in the hobby staking their reps on this as well. It's hard to deni the facts but as always when the herd goes right there is always those few that stray right.

bn2cardz · #5 09-27-2012, 05:32 PM

Didn't SGC (along with PSA) also encapsulate an Old Mill black overprint that turned out to be fake?

This may be why some people are still skeptical when a new Old Mill anomaly hits the market.

Old Mill black overprint apology forum

packs · #6 09-27-2012, 05:47 PM

I'm not saying there has to be two of EVERY card. It just seems logical that cards from this particular set, of which probably hundred of thousands were made, there would have to be at least two of everything. Especially considering as I've said there are at least two of even the most extreme, semmingly one off printing freaks from this set (yellow and brown ink only cards, cards with huge color splotches across the fronts, ghost images, severely miscut half of one card half of another cards, grossly over-printed backs, etc.). There's no comparing cards printed for the T206 set to Tango Eggs or any other obscure type set when looking for variables or considering population numbers.

Edited to add we also know without a doubt that these cards were printed in sheets. That's why there would have to be at least two and why there are two of every other printing anomaly.

teetwoohsix · #7 09-28-2012, 02:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

Didn't SGC (along with PSA) also encapsulate an Old Mill black overprint that turned out to be fake?

This may be why some people are still skeptical when a new Old Mill anomaly hits the market.

Old Mill black overprint apology forum

+1 And thanks for posting that link.

Sincerely, Clayton

T206Collector · #8 09-28-2012, 08:29 AM

You can put me on the highly skeptical side of the ledger. Based on nothing more than the obvious -- the color of the printing.

We now live in a T206 economy where slight deviations from the norm create huge prices. The incentive to create a deviation, coupled with the relative ease of creating only the slightest deviation, is so great.

I will take as a given that the Walsh is an authentic Old Mill T206 card. I will not take as a given that the color of the ink was blue when it left the factory over 100 years ago. I would need some additional circumstantial evidence.

teetwoohsix · #9 09-28-2012, 02:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pup6913

By saying you need more than one for proof you are saying all single example cards are discredited. The hobby has left no stone unturned looking for the Tango Eggs Cobb and finally one surfaced after Several years of heavy debate and discussion. So that card is fake also till another surfaces?

Yes I smelled the card. Sounds weird but the simple fact I use a wrap around loupe the card(s) are always extremely close to my face. You also can't deni the fact that the card has the floral lithography characteristics. The simple fact that by SGC slabbing this card would destroy their reputation if it came out to be fake is a pretty big issue as well as some of the most respected names in the hobby staking their reps on this as well. It's hard to deni the facts but as always when the herd goes right there is always those few that stray right.

Hi Andrew-

I'm not sure how you are taking my posts- I'm only wanting to have a rational discussion about the card, I'm not trying to convince anyone that the card is real or fake, in fact, I have not used the word fake. But, you are correct, I am not following the herd on this one.

I highly doubt SGC's rep would be destroyed because they slabbed this card (if it did turn out to be a "Frankenstein") because they are only human, and mistakes will be made. I love SGC, and I prefer the way they grade cards. But that doesn't mean they are flawless and will never get something wrong.

And the same goes for the most respected names in the hobby- why would their reputation be on the line??

I'm missing that point.

What I am saying is that I would think before SGC slabbed this as a "Blue Back" they should have at least one other to compare it to- otherwise, I'd think they would just label it "Old Mill".......

Packs already made the points I would make, I feel like a broken record. For all those who say the card is the real deal-more power to you and don't mind me. If you want to spend thousands on it, by all means, have at it.

Sincerely, Clayton

teetwoohsix · #10 09-28-2012, 02:48 AM

Hi Steve-

Kevin did respond about the card in that thread, but not about a black light or a loupe..,I didn't word that quite right

I should of said " and of anyone I could think of who would know how to get around those things, I would think it would be him" or something to that effect

I did read your post and it is a good theory, but it's like much of the mysteries of T206....we can try to make sense of things, but proving it is difficult,if not impossible. I tried for months to come up with some kind of proof (a theory I had) that the fronts of the cards were printed at the ALC and sent to the factories to have the backs printed on them "at the factories" but could not find anything to solidify my theory....I almost started a thread about it, I was pretty convinced that the 150 series had both front and back printed at the ALC but maybe the 350 and 460 series were shipped to the factories to have them print the backs (one color ink, one pass-as opposed to a six step process). After running this by a few people, I realized my theory wasn't right * although I still wonder

*

Thanks for your response, I always enjoy your posts, very informative about printing processes-I learn alot from your posts.

Sincerely, Clayton

steve B · #11 09-28-2012, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by teetwoohsix

Hi Steve-

Kevin did respond about the card in that thread, but not about a black light or a loupe..,I didn't word that quite right

I should of said " and of anyone I could think of who would know how to get around those things, I would think it would be him" or something to that effect

I did read your post and it is a good theory, but it's like much of the mysteries of T206....we can try to make sense of things, but proving it is difficult,if not impossible. I tried for months to come up with some kind of proof (a theory I had) that the fronts of the cards were printed at the ALC and sent to the factories to have the backs printed on them "at the factories" but could not find anything to solidify my theory....I almost started a thread about it, I was pretty convinced that the 150 series had both front and back printed at the ALC but maybe the 350 and 460 series were shipped to the factories to have them print the backs (one color ink, one pass-as opposed to a six step process). After running this by a few people, I realized my theory wasn't right * although I still wonder

*

Thanks for your response, I always enjoy your posts, very informative about printing processes-I learn alot from your posts.

Sincerely, Clayton

Ah, that makes sense now.
It should be possible to add a UV blocker to get around the blacklight, but all the ones I know of would be very obvious.

