When a proof is a proof

[peterb69]

Wow, great stuff. Both seem to fit "rare" & "proofs".

Thanks for the education. I didn't know those intended T206's even existed. That's why I am really enjoying this site since I stumbled onto it in January.

[barrysloate]

Jeremy- agreed on the Chattanooga players. If the team was originally planned to be a part of the SL series, why was it left out entirely? There's a great story to be told about those eight cards.

[Kawika]

Anybody got ID's on these guys? Top row, third from left is Joe Pepe, Montgomery shortstop 1908-1910, brief stint with New Orleans in 1911.

[DixieBaseball]

Originally Posted by Kawika

Anybody got ID's on these guys? Top row, third from left is Joe Pepe, Montgomery shortstop 1908-1910, brief stint with New Orleans in 1911.

David,

Here ya go :
Alcock, Meek - Chattanooga (Not featured in the T210-8 series, but both played partial seasons for the Lookouts who are featured in T210-8 series)
Dwyer, Lee, Roth - Jacksonville (Dwyer & Lee featured in T210-1 series) (Roth not featured in the T210 set)
Osteen, Pepe - Montgomery (Both featured in T210-8 Series)
Mayberry - Danville (Featuered in T210-2 series)

[Leon]

I would have thought at least one person would mention the T212-1 proof strip? It's the only Obak proof I have ever seen. But if you guys have to see T206's then here ya go...my only one (and shown for the thousandth time but still...)

ps....not for sale yet Dan Co.......

[barrysloate]

I know Leon. We ignored your original post, I was thinking about that too. Sorry.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

I know Leon. We ignored your original post, I was thinking about that too. Sorry.

That's ok Barry. No worries. Obaks aren't as fancy smancy as T206's.....It's all good.

[tbob]

[QUOTE=Leon;875938]I would have thought at least one person would mention the T212-1 proof strip? It's the only Obak proof I have ever seen. QUOTE]

Outstanding Leon! I am incredibly envious

[rhettyeakley]

Leon, great proof sheet that I too have admired. The best thing about it (which isn't obvious when you first see it) is that all the images are reversed--most obvious with the "SF" on the jersey!
-Rhett

[fkw]

This is either a "Proof" (prototype), or a new set?? (R340?)

Ive shown it a few times, but maybe some of you havent seen it yet or even have one. Ive never seen another.



differences from the common R309-1...
nearly 1/2" wider and taller because of extra green border
green name plaque instead of gold
much clearer image quality and contrast
different easel on back
hole punch (smaller than a normal hole punch and cleanly cut through thick stock)



1st image is a common R309-1, the second image is what was described as a proof of the R309-1 (sold in 2005 REA)


If anyone has info or seen another please let me know.

[Rob D.]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Jeremy- agreed on the Chatanooga players. If the team was originally planned to be a part of the SL series, why was it left out entirely? There's a great story to be told about those eight cards.

Are there any theories about these cards?

[wonkaticket]

The Pepe T206 above is one that I have always loved.

Back when these were sold I wished so much that card was done it's such a great shot!

Cheers,

John

[barrysloate]

Rob- if memory serves, I think Keith O. wrote an article about them. Can anyone confirm this?

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Rob- if memory serves, I think Keith O. wrote an article about them. Can anyone confirm this?

Keith wrote an article about the eight Southern League proofs for VCBC. "Eight Men In"

[barrysloate]

Thanks Tim. I don't recall if he had a theory about them, but I do think he came pretty close to identifying all or most of the players.

[mrvster]

Leon,

not even close to yours not a true "proof"....but my Matty "proof"

thanks Martin!

[Jaybird]

This is the stuff that really gets me going. Beautiful cards. Thanks for posting and sharing the knowledge. I love reading about all the behind the scenes stuff.

Nice strip, Leon. Your strip makes me think... If someone had cut that strip apart, the middle cards wouldn't have the telltale crosshairs. Of course, they would still be reversed but wouldn't be quite so easy to spot.

Just makes me think a treasure hunter could stumble upon one.

[steve B]

The crosshairs are usually registration marks. Nearly every multi-color printed item has them on the paper before trimming to final size. Plus a lot of other marks.

The ones on the T206 proofs seem to me to be more layout oriented. In other words, marks used to make sure the location of the corresponding colors were exactly lined up on the stone. Once the stone was considered finished, they'd be erased from the stone.

To me proofs are fascinating. They show a portion of the entire process for making the final product. Some places do a lot of proofing. Topps has a vast array of different sorts of proofs. Some for the design pahse, some for the production phase. A lot of the final lining up Bridwell mentioned is done on the press with the regular production plates or stones. The sheets produced can be either nearly perfect or truly horrible. The shop I worked for usually had it near perfect first time, and perfect in less than 10 sheets. They also did nearly no proofing, any that I saw were photographic developed from the final sheet of negatives.

Not prewar, but here's one that crosses that proof/regular card boundary.


This is from the corner of what's called a "make ready" sheet. The magenta is printed a bit low. At the lower right are a couple lines that are registration marks. They should be printed right on top of each other. The torn top right corner is the special part. In order to keep the make ready sheets separated from the ones that will become releaseable product we used to tear off a corner of one sheet as a marker. Apparently Topps did the same thing. You can see the blue of the batting helmet printed onto the torn surface. It's not bleed through, as the card is printed on a surfaced board stock. The surfacing prevents the ink from soaking in, which keeps the image crisp.

So it's a production card, on the production material, printed from the same plates. But it's also partly a proof, since it was used to test the press adjustment. (Plus it's got the wrong back, printed lower than the front)
I'd like to think they went back and did a bit more adjusting. The shop I worked for would have considered this unacceptable registration. But I've seen enough 82 Topps to know better.

Steve B

[DixieBaseball]

Originally Posted by wonkaticket

The Pepe T206 above is one that I have always loved.

Back when these were sold I wished so much that card was done it's such a great shot!

Cheers,

John

Hi John - I share your affinity for Le Pepe... He was a heck of a shortstop by accounts I have read... Here is another pic of the Frenchman, but with an error reverse. The T210 set was very short on error's for some odd reason. Totally baffles me there were not more screw ups on such a large set offering... 640 cards in 8 series, and I can only think of a couple of cards that made it to market with an error (Not counting miscuts with names at the top)