Yet Another T206 Sheet Size Discussion

steve B · #1 08-14-2014, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tedzan

Yes, we know that American Litho (ALC) had varying sizes of printing presses. Big ones, medium size ones, and smaller size presses. However, it is my understanding that ALC
realized, with their 6-7 color process used to print these tobacco cards, they were able to achieve a higher YIELD of quality by printing them on smaller sheets. And, YIELD was
a very important factor when you are cranking out 10's of Millions of cards in a short time span.

Steve, do you agree with the above premise ?

And, while it's a mystery to me that we haven't discovered any uncut sheets (or partially uncut panels) of T206's, I've seen several uncut sheets of various Non-Sports issues
produced by ALC. One (or two) were printed on a 19" x 24" sheet; and, others were printed on smaller size sheets.

TED Z

Not quite. They would get higher yield from larger sheets. The press can only make so many impressions an hour back then typically 800-1000 for a sheet fed press.
The web presses could run much faster, but I haven't found any indication that they were for lithography. The aluminum plates came out around 1900, so it's certainly possible.

Balancing quality, speed, and costs from setup time etc is the challenge. Quality is mostly up to the operator, but running faster makes it much harder.

One thing all of us neglect is the possibility of very large sheets laid out in blocks that could be based on 12 or 17 subjects. Or multiple sheet arrangements - So printing both sheets that were 17 (Maybe more) Subjects AND at the same time printing sheets that were 12 subjects.

I haven't seen the uncut non-sports cards, different sizes makes sense since many of those sets were 50-100 cards. If you have any links to them I think they'd be very interesting.

It is odd that no uncut production baseball cards are known, when there are sheets or partial sheets of other stuff. Odder still is that the progressive proof books for cigar box labels are readily available, but I've never seen one for any card. That's probably a matter of what got saved.

Steve B

tedzan · #2 08-14-2014, 12:09 PM

Double post.

tedzan · #3 08-14-2014, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve B

Balancing quality, speed, and costs from setup time etc is the challenge. Quality is mostly up to the operator, but running faster makes it much harder.

I haven't seen the uncut non-sports cards, different sizes makes sense since many of those sets were 50-100 cards. If you have any links to them I think they'd be very interesting.

Steve B

To your last question......it has been quite a while since I've seen these non-sports sheets. I will search for pictures of them.

The following simulated 96-card sheet of known 48 subjects from the 350 series ** is my concept of a typical ALC press run
employing a 19" press to print these cards on a 19" x 24" sheet of cardboard.

Note **
These 48 - Major League subjects are a known quantity from the 1910 COUPON issue. Their arrangement is arbitrary, but I firmly
believe these 48 were printed together on the same sheet. I show them Double-Printed in order to completely fill-out the sheet.

If these 96 cards do not display on your screen as a 12 x 9 arrangement, diminish the display to obtain the desired configuration.

TED Z
.

t206hound · #4 08-14-2014, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tedzan

To your last question......it has been quite a while since I've seen these non-sports sheets. I will search for pictures of them.

The following simulated 96-card sheet of known 48 subjects from the 350 series ** is my concept of a typical ALC press run
employing a 19" press to print these cards on a 19" x 24" sheet of cardboard.

Note **
These 48 - Major League subjects are a known quantity from the 1910 COUPON issue. Their arrangement is arbitrary, but I firmly
believe these 48 were printed together on the same sheet. I show them Double-Printed in order to completely fill-out the sheet.

If these 96 cards do not display on your screen as a 12 x 9 arrangement, diminish the display to obtain the desired configuration.

TED Z
.

The following are confirmed sheetmates; bolded items are contrary to your image above.

On (at least one instance of) a Sweet Caporal 350 Factory 30 sheet:

Thomas and Rossman were stacked vertically

On (at least one instance of) a Piedmont 350 sheet:

McBride and Rossman were stacked vertically
Stephens and Rossman were aligned horizontally
Stephens and Hoblitzell were stacked vertically
Jackson and Danny Hoffman were stacked vertically
Matty McIntyre and Danny Hoffman were stacked vertically
McElveen and Dygert were stacked vertically
Hartsel and Wilson were aligned horizontally

t206hound · #5 08-14-2014, 01:36 PM

Assuming that sheet layouts did not change during the piedmont 350 run (which may be totally invalid statement), you could have had this (number of rows is insignificant... alignment is what's being demonstrated):

tedzan · #6 08-14-2014, 02:19 PM

I arranged this 48 subject sheet some years ago before any top/bottom data was reported. And as I stated......

