Month: November 2018

Big Group of T206 Printer’s Scrap and Print Freaks Sell via Love of the Game Auctions

The Fall 2018 Love of the Game Premier Auction ended last night.  As usual, there were tons of amazing cards in the auction.  The auction contained a large group of T206 Printer’s Scrap and oddities.  As a T206 guy, these caught my eye as soon as I logged in to place my initial bids three weeks ago.  One thing that makes T206s so popular and easy to collect is the fact that for the most part, they are bought and sold as commodities.  There is enough supply, and enough sales data that buyers and sellers alike are usually able to agree on prices.  Obviously, it gets tougher with the mid-tier and rare backs as there is less supply than demand, and often a lack of sales data.  As rarity increases, so too does price volatility.

Printer’s Scrap and other T206 oddities are so rare, it can be very tough to ascertain their market value.  Many examples are unique, making an auction the perfect place to figure out what they are worth.  With that in mind, I think we can learn a lot about the current market value for T206 Print Freaks and oddities by taking a look at the prices realized from last night’s auction:

Jordan Mis-cut:  $4,920
Lake with Bender Ghost Image:  $3,075
Knight Printer’s Scrap Missing Color Passes:  $2,583
Brain with Multi-Strike Piedmont back and Piedmont Back Printed on the Front:  $2,214
Huggins with Upside-Down Sweet Caporal back:  $1,107
Overall Piedmont 150 Cylinder Print Ghost:  $861
Moriarty Blank Back:  $861
Graham Printer’s Scrap with Multiple Strike Tolstoi and Piedmont ads on Back:  $800
McIntyre Double-Printed Sweet Caporal Back:  $800
Beck Blank Back:  $615
Krause Portrait with Upside Down Jack White Ghost:  $554
Schlafly Upside-Down Back:  $523
Doolan Upside-Down Back:  $431

Do T206 Blank Backs Get the Respect They Deserve from Back Collectors?

Despite being ranked right in the same neighborhood as Broad Leaf 350 and Carolina Brights on back scarcity lists, Blank Backs aren’t viewed in the same light by many collectors.  There are a few obvious reasons for this.  First, Blank Backs were not distributed in tobacco packages like the other T206 backs were.  They are examples of Printer’s Scrap.  The fronts were printed as normal, but for some reason, the sheet was “scrapped” prior to the backs being printed.  Because production on these cards was not completed, every Blank Backed T206 is hand-cut.  Presumably most of the scrapped T206 sheets ended up in the garbage, but the ones that survived were likely either rescued from a dumpster by some neighborhood kids, or brought home by a worker in the American Lithographic Company.  If you’d like a longer, more complete explanation of T206 Printer’s Scrap, check out the link below:

T206 Printer’s Scrap 101

Blank Backs were not released in tobacco products.  As a result, many collectors lump them in with all other types of Printer’s Scrap and prefer to focus on the tougher backs that have an advertisement on them.  Because Blank Backs are all hand-cut, they can’t receive a numerical grade.  For collectors who prefer mid-grade or higher cards, the idea of adding a SGC Auth or PSA Auth T206 Blank Back may not be as appealing as buying a PSA/SGC 4 Carolina Brights back for instance.

Another aspect to people’s hesitancy is that there is incomplete information out there about Blank Banks in comparison to the other backs.  For one thing, Blank Backs were not limited to one series.  There are examples that I am aware of from the 150-350 Series (Proofs), 350 Only Series, and the 350-460 Series.  The Pop Reports are also less helpful when it comes to Blank Backs than the other backs.  SGC has a number of cards labeled as “T206” that are either a card that has a Blank Back, or a card with the back so damaged that they couldn’t tell what it was, and just had to label is with a generic “T206”.

I can totally see why some people shy away from Blank Backs, but I don’t really understand why back collectors don’t embrace them more.  Back collectors generally value scarcity and “the hunt” above all else.  When it comes to scarcity, it doesn’t get much better than Blank Backs.  Not all T206 poses exist with a Blank Back, and the ones that do will generally have only one or two known copies.  In other words, if you are searching for the rarest back for a give pose, there’s a decent chance that you’ll be looking for the Blank Back.  For example, the Crawford above is the only known copy with a Blank Back.  When looked at in that light, Blank Backs seem like a pretty good value.

