Why I think Cobb wasn't printed with a Brown Hindu back

[G1911]

Originally Posted by wolf441

Thanks for the reply and the information.

I agree that the smaller companies could have ignored the law. And if the letter was on behalf of the lithographers, it would make sense that there would be fewer of them needed than if they had to be obtained by each individual tobacco, candy, gum firm that included them with their products.

I thought about the fact that the letter was from an fairly average player, rather than one of the stars of the day. But, if you were trying to make a convincing forgery, wouldn't that be the type of player that you would choose? Also, the all of the facts around the 1912 article dealing with Honus Wagner's refusal to grant permission to use his image were well known by the 1980's. So the content of the letter is not sufficient proof that it is not a forgery. Is there an explanation as to why it is on New York Highlanders stationary?

I am not arguing that the letter is a forgery, I'm just trying to understand how this letter survived where no other copies have every been discovered.

If they had to get sign off from everyone in the set, you would think that in some cases, they would have had to send more than one letter if players did not respond to the first request. Why have no copies come to light when the personal effects of the players of the time were sold off by family members in the decades after the cards were issued?

By consistent with the later evidence I am not referring to Wagner at all. In that time the hobby was focused on the tobacco companies and not the printers, it is consistent with the information we have gleaned since from other sources. A forgery would likely be on behalf of the ATC, as it is only very recently we have begun to understand that the lithographers played a much more active role in these sets than just printing them for ATC.

I agree with Steve, this is hardly the first letter from a sports writer on team letterhead, kickbacks from the team were common and the press was usually in bed with the team ownership. It doesn’t seem out of place to me. Also makes sense the team would be supportive: it’s free advertising.

The survival rate isn’t a red flag, I think. How many printing stones and plates from the ATC sets have been found? How much other internal documentation? It’s almost none. I wouldn’t expect these letters, fairly insignificant at this time, to survive in greater quantity than other documentation has.

I am a big fan of skepticism, separating fact from probability from personal opinions. We cannot say beyond any doubt the letter is genuine, but it is more reasonable to think it real than to think it a clever forgery, as there is no evidence for the later.

[wolf441]

Originally Posted by G1911

By consistent with the later evidence I am not referring to Wagner at all. In that time the hobby was focused on the tobacco companies and not the printers, it is consistent with the information we have gleaned since from other sources. A forgery would likely be on behalf of the ATC, as it is only very recently we have begun to understand that the lithographers played a much more active role in these sets than just printing them for ATC.

I agree with Steve, this is hardly the first letter from a sports writer on team letterhead, kickbacks from the team were common and the press was usually in bed with the team ownership. It doesn’t seem out of place to me. Also makes sense the team would be supportive: it’s free advertising.

The survival rate isn’t a red flag, I think. How many printing stones and plates from the ATC sets have been found? How much other internal documentation? It’s almost none. I wouldn’t expect these letters, fairly insignificant at this time, to survive in greater quantity than other documentation has.

I am a big fan of skepticism, separating fact from probability from personal opinions. We cannot say beyond any doubt the letter is genuine, but it is more reasonable to think it real than to think it a clever forgery, as there is no evidence for the later.

Thanks, that certainly makes sense. I'm usually not a conspiracy theory type of guy at all.

It would be cool if we knew where the Ball letter came from when it was originally put up for auction. Was there any mention as to who sold/consigned it when it originally surfaced and how it came to be in their possession?

[Pat R]

I not saying they could not have but if it was forged they would have either done some research or had knowledge of the change in the use of images law but still it seems like an odd thing to put in this letter if it was forged.

[wolf441]

Originally Posted by Pat R

I not saying they could not have but if it was forged they would have either done some research or had knowledge of the change in the use of images law but still it seems like an odd thing to put in this letter if it was forged.

Yeah, agreed. I guess misplaced skepticism on my part. Sorry to take the thread off track, Pat. Great information as always in terms of the progression of subjects from 150 to 350 across various backs.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by wolf441

Yeah, agreed. I guess misplaced skepticism on my part. Sorry to take the thread off track, Pat. Great information as always in terms of the progression of subjects from 150 to 350 across various backs.

No problem Steve, I didn't find anything wrong with questioning it.

[Pat R]

Adding to the stages theory, in different degrees there's usually a group of subjects that are tougher on a particular back than another group and sometimes there's yet another group that falls in the middle.

Just using the Old Mills for example because they were discussed recently with the print group 1 subjects. For instance lets say they were printed in three stages the group of tougher subjects would have only been on a sheet for one stage the middle group for 2 stages and the easier ones for all 3. Now if there the old mills were only printed in two stages it could be that there were a lot more sheets printed in one of the stages and the tougher group was printed in the short print stage the middle group in the long print stage and the easier group in both stages.

This would also apply if they were printed in different facility's.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by G1911

How many printing stones and plates from the ATC sets have been found?

I think there are non- card stones out there from ALC.

I've only seen one stone with a card, and that was for one of the Canadian hockey sets. And at that, it was a master that transfers would have been printed from rather than a production stone.

The production stones would have been resurfaced once they wore enough. And large ones did exist. But all the more reason to resurface as they were very heavy and expensive.

I have a scan saved of one card that I need to find and put up that I believe shows the P350 stone was done on one of the scratched P150 stones. As it has a faint remnant of a scratch.

Having just found out about the Aluminum plate rotary press being used on something besides tin, I'm not sure about what would have been done with the aluminum plates. The description makes it seem as if they were fairly thick, and if so they may have been resurfaced too.
The ones I'm familiar with were very thin and coated and were just saved to be recycled. The smaller ones from the 12" press made great dustpans.