Note **
These 48 - Major League subjects are a known quantity from the 1910 COUPON issue. Their arrangement is arbitrary, but I firmly
believe these 48 were printed together on the same sheet. I show them Double-Printed in order to completely fill-out the sheet.

If these 96 cards do not display on your screen as a 12 x 9 arrangement, diminish the display to obtain the desired configuration.

So, I don't understand your comments......as, the following 9 subjects are on this sheet......

Thomas and Rossman

McBride and Rossman

Matty McIntyre and Danny Hoffman

Hartsel and Wilson

AND, I'll will add the red Cobb adjacent to Chance (yellow portrait)....as I have personally seen this combo.

These subjects were printed on a different sheet (we are aware that ALC would switch around various subjects during press runs).

McElveen and Dygert
Stephens and Rossman
Stephens and Hoblitzell
Jackson and Danny Hoffman

TED Z
.

t206hound · #7 08-14-2014, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tedzan

Note **
These 48 - Major League subjects are a known quantity from the 1910 COUPON issue. Their arrangement is arbitrary, but I firmly
believe these 48 were printed together on the same sheet. I show them Double-Printed in order to completely fill-out the sheet.

So, I don't understand your comments.....
TED Z
.

my comment was not on arrangement, it was on the "I firmly believe these 48 were printed together on the same sheet."

If these 48 were printed together on the same sheet, then how could the Jackson, Stephens and Dygert cards also be on the same sheet (since they are known to be adjacent to cards in your list of 48)?

tedzan · #8 08-14-2014, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tedzan

These subjects were printed on a different sheet (we are aware that ALC would switch around various subjects during press runs).

McElveen and Dygert
Stephens and Rossman
Stephens and Hoblitzell
Jackson and Danny Hoffman

TED Z
.

As I noted above, Erick.

This is not new news, it has been previously discussed. The arrangement of the 48 subjects that I have displayed here is by no means a singular grouping of these subjects.

The 6 super-prints certainly exemplify this fact. They are repeated on subsequent series sheets (e.g. they are included again in the 66-subject Sovereign apple green sheet,
also, T213, T214, T215 issues).

TED Z
.

t206hound · #9 08-14-2014, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tedzan

As I noted above, Erick.

This is not new news, it has been previously discussed. The arrangement of the 48 subjects that I have displayed here is by no means a singular grouping of these subjects.

The 6 super-prints certainly exemplify this fact. They are repeated on subsequent series sheets (e.g. they are included again in the 66-subject Sovereign apple green sheet,
also, T213, T214, T215 issues).

TED Z
.

I'm really confused... how can you assert that the 48 absolutely appeared together on a Piedmont 350 sheet when you also acknowledge that there were instances when they didn't appear together on a Piedmont 350 sheet? That's like saying I have a lot of money in my wallet, except when I don't.

[Edited] Just so that I make sure that we are discussing the same thing... I fully understand that between different series P350 vs S460 (superprints for example) that the layouts were different. Are you are saying that within a series (Piedmont 350 in this instance) that the layouts did or did not change?

teetwoohsix · #10 08-21-2014, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve B

Not quite. They would get higher yield from larger sheets. The press can only make so many impressions an hour back then typically 800-1000 for a sheet fed press.

Steve B

Now, this is very interesting ^^^^ and I'm also glad the Obak sheet is being talked about.

I think it is very important to be open minded about the sheet layout and not get pigeon holed into focusing on a "certain sized" track, when we already know they were using multiple sized presses. The Obak sheet shows us that the print quality on this larger sheet was not sacrificed by using a larger sheet. And, for now, that Obak sheet is the closest thing we have to study.

Great discussion! I love threads like this.

Jantz- great observation!

Chris- Great input with the yellow-brown scraps, I think those are an excellent clue.

Erick- great questions, you are better with words than I am.

Steve- always fun to read your information, thanks!

Everyone else- thanks for the input! I didn't start this thread but I've thoroughly enjoyed reading through it.

Sincerely, Clayton

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Topics for discussion re: t206 Printing and errors	Clark7781	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	16	04-17-2012 10:38 PM
T206 Backs Discussion, Part 215,256,559	usernamealreadytaken	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	4	04-16-2010 08:31 PM
E cards - what size sheet to store raw?	tiger8mush	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	2	04-16-2010 01:46 PM
T206 Printing Discussion	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	8	11-21-2007 07:01 AM
For Discussion: Relative Values of T206 and T205	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	3	06-02-2006 10:57 AM