Another great thing about Blank Backs is that copies in great condition are a great value.  The market value of a really nice looking Blank Back is not that much higher than a copy in rougher shape.  I guess the reason for this is that all Blank Backs are graded “Authentic” and thus all copies look the same on paper.  On one hand, that makes sense, but on the other, not so much.  Obviously there are a good number of “flip collectors”, but for the most part I think collectors are buying the card rather than the holder.  If you follow auctions, you know that cards that are well-centered are fetching record amounts.  Clearly people are buying based on eye appeal, but when it comes to Blank Backs, there seems to be an inefficiency in the market.

The Vast Majority of T206s Marketed as “Missing Red Ink” Actually Aren’t – But This One Might be Legit… Let’s Take a Closer Look

A couple of years ago, I wrote an article warning collectors to be wary of T206s that are marketed as “missing red ink” cards.  The reasons for this are two-fold.  First, red ink seems to be especially prone to fading on T206s.  Secondly, it seems likely that some of the adhesives used 100 years ago caused red ink to fade from the fronts of T206s.  Whether the red ink was altered by a chemical, or simply faded from being exposed to light, there is almost always some paper loss or adhesive residue on the back of the card.

The full article can be read by clicking the link below:

Beware of Expensive “Missing Red” T206 cards

As you can probably tell, I am very skeptical of cards that appear to be missing red ink.  However, there are some legit missing red T206s out there, and they are pretty cool.  Ultimately, it comes down the this question:  “Was red ink printed on this card, or not?”  If not, it’s a rare card, and it will often command a premium.  If red ink was printed on the card, but a post-production alteration (either due to chemicals or exposure to light) removed it from the card, that card is not a legitimate “missing red ink” T206.

Recently, I spotted the Frank Chance Red Background Portrait above and had to do a double-take.  The background appears to be a cross between orange, pink, and gray.  In fact, it looks so dissimilar to other Chance Red Background Portraits that the Auction House labeled it as Chance’s Yellow Background Portrait.  At first glance, it looked legit to me, but I wanted to get it in hand to take a closer look.  I put in a bid that was somewhere between what it would be worth if it was a real missing red ink T206, and what it would be worth if it was merely faded, and I won it.  When the card arrived in the mail, the first thing I did was examine the back.  I was looking for any sign of adhesive residue or staining.  As you can see from the scan above, it looks totally clean.

Back damage is usually the tell-tale sign that the front of a card has been altered, either by exposure to light or chemicals.  Even without any evidence of adhesive residue, fading is still possible.  It doesn’t seem very likely, but it’s always possible that a card was left on a window ledge or bookshelf and the red ink faded over time.  However, if the missing red ink was the result of fading, I would expect the front of the card to exhibit other signs of fading.  Luckily, I had another copy of the card with a typical, deep red background handy.  I scanned the two cards side-by-side at low resolution.  The difference is striking.

Next, I wanted to compare the different attributes of each card.  I turned the resolution on my scanner up to 1200 dpi.  First, I looked at the black line around the images, and then the name and team caption.  To my eye, both the black and brown inks look the same on each card.  Next I wanted to compare the green print dots that appear to the right and left of his face.  They are quite faint on each card.  If the card on the left (aka “Orange Chance”) was exposed to light for an extended period of time, I would expect the light green dots to fade along with the red.

Then I shifted my focus to his uniform.  To my eye, the blue on his collar is an identical shade on each card.  If Orange Chance was exposed to light, I would expect the blue on his collar to be dulled, at least to some extent.  To my eye, it looks like the card on the right has some red in the uniform while Orange Chance does not.  Other than that, I don’t see any other differences.

Finally, I focused on the pink shading on his face.  Red Chance not only has pink shading, but a small amount of red ink on his upper lip.  The pink layer on Orange Chance is fainter than Red Chance.  The red ink on his lip is completely missing on Orange Chance.  I would expect the pink layer to be completely gone if Orange Chance had been exposed to a light source.  On the other hand, the fact that the pink layer is lighter on Orange Chance does give me pause.  This is the only difference between the two cards that points toward fading.  It’s possible that Orange Chance could have been exposed to light, which caused the red ink to fade, and the pink layer to partially fade.

Taking all of the available information into consideration, I think it’s quite likely that red ink was never applied to my card.  However, it’s probably impossible to prove either way, and I am certainly biased.  I am hoping to have a friend who is an expert on printing processes used in the early 1900’s take a look at my card and offer his opinion.  If I’m able to make that happen, I will post an update.

T206 Ghosts, Wet Sheet Transfers, and Post-Factory Transfers Explained

There is a lot of confusion and misinformation out there with regard to T206 ghosts.  As a result, collectors are often hesitant to collect them, for fear of being taken advantage of.  It doesn’t help that many sellers misrepresent what they are selling.  So, let’s get into it.

