|
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Well, on this account, I differ from you. The MAGIE error card and the JOE DOYLE (Nat'l error) card absolutely tell us that PIEDMONT backs were FIRST printed on the sheets of pre-printed fronts. There is no other logical explanation for the PIEDMONT-only backs on these cards and the scarcity of them. TED Z . |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
"Because of time constraints I don't see any brand being produced first. Certainly portions of a series for some brands were done before others, but Getting it done would probably have required almost constant output for the bigger brands. Magie was probably very early, and yes, would have gotten Piedmont first. But there's no way of knowing whether Magie was on the very first sheet or a later sheet. If we knew which cards were with Magie then we might be able to tell. If it was with the other 150 only cards and the whole sheet was pulled and reworked. Maybe it was early. If not then there were sheets done before that one and they would have had a range of backs. The Doyle tells us nothing about the sequence of backs. The error would have been easily corrected on the press, Unlike Magie which was reworked. So the Doyle could have happened anytime during the 350 run. Scot Rs estimates of production are as high as 100 million just for Piedmont in 1910. I don't think it's realistic to think they printed all the Piedmonts them moved on to whatever was next. Even if the production number was 1/3 of that it makes no sense. What does make sense - if it was a normal sheet fed press or more likely presses. would be printing a group on multiple presses until either the order was complete or the plates wore out. Then moving on to the next sheet layout. The raw numbers make the use of one sheetfed single color press nearly impossible. 9375 hours at 1000 sheets /hour. for 100 million. 3093 hours for 33 million. A full year of 50 hour weeks is only 2600 hours. Those numbers assume a 96 card sheet. Smaller would take longer larger would be faster. Multi color presses would reduce the time a lot. As would faster presses which were usually webfed. (Printing from a large roll of paper rather than from sheets.) Steve B |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
You are dismissing an established fact regarding ATC....PIEDMONT was ATC's "flagship" tobacco brand....and, this is the reason why 53 % T206's were printed with PIEDMONT backs (two independent large surveys both confirm this %). My guess is that American Litho first printed huge loads of PIEDMONT backed T206's and shipped them down to Factory #25 in Richmond, VA. DITTO for when ALC introduced their 350 series cards. Followed by SWEET CAPORAL backed T206's which were shipped to [Factory #25 (VA) and Factory #30 (N.Y.)]. The same surveys indicate that 28 % of the T206 population was printed with the SWEET CAPORAL brand. Quote:
series are known which were printed on the "very first" sheets. MAGEE is not one of them. Quote:
of its PIEDMONT 350 back. Quote:
I have been saying 96-card sheets (12 columns x 8 rows) for a long time now....so, I'm pleased to read here that you appear to agree. And, American Lithographic operating multiple presses simultaneously to produce millions of T206 cards sounds good to me. TED Z . Last edited by tedzan; 08-19-2014 at 03:45 PM. |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
I'll split the quotes so my comments go with the right ones
Quote:
More likely is nearly constant throughput for Piedmont and probably SC. The other brands might have been done in a single batch, especially the really hard ones like Drum and BL460. I know that goes against the established views, but barring high speed presses (Which might have been used, and almost certainly were for the pack labels) There simply wasn't enough time. Quote:
I've become positive that the 150s went to press three individual times (At least) With small changes between runs. Most likely because the plates wore out. The 350's also were done with multiple sets of plates - at least three and possibly more. And those were all slightly different form the 150's where the subject was produced for both. The question remains - Why were the 150 onlys not continued? If Magie is counted there are 13, Those fall somewhat neatly into two groups based on population numbers (for what they're worth, flawed, but the only numbers publicly available. ) That to me indicates either an uneven sheet layout or blocks of 6 by X for the transfers the layouts were probably done with. Both Wagner and MagIE were pulled, Magie to be reworked, Wagner removed entirely. Magee added to a different transfer once the rework was done, and continued. I still need to do more work on this with the numbers, but I have a feeling the odd ones like Dahlen and Lundgren may have been involved in some way as well. Quote:
What's most likely was that some sheets were printed, the mistake was recognized - Maybe by the pressman, they were in NY after all, and both Doyles played for NY teams. Approval to fix the mistake probably took a few minutes. " hey boss, this isn't the Doyle who's on the Giants." " Really? let me see." " Ok, just stone off the Natl " The very few sheets then got sent on to whatever the next step was, and eventually got Piedmont backs. Not surprising at all. As you say, they could just as easily been a stack destined for SC or any of the other backs (Doyle NY Nat'l as a BL or Drum only subject....now there's a thing to ponder. )Quote:
(I think "hot " begins around 80, and "cold" starts around 20, maybe less. My wife figures "hot" as usually 90 + maybe higher. And "cold" starts around 60. Discussing this stuff is fun for me. I'm always looking for those little bits of solid proof of any part of it, and nearly always learn something new about the set and/or the players. And the perspective of someone who's handled thousands of the cards is always interesting. And I know very well that some of my ideas are well outside what's established. Frankly I'd like nothing more than to see a find of a load of ALC documents - Invoices, work orders, that sort of thing or an uncut sheet. No matter which idea it proved or disproved. Even if it proved all my ideas wrong. Steve B |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Here is one for you Steve.
When reviewing the SLs PSA pop report totals there is some interesting data showing up. I broke the 48 SLs up into two groups, the 34 printed with OM/Pied/Hindu & the 14 printed with OM/Piedmont. The 34 group has an average ratio of .76 Piedmonts per OM printed (51%-103%) The 14 group has an average ratio of 1.6 Piedmonts per OM printed (140%-221%) Those 14 show up on average more than double with Piedmonts than the other 34 group. Based on the pop numbers it appears that those 14 SLs were printed at one point (or always) separately than the 34.
|
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Chris, now that you are springing something new into the conversation, I am getting out the Orval Redenbacher in preparation for Ted's retort.
When my girlfriend goes shopping she buys SHIT. I buy the gourmet expensive stuff because when I eat it I want to taste it. But you know what's on my mind right now? It AIN'T the popcorn in my microwave, ...
__________________
$co++ Forre$+ |
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czb4jn5y94g#t=142
__________________
___________________ T206 Master Set:103/524 T206 HOFers: 22/76 T206 SLers: 11/48 T206 Back Run: 28/39 Desiderata You are a child of the universe, no less than the trees and the stars; you have a right to be here. And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should. With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Strive to be happy. |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
You know what they put on popcorn in Canada instead of butter? Cheescurds & gravy. I've seen 'em do it, man. They drown 'em in that stuff.
Thanks Ted. The pop reports likely indicate that the 14 were printed separately in the Piedmont run than the 34 group, which to me could indicate that 34 was the number used on a sheet for that series. Last edited by atx840; 08-19-2014 at 09:16 PM. |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
In 2006, when I was working on my all-PIEDMONT set, among the last few cards I needed to complete it were a good number of the group of 34 - SL guys. So, there you are....some empirical data to support your observation on this subject of PIEDMONT vs OLD MILL SL's. TED Z |
![]() |
|
|
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 |