Home› U.S. & World Currency Forum

Was 1928A $2 USN printed less # wide vs. 1928E $2 USN? See picture

rynotogracerynotograce Posts: 32 ✭
in U.S. & World Currency Forum


Hello, see the picture below.

Why is the 1928A $2 USN wider? Did they have 12 notes across vs. say 18 for the 1928E series?

Thanks for input.

Kj


image
US small size Federal Reserve Note collector with focus on 1928 to 1950E and main focus on 1934 to 1934D series. $5 to $100 denominations.

kurtisjohnson is my eBay ID

http://www.ebay.com/sch/kurtisjohnson/m.html

Comments

  • luckybucksluckybucks Posts: 1,318 ✭✭✭
    I have heard of sheets shrinking. Back in the day they used wet ink, and sheets had to dry.
  • larry510larry510 Posts: 566 ✭✭
    Besides the wet to dry shrinking the plates might have varied in size just a tiny bit. I have seen even notes from the same series with slightly different plate size stampings as well.
  • SmallSizedGuySmallSizedGuy Posts: 503 ✭✭✭
    Differences are due to sheet shrinkage during drying and cutting variants when cutting into individual notes.
    Jim Hodgson



    Collector of US Small Size currency, Atlanta FRNs, and Georgia nationals since 1977. Researcher of small size US type - seeking serial number data for all FRN star notes, Series 1928 to 1934-D. Life member SPMC.



  • larry510larry510 Posts: 566 ✭✭
    Jim, you don't think it could be plate variations as well? Scott L. and I had a conversation about this last year and he also suspects that the plates could be a factor in addition to the shrinkage.
  • mfontesmfontes Posts: 146 ✭✭✭
    If all the plates were made from a master engraving how could the plates vary in size? Could it have been due to the plate duplication process?
  • SmallSizedGuySmallSizedGuy Posts: 503 ✭✭✭
    The only variation in size that I am aware of is the standardization of frame sizes to the same dimension for all denominations made in the 1949/1950 timeframe.
    Jim Hodgson



    Collector of US Small Size currency, Atlanta FRNs, and Georgia nationals since 1977. Researcher of small size US type - seeking serial number data for all FRN star notes, Series 1928 to 1934-D. Life member SPMC.



  • gnatgnat Posts: 392 ✭✭✭
    Originally posted by: mfontes

    If all the plates were made from a master engraving how could the plates vary in size?




    Exactly.



    Could it have been due to the plate duplication process?




    No. The various methods that have been used for plate duplication mean that the copies (printing plates) are identical.

  • JamericonJamericon Posts: 438 ✭✭✭
    "Differences are due to sheet shrinkage during drying and cutting variants when cutting into individual notes."



    I agree with Jim.



    Printing plates were reproduced from a master die, so all the subjects on the plates will be an identical size.



    Currency paper is really cloth. Just like you don't dry your jeans in the dryer because they will shrink, currency paper will do the same thing when wetted and dried.
    Jamie Yakes - U.S. paper money collector, researcher, and author. | Join the SPMCUS Small-Size Notes, National Bank Notes, and NJ Depression Scrip
  • larry510larry510 Posts: 566 ✭✭
    What about paper variations affecting shrinking amounts? In the 1928A vs 1928E pictured above that looks like a significant size difference in length of stamping. If that is due to sheet shrinkage that was a lot of shrinkage on the 28E. Could the paper have changed a little through the years which could make different paper types more prone to shrinkage than others? Paper from the 1928A series looks brighter and Whiter than paper used by the time the 1928E series was printed which had more of greyish tint. Just a thought.
  • mainejoemainejoe Posts: 312 ✭✭✭
    If I am thinking right, the A is a notably different type paper from the E, which would account for the drying variance. Take a circulated one of each note and put it in water, you will see the difference in the paper right off. The A should be more transparent when wet, the E not so much. Just my two cents worth is all .
  • luckybucksluckybucks Posts: 1,318 ✭✭✭
    Paper characteristics did change with time, but not the size of the paper.



    I have also seen oversized notes from this era. Some of the size variations could have to do with improper cutting, but 99% of the time, size differences are the result of shrinkage.



    Regarding the paper differences. Take the 1935A (and 1935B) $1's as a good example. Most of the early issues come with bright white paper, but the notes printed around WWII, have a dingy grayish cast to them, and some of the notes printed after WWII have a "creamy" off white look to them.
  • larry510larry510 Posts: 566 ✭✭
    Originally posted by: mainejoe

    If I am thinking right, the A is a notably different type paper from the E, which would account for the drying variance. Take a circulated one of each note and put it in water, you will see the difference in the paper right off. The A should be more transparent when wet, the E not so much. Just my two cents worth is all .




    Right. That is what I suspect also. Paper variations might account for shrinking variations.
Sign In or Register to comment.