T cards that look more like E cards?

Going through some of my T206 cards, it struck me that a few of them have a more caramel-card look than T206 look. What do you guys think, if you never saw this T206 Crawford, would you have guessed T card or E card? Any others?

To my thinking, the predominant characteristic which distinguishes t from e cards is that the images, and most notably the faces, are far better portrayed on the t-cards. Often all detail on a t-card is crisp and bold, while an e-card frequently appears washed out and exhibits little detail.

I do not see this on either t-206 Crawford, and I have not noted a lack of clarity in most t-card sets. But if I was to seek an e-card look alike, I may look to t-207 first.

JMO

That Crawford is a beautiful card, one of my favorites in the T206 set. Sorta reminds me of a E97 with the blended colors in the background.



I agree with Gil that T cards often have crisper/more detailed images, but that's not always the case. I think some of the single color background t212 Obaks have an E card feel to them.

T cards that look like E-s to me:

Some of the T216's (Donovan)
T206 Dunn (Baltimore) or Dolly Gray (must be the solid backgrounds)
T207 (almost any card)

But Some of the E's can look better than T's like E98 (Cheating I know because they are basically tinted photos)

t2069bk wrote:T cards that look like E-s to me:

Some of the T216's (Donovan)

T216's got their images from some of the E-card sets. E90-1's, E92's, E102's, E106's, and T216's use the same images.



Here's a perfect example: E102 Bender


T216 Bender:

I always thought the T206 Hulswitt never fit in the set. It looks like it was drawn. It may be more of a W than an E, but not a T. I have no scan, sorry.

I have never seen that McIntyre card, stunning.

Lee

wow...the clarity difference between the E102 and Kotton Bender is big when you see them together. The Kotton image is stunning.

bowlingshoeguy wrote:I always thought the T206 Hulswitt never fit in the set. It looks like it was drawn.

This one doesn't look like it belongs in the T206 set

I always get fooled by this one...



It just has a caramel feel to it. I also think it looks more like a 1909 Obak than a T206.

Thanks,

AndyH

...

I always thought the T206 Niles was one of the nicest cards in the set, it kind of has a 3D feel to it. Thanks for posting the Hulswit.

Lee

Agreed Lee,

I think the Niles is one of the best images in the set as well.

AndyH

joejo20 wrote:wow...the clarity difference between the E102 and Kotton Bender is big when you see them together. The Kotton image is stunning.

A good amount of that may have to do with scanner settings - the E102 scan was either taken with a different scanner or very different settings. Looking at the back, youcan clearly see the E102 scan is much blurrier then the Kotton; also the black SGC insert shows very differently.

mwieder wrote:
A good amount of that may have to do with scanner settings - the E102 scan was either taken with a different scanner or very different settings. Looking at the back, youcan clearly see the E102 scan is much blurrier then the Kotton; also the black SGC insert shows very differently.

I went back and looked at the cards in hand. Matt is right. They were taken on 2 different scanners. I used the image of the E102 from the auction where I won it. The T216 Bender was with my scanner. When looking at them together in hand, the image clarity is the same.

I always thought certain e95s and e96s kinda resembled t206s in a way. Like the e95 Matty and Cicotte for example as well as some of those e96 portraits.

The T206 Donovan portrait kinda looks like a E96 to me. Very similar look to the E96 Karger, actually.

So post the Kargar too

Jay