![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
American Lithographic Company in NYC designed the 522 cards in the T206 set by producing 507 different "gems" |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
Some of the repeated designs are identical or nearly so, like Kleinow and Elberfeld, but others have considerable cropping and color differences, such as Chase and M.Brown. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: robert a
I guess Schulte front view with Chicago instead of Cubs would've been another one had it made the cut. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barry arnold
Fascinating,illuminative work as always, TRex. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: peter ullman
nice work Ted...card talk...how unusual!!! The Cobb/Matty poses to me also look quite different from each other. It must be the eyes! |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: MVSNYC
it is refreshing to actually discuss cards themselves, thanks ted. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Trae R.
Mr. Z., I look forward to meeting you some day. Thanks for all you do. I always enjoy your posts! |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: DMcD
Ted's post is one for the N54 Archives imho. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: PC
Need to add Bender trees/no trees to the list. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: J Hull
Every time I see those two Lundgren cards side by side it makes me scratch my head. He's the only player in the set pictured with both a major league team and a minor league team. Why him? |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
Carl Lundgren's Major League pitching career ended early in 1909. Then, when ATC was designing |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Alan U
This is a great post! |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
I didn't include the two Chief Bender cards in this list of "twin" poses since there are sufficient dif- |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: PC
I think the Benders were both rendered from the same photograph, although the artistic differences are greater than the other examples. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jim Parker
Ok, forgive me for this newbie question but I haven't seen it mentioned in other threads, but can the great T-Rex please help me understand why the t206 designers considered it a 460 series? Do we have a good handle on how ATC came to the figure of 460 subjects, when there were in fact 522 cards total? Is it as simple as there were 62 cards that happen to be of subjects already accounted for in the set (like the 4 cobbs)? I have been following Ted's every post for years now and just now it occurred to me that I don't know where the number 460 came from. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: T206Collector
I started a post about the six super prints a few months back, focused primarily on the question of why did they need to repaint those six cards for the mass production? Why not just issue them en masse? And if you were going to repaint Matty, why use a different artist, which to me, it is clear they did.... Unanswerable questions, I know, but that's why I love the #521. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
JIM P |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dave Hornish
Personally, I've always wondered about backs that state 350-460 subjects. Always thought that was a little bizarre. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
As you know....the "350-460" labeling only applies to the Piedmont and Sweet Caporal backs. The American Beauty, Broad Leaf, |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dave Hornish
I guess those backs just show how dynamic the production of the set was. Still, they strike me as being wishy washy....different times for sure. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jantz
Great stuff. Thanks for sharing. I have a question though. Do you take personal checks? |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barry arnold
thanks for the clarification re: the Lundgren KC. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Brian Weisner
Hi Barry, |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jason L
That first column of the 6 super-prints have more white in their eyes than does that second column. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
I have observed that the colors in the 2nd Series (350) are richer in color (especially BLUE) than the 150 Series. Other than |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barry arnold
Brian W |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
Thanks for the kind words. Perhaps, we'll run into each other at the National in Chicago. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
Hey guys and gals........I thought this was a Vintage Base Ball card Forum ? |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
Your observation is very astute...... |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
Thanks for the kind words.....but, why do you ask....." Do you take personal checks? " |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
A close-up scan of both the Matty's illustrates the difference in the application of Brown ink between |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: T206Collector
I completely agree that the Matty Dark Cap is the pose that is most prevalent in Matty's other issues. He is skinnier, with more classical features under his dark cap. Under his white cap, however, he is pudgier, with different facial features than his dark capped twin. It is for this reason that I think two different artists drew up these Matty cards. Though I obviously also agree that different ink was used in each. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
PAUL M |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Matt
The artist of Matty's T3 seems to have combined aspect of both the dark cap and white cap version of the T206, with the skinny face of the dark cap, but the cap is white and the collar has the shadowing from the white cap T206. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Mike
I'm inclined (pun intended) to agree with you, Paul - that the differences go beyond simple variations in the ink (which are there, no doubt). I'd go as far as to say that all six Super-prints are re-drawn - if not by another artist, at least by the same artist from the same pose, just "re-done". |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
MATT |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
Reprised |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
T206 collectors have asked....why the 150, 350, 460 Subjects in the three Series of the T206 issue since there are 524 cards. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Frank Wakefield
That sounds reasonable, Ted. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
The initial Southern League series of 42 Subjects (South Atlantic, Southern & Virginia Leaguers) must of closely coin- |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
A long time, great friend of mine who reads the Net54 threads called me and has convinced me |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
It seems likely that the American Lithograph Company employed dozens of artists. It is quite possible that several other renditions of Matty pitching were drawn but were rejected, and the two best ones made it into the set. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
The Six Super-Prints and M. Brown are Subjects in the 350/460 series (1910); and, these cards were |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
TRIVIA.....Will history be repeated ? ? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 287 | 09-17-2008 09:57 AM |
T206 coloring differences - idea why | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 1 | 04-26-2007 10:02 AM |
T205 Baseball Series 400 designs? really? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 1 | 06-06-2006 01:33 PM |
Player poses that are repeated in multiple card issues | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 9 | 11-08-2005 04:33 PM |
2006 Baseball Cards Designs | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 0 | 10-03-2005 09:30 AM |