38: HOW TO ANALYZE AND DIFFERENTIATE PLAYING CARD PLATES (DE LA RUE) [NEW 12.5.14]

THIS PAGE IS NOW TO BE FOUND AT:  http://www.wopc.co.uk/blogs/kenlodge/analyzing-playing-card-plates
THERE ARE SOME ADDITIONS TO IT.

The book that Paul Bostock and I have recently published deals in detail with the analysis of wood-block courts (see Home Page for details).   So, I thought it might be helpful to explain my approach to cards printed by the later methods from metal plates or lithographic stones.   The same approach can be applied to modern computer-based printing, where there is variation, as in Chinese versions of the English pattern.   Some firms, on the other hand, such as Carta Mundi and Fournier, have such consistent print runs that no variation can be detected.   That makes these designs much less interesting to me.

How to analyze and differentiate plates.

As I said on page 40, my interest in stamp variants led me to apply the same principles to playing cards.   This is essentially the basis of my book The standard English pattern.   The plates used by a maker may, in fact, be unrelated, as in the case of De La Rue’s first designs and their third one.   Although the basic arrangement of the figure and his clothing is the same, so he is recognizable as belonging to the standard English pattern, the details of the plates, especially of the clothing are all very different.   His attribute varies, too.   D1 is idiosyncratic, anyway, and was part of an unpopular set of changes to the design;  D2 follows the style of wood-block production, in particular that of Type III, the version used mainly by Reynolds in the 1830s, and D3 is a decorative version with the traditional components of the clothing being retained, but with more intricate details.   The bottom of his tunic has a zigzag edge, there is an extra roundel on his sleeve at the left instead of a separate, plain coloured section, and small decorative spades on his back and sleeves, though they tend to loose their shape in the printing process.

                                               D1                          D2                               D3

On the other hand, makers often redrew their plates, probably when they were worn and could no longer be repaired, and certainly when a major functional change was to be incorporated, such as double-ending.   This leads to a series of related designs, which clearly have a lot of characteristics in common.   If we look at De La Rue’s later double-headed designs, we can see that they are derived from D3 in the first instance.   The hairstyle is the same, the decorations on the shoulder straps and sleeve are, too.   The panels on his tunic have been raised to be incorporated into the design at his waist.      His hands have been turned round, turning his back into his chest.   This is a common feature of many of the redrawn designs, which still persists today.

                                           D4                               D4.1                          D5

In D4.1 there is extra overlaid design on his chest, his hat has decoration on it (features found in D3) and the tunic panels are coloured differently.   D5 has been redrawn, most noticeable on the head and hands, with dots added to the right-hand roundel and an extra black stripe on his waist-band;  the kings and queens have different designs on their crowns, too.

           

D4.1

D5

After the turning process the outline design of D6 was fixed for many years and used with different formats, including different colour schemes and indices.   The particular clue to this long-term use can be found on the JC.   There are two breaks in his cuff at one end (probably damage), which is a constant feature of all turned packs using a version of D6 from c.1875-1910.

D6

Turned JC detail

                                                              D6                   D6.1, three colours

D6, but not D6.1, is found with the original Dexter indices with some variation, and the smallest corner indices with 1 for ace.

Dexter indices c.1878-90

The smallest indices with 1 for ace, c.1880-95

D6.1 is the same outline plate printed in black instead of blue with just red and yellow added.   There is a lot more superimposed decoration on the clothing, too.

                                       D6.1, small indices, c.1895    Larger indices, c.1910

The later packs, both wide and bridge-width, have redrawings and the final version has a lot of changed decoration on the clothing.

From top left: D6, D6.1, D7, D8, D9 wide, D9 bridge.

In the case of the two widths of D9 the same plates were used, whereas the wide D7 is different from the bridge-size D8.   The approximate dates for the variants above from top left are:  D6, 1890-1905; D6.1, 1890-1905;  D7, 1905-20;  D8, 1910-20;  D9, 1922-28.

See also page 5 for other details of De La Rue.

I should explain here how I arrive at my alphanumeric designations.   Each different first digit refers to the outline plates:  if a new one is produced, it receives a new number, e.g. D1, D2, D3, above.   The sequence has no particular significance, though they are usually in chronological order.   (This may not be the case if two sets of courts co-occur, or if I have discovered a variant after having fixed the basic classification.)   The decimal point system is used to differentiate variation using the same outline plate, so D4.1 has the same outline plates as D4, but the colour plates vary;  similarly with D6 and D6.1.   Copies of a design are prefixed with either X, if no originator of the copy is obvious, or a more local one, such as US for American copies and T for Turnhout copies, by whichever maker.

It is then possible to take this classification as a basis and see whether other makers took it as a model.   So, for example, we find Brepols using D9 as a model right into the 1950s, long after De La Rue had ceased to print it.   

Brepols copy of D9 (TD9)

Similarly, Van Genechten used De La Rue designs as models, both D3 and D4.1.

Van Genechten TD3

Van Genechten TD4.1

This particular maker was quite prolific in his use of other people's designs, but also adapted them further in his own versions.   He redrew D3 with more of his own features and he even produced his own double-ended version.

Van Genechten TD3

Van Genechten TD3.1

Of course, this approach can be applied to any type of card, standard or non-standard, or card game.   So, to finish off, here are some Berlin pattern variants.

VEB Altenburger Spielkarten, c.1950

F X Schmid, c.1980

Pelikan (makers of ink), ?c.2000

These are all different drawings of the pattern:  look at the KS, for example, and note the differences in the edges of his cloak and the band across his chest.

After that we might want to ask whether the courts illustrated below are a mixed up version of the Berlin pattern or just a non-standard derived from it.

Nürnberger, c.1990

It's all in a day's collecting!