T206 and Cracker Jack reprint question

Aric · May 27, 2008 12:13AM

I acquired these cards in the 90's along with some other vintage. I always had my suspicions about the t206's but did not know how to tell for sure. What little hope I clung to that they were authentic was based on the facts they were pretty much all commons, they had different backs and they came with some other cards that were definitely not reprints. I've since learned that one can be certain of when the cards were printed by doing a quality scan and zooming in on the print dots. What I have not found are photo examples of a real compared to a reprint. As you can see, mine have the dots which are typical of post war cards. Can any one post a close up scan of a real card so I can see the difference?

I also have suspicions about my Cracker Jack cards below. Did they ever make a Cracker Jack reprint set that was not marked "reprint?"

I always thought the Cracker Jack cards were real but it looks like they may also be reprints. Can someone also verify this?

Stingray · May 27, 2008 12:27AM

T206s are fake, border way too big and lettering is wrong. Not sure on the CJs though.

Griffins · May 27, 2008 12:37AM

The CJ's are fakes.
First off determine if the card (or reprint it's supposed to be of) is a '14 or '15. Look at the back- if it has an offer for the entire set by mail in, and says 176 subjects it's a '15. On real '15 CJ's the backs are printed upside down, most (or all) of the fakes are not. They do not say reprint on them.
Second the border should be the same tone as the uniform- yours are distinctly different

There are other signs- the type, paper stock, etc.

Unfortunately you have the 2 sets that are probably the most commonly reprinted. Sorry!

jimq112 · May 27, 2008 1:42AM

Here's a scan of a T206. The solid black areas (like his hair) should be solid black, not print dots, and the names will be in dark brown, not black. That's the complete extent of my knowledge of T206 cards.

sonoranmonsoon · May 27, 2008 3:21AM

All the T206 are Reprints. The Sweet Caporal was not issued in blue, and none of the backs shown have the factory, district, or state listed. All the origionals have that info on the bottom. Click on the link to my T206 set. I am starting to take picks with the backs. You will be able to see what I mean.

fkw · May 27, 2008 9:32AM

Common reprints

T206 reprints like these will have the photo area cropped and a new caption added (caption is the wrong font style, the spacing of the letters is too condencsed, and the caption ink color is wrong). The backs are printed in the wrong color (ie. Sweet Caporal are always red, Old Mill are black or sometimes brown, etc.), also the back is missing the Tobacco Factory District Number at the bottom (this is also where the word "Reprint" was erased).

(like others have said)
E145 The cards are made of a thin rough textured brittle paper, the picture area will use the natural paper color for the light/white parts of the card, so the uniform will always blend into the border where they meet.

1914 (E145-1) will have the back printed rightside up and note "144 pictures" in the description.
1915 (E145-2) will have the back printed upside down (in other words the top edge of the front is the same edge as the bottom of the back), and the back will note "176 pictures" in the description.

1914 E145-1

1915 E145-2

SDSportsFan · May 27, 2008 11:40AM

Here's a scan of a real Cracker Jack Hoffman:

Notice how at certain points along the bottom, the white of his jersey blends in with the white border. The card in your scan above does not have this similarity. This is a common sign of a fake Cracker Jack.

As others have said above, the T206's are definitely fake, as determined by the too-wide borders, and the wrong font/color of the caption at the bottom. Also, Sweet Caporal backs only came in red printing, not blue as in your scans.

Steve

T206 and Cracker Jack reprint question

Comments