“Ghosts”

A “ghost” is a card that has one or more layers of ink printed out of registration in a way that creates a “ghost-like” effect.  The McBride above has a ghost printed in light black ink slightly above and to the left of the main image.  The Hoblitzell below has the ghost off to the right of the main image.  You’ll also notice part of the card that was printed to the left of Hoblitzell is also visible.  These are the most fun types of ghosts to find, as it tells you which player was printed next door to Hoblitzell.  In this case, Hoblitzell’s sheet-mate is Art Fromme.

Ghosts can occur on either the front or back of a T206, though the front is much more common because there were a number of color passes that could possibly get out of alignment.  Some front ghosts (like Hoblitzell) were factory-cut, while others (like McBride) were scrapped at the factory, and later hand-cut from a sheet.

Ghosts that appear on the back of the card are referred to as “Cylinder Print Ghosts”.  There was at least one sheet of Piedmont 150s where a black outline ghost of the image on the front was mistakenly printed on the back.  You can check out the article by clicking the link below:

The T206 Piedmont 150 “Cylinder Print Ghosts”

Cylinder print ghosts usually sell in the $1000 plus range.   Front ghosts like the McBride and Hoblitzell shown sell for a premium as well, but nowhere near as much as the cylinder prints.  Though the market for “T206 Print Freaks” can be volatile, I would expect McBride and Hoblitzell to sell for at least $200.

The one thing all ghosts have in common is the “ghost” was printed on the card in the factory.  This is an important distinction because I constantly see sellers trying to sell a card that merely has a transfer on it as a ghost.  The purpose of this article is to help you understand the difference.

Piedmont 150 with Cylinder Print Ghost

Wet Sheet Transfers

Wet sheet transfers (also commonly referred to as WST) are different from ghosts in that they are not printed directly on the card.  Rather, they are a transfer of ink from one card to another.  When T206s were printed, an entire sheet of fronts was printed, then put onto the stack of completed sheets.  Then the next sheet was printed and added to the stack.  The vast majority of sheets were completely dry before being added to the stack, but occasionally the ink hadn’t quite dried.  This led to a transfer of ink from one sheet to the other.  Because the sheets were stacked, a transfer was only possible from the back of one card to the front of the card on the adjacent sheet, or vice versa.

WSTs occurred most often with black ink, and specifically black ink from the back advertisements.  My guess is the black ink took longer to dry, leading to transfers when the fresh sheet of backs was placed on top of the stack.  As a result, the vast majority of wet sheet transfers out there are Cycle, Old Mill, or Tolstoi backs which have WST of the back advertisement on the front.  These transfers vary in intensity.  Some are very faint and hard to see, and some are very dark and obvious.

This Topsy Hartsel T206 has a Sweet Caporal Wet Sheet Transfer

The other type of WST is a transfer of ink from the front of a card onto the back.  These are often pretty faint and tend to be a vague outline of the front of the card.  The back of the Joss Portrait below is an example of such a WST.  Typically, WSTs on the back of a card are not very impressive, just like this one.

It’s important to understand that wet sheet transfers are not ghosts.  Ghosts are much more rare and valuable.  They are also more impressive and interesting to look at.  Sadly, there are sellers who try to pass WSTs off as ghosts.  You’ll occasionally see a WST listed on eBay as a ghost and priced at some insane price.  Hopefully, as people become more educated about this subject, those type of listings will start to go away.  Unlike ghosts, WSTs do not command much of a premium (if any) when they sell.

Post-Factory Transfers

The third type of transfer is one that happens after the card leaves the factory.  Typically this type of transfer is caused by some sort of moisture damage.  I’ve seen cards that were clearly in a stack that got soaked in water.  Many cards with post-factory transfers will also have paper loss as a result of the cards being stuck together and then separated.  These post-factory transfers will usually be faint and not at all precise.  A wet sheet transfer of an Old Mill back is a precise transfer of the back onto the front of the card.  Post-factory transfers are not like that.  There is a lot of color bleed in a post-factory transfer.  The Seymour below is a good example.  It has the tell-tale paper loss on the back, and the transfer of the Sweet Caporal ad onto the front is faint and indistinct.  It kind of looks like a watercolor copy of the ink of the back of the adjacent card in the stack.  Though post-factory transfers are fairly uncommon, they don’t usually command any premium when they sell.

This Seymour has a post-factory transfer
The back has the tell-tale signs of a post-factory transfer