Input on Guide

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron 

Hello, I hope to issue a pocket guide on authenticating early baseball cards, and am welcoming input and opinions. The guide will cover advanced examination (i.e microscopy), but will also have chapters for total beginners-- how to buy safetly, resources like SCD and Network54, common scams to avoid, etc.

As I'm organizing material and plot, I welcome input and suggestions, including areas and cards that should be covered. Anything anyone has to say is appreceated, as I am at this point gathering ideas myself.

Thanks,
David drudd at cycleback com

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

Also, the guide will be entirely online and free (at my site), and not issued as a for price paper publication--, so don't anyone fear that your good ideas will merely be going to supporting Dave's Playboy lifestyle.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jay Miller

Dave--If you are going to focus on early baseball cards I would imagine that Old Judge would be part of the discussion. I would be happy to provide whatever assistance I can. Just tell me what you need and I'll do my best to comply. Please email me at curl777@aol.com if you want to get in touch.

Best---Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

I really hope it includes detection methods using a 10x as well - while a microscope might be ideal, loupes can be very effective methods for detecting forgeries and tampering, and are in more widespead use. So I'm suggesting working "from the outside in" - e.g: "a real t206 has brown lettering" is more effective than. "...when the text is viewed under an electron microscope, you will notice at the molecular level...".

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

Scott, the guide will have a wide variety of levels, including common tips for looking at specific cards-- such as how we look at the border of Cracker Jacks or the thickness of T206s.

Most of my personal efforts are on in-general examination techniques (how to identify an albumen print, or early lithography), and less on specific card sets. I'm a print/photograph historian and not a card collector, so my approach is always from the former viewpoint. This is why I welcome input and insight on specific cards. Most anything useful that anyone sends me will be included, including links. Due credit will be given for those who contribute.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

So perhaps forgery detection techniques might be grouped by "printing type", with specifics for each issue when applicable, some ideas:

- 1880's albumen cards (ojs,gypsy queens,lone jacks,etc)
- 1880's chromolithographs (n162s,n28s,n29s,n43setc)
- '33-'35 Goudeys, Diamond Stars
- Sporting News and other b&w issues from same period
- t206s
- t205s
- Cracker Jacks
- e103s, e95s, e96s

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

Perhaps something on that order.

I would also include the basic physical qualities of cards-- thickness, gloss, etc. This information would no doubt be useful for collectors, experienced to beginners. However, this information would have to come from outside sources. This means that someone who owns a collection of T205s or M116s could give me comments on thickness, etc. For accuracy/comparison, information on a particular set should come from a variety of sources.

[Archive]

Posted By: UnAmuzd1

Hi,

Once data collection starts, I'll be happy to provide any measurements of the t-cards I own for use in a database (assuming such is part of the plan). What I really wanted to say is, thanks for taking the time to put this together. It sounds like it will be a great resource for folks who want to dig deeper into the pre-war cards; I, for one, very much want to, but am scared to death of buying forgeries.

So while I doubt I have much that can help in the data gathering phase (I have mainly t206s, a few t205s, and a couple of caramels), I would love to know more about papers, processes, what to look for, what to avoid - anything to make me a more enlightened collector.

I've only been reading these boards for a short time, but I've already learned a lot.

thanks,

Morrie

[Archive]

Posted By: George

Would you consider a short discussion of how to the the difference between a tintype and daguerrotypes and how to detect a forgery or reproductions of these? Thank you so much and I am very appreciative of your efforts. You could teach this as an online course and give us tests and assign grades! (just kidding) Thanks, George

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

There are no known forgeries of baseball tintypes, ambrotypes or Daguerreotypes. Each is also a one-of-one. So, if you have a baseball tintype in your posession, you can be conident it's vintage.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

Whether or not the 'tables' of physical qualities will be included depends on a variety of factors, including:

1) Level of participation. If few offer information on the cards they have, this section would be omitted. Even collectors who only own a few cards, can submit. This is because, in order to get accurate data, the infomation will have to come from a variety of sources.

2) Can one get accurate/useful information this way-- via email.

I also have to decide what qualites are most useful. So far I can think of 1) thickness, 2) weight(maybe/maybe not), 3) gloss (subjectivity problem) and 4) general observations. General observations can include, "1973 OPCs usually have very rough edges" or "Some 1956 Topps can have different color cardstock" or "1915 Sporting News are super glossy on front but matte on back." There definitely will be room for experts/specialists like Jay Miller and many others on this board to offer lengthy opinions and observations on particular issues.

Most people, especially beginners, will likely start by refering to these tables, so the information will have to, above all, be useful for the normal collector.

At this point I am thinking about how gathering and using this data should be approached and likely will have a plan next week (Packers V Seahawks tommorow, so I must be given some slack).

Lastly but not leastly, I reiterate that everyone's avid participation is the only way these tables will work and be included in the guide. I am certain that those who submit information and observations for the table on one issue will be regularly be refering to the table on other issues. I am also confident that many reading this very sentence wish there was such a table already.

Again, any opinions on this matter or others are welcome.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff S

>As I'm organizing material and plot...

I suggest a murder mystery about an intrepid photography expert...just don't give it all away on the dust jacket.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hankron

Having I think accurately looked at and discussed the major issues offered above, I have decided that the guide will proceed, but without the charts mentioned above. I don't think one can create useful/accurate measurements of thickness, for example, via disperse email sources. Also, having done projects like this before, I am confident that there wouldn't be widespread participation in providing data. For better or worse, a project like this is done personally.

So, the guide will be provided in the near future, but without said charts.

[Archive]

Posted By: Morrie

I'm looking forward to it, whatever form it takes. Thanks for taking on the project!

Morrie