And it's so true that a lot of the details about T206 or nearly every card set of the era will probably remain unproven. Unless someone turns up some paperwork from ALC or from ATC we can't know what was made when or in what quantity.

There's a lot of stuff I could pin down if I had access to some real science equipment. Like what the exact makeup of the black old mill ink was. Most black inks can't turn blue. Carbon particles in a hardener won't ever fade or turn, Iron gall ink fades brown, but not Brown OM brown and it wasn't used in lithography since it's not oil based. Some dyes can change. I vaguely recall making some stuff with my chemistry set that could be changed. But I've never seen it used anywhere and I'm not sure if it changed both ways or just from blue to black. (I seem to remember it changing both ways depending on what was added, but it was over 40 years ago)

And I'm constantly learning things that change things slightly. Like recently I found out that one particular printing of Stamps from New Zealand can be identified from another nearly identical one by the reaction of the paper to blacklight. One shows green, the other doesn't. And that printing was pre 1900. So some old papers do react, which I never knew.

Steve B

Steve B

Exhibitman · #12 09-28-2012, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by packs

I think people have a bigger issue with the lack of a reasonable explanation for how such a card could have been made in a sole individual printing. As I said every printing anomaly, even the most extreme of them, seem to have at least one other example except this card.

That is not a good deductive argument against the legitimacy of any card. It has a formal fallacy. A good deductive argument has to have all true premises from which the conclusion is reached:

All men are mortal
I am a man
I am mortal.

The argument against the card is:

All genuine Old Mill cards are black backed
This card is blue-backed
This card is not a genuine Old Mill

Problem is, no one here has seen every Old Mill card ever made. The first leg of the argument is invalid. It is a fallacy of division variation: ascribing an attribute to every member of a class because every known member of the class has it. Doesn't rule out the exceptional cases within the unknown part of the group.

packs · #13 09-28-2012, 08:02 PM

I am willing to be wrong. I am just stating a case and making points.

teetwoohsix · #14 09-27-2012, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pup6913

Next time I will get some professional equiptment for pics then.

For all you Nay Sayers I can say probably 100% of you have not even seen more than a pic. I have personally held the card raw, louped it, and hit it with a black light. Unless someone recreated the lithograpy spot on I will stand behind SGC and everyone else that handled the card. All that have seen it say its good. That solidifies it more than the guys looking at a computer screen saying no.

I guess I'm a Nay Sayer so I feel compelled to respond. I have not seen the card in person & have never attempted to discredit anyone who has. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, mine is just different than others-and I am no "expert" by any means- but I have learned enough over the past 4-5 years to have hesitations about this card.

I guess people get annoyed that EVERYONE doesn't just accept the card because the majority already has-especially after SGC gives it their stamp of approval. In most cases, I would be on board with this scenario. My gut is holding me back- I don't know what else to say. A good friend from this board saw the card at the National and he also said it looked real. I HIGHLY value his opinion- but I am still skeptical.

This may sound stupid-but- did anyone who held the raw card "smell" it?

Just curious. And, by the way- card doctors know how to get around the "black light" and the "loupe" by now-ask Kevin S. (he responded about this card in the other thread).

I mean no disrespect to ANYONE who has seen the card in person and believes it to be real, I just want to be clear on that.

Sincerely, Clayton

steve B · #15 09-27-2012, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by teetwoohsix

I And, by the way- card doctors know how to get around the "black light" and the "loupe" by now-ask Kevin S. (he responded about this card in the other thread).

Sincerely, Clayton

I looked for that post, but couldn't find it in the original thread. Was it in another one? The only way around the blacklight that I know of is very obvious, and I can't think of any way to make modern printing look like
the type of lithography used on T206s. It should be possible to duplicate the entire process, so I wouldn't rule that out.

I did post an explanation of how this card could have happened at the factory, but it was at the very end of the original thread. I've copied and pasted it below.

"Ok, so here's a theory- Or just a crazy guess if you want to call it that.

T206s are being printed, a batch of fronts are done and backs are being printed. Polar bear on one press, Old mill on another. It gets late in the afternoon, and the guy running the Old mill press realizes he's going to run low on ink a bit before quitting time. So he asks the guy next to him who's runnning a dark blue if he'll have any extra. He will, and shortly before quitting the first guy adds that extra to his ink reservoir. Blue mixes with the black he's running, making some very dark blue backs, and transitioning to a color close to the blue but not quite, maybe just a bit darker.
The day ends, the presses are washed down removing the days ink, and the handful of sheets slips by QC if there is any because the colors are close until the last few sheets. They're cut and distributed, probably not even getting into the same carton.

-Most pressmen do their own QC in the time I was at the print shop I only did QC once. And that was on a program for an event where we had to look for perfect copies that would be presented to the dignitaries presenting papers. Try finding 50-75 flawless copies out of 5000 of anything."

The pics taken at an angle that were posted in the original thread show the name and team as brown, at least on my monitor. Computer monitors aren't known for precise color rendering, and digital cameras aren't much better.

I'd love to see a scan taken at 800-1200dpi. The differences are really obvious at that level.

Steve B

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
FS t206 SGC 40 Flick and Walsh	David R	Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T	0	05-30-2012 05:41 PM
FS: 1960 Topps SGC - all graded 84 or higher	Irwin Fletcher	1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T	2	05-07-2012 09:14 PM
T206 SGC Graded Cards For Sale...	iggyman	Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T	7	08-16-2010 05:57 PM
FS: T206 Walsh SGC 60	Anthony S.	Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T	1	04-20-2010 02:27 PM
REDUCED T206 Vic Willis SGC 20 Old Mill & SGC 30	Jay Wolt	Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T	1	08-10-2009 01:37 PM