March 1914 Page-Size Anomoly

[George Thomas Wilson]

Every month, when I get my new issue of National Geographic, I like to pull out my issue from 100 years ago and read them side-by-side.  When I received my March issue and got out my 1914 one, I notice several pages that appeared different in many respects from the rest of the magazine.  The most prominent difference was page size.  While all of the pages are aligned on the bottom and outer edge and tightly bound, they are short at the top: Pages 265-268 are 1/8" short, pages 285-288 are 5/16" short, and page 313-314 are 3/16" short.

These 10 pages (5 sheets) have several other things in common.  They are of a different paper stock and have browned considerably more than the rest of the magazine.  They all have a color photo on one side and a black-and-white photo on the other.  And they all have no page numbers on them.

What I'd like to know is whether or not this is a common occurrence in older issues or was this more or less unique to this issue?

Tom Wilson

[Melvin L. De Vilbiss]

Not uncommon Tom, but not necessarily standard - which makes finding a "perfect" issue all the more interesting/difficult.

The special effort used to make the color photographs sometimes did not match the cut of the remainder of the magazine such that when they finally came together, and got their final cut/trim, some pages were slightly different in size. This process also contributed to the darkening of the pages and usually used a different paper stock.

The numbering issue (or lack thereof) didn't settle out until sometime in the 20's (I believe) or possibly the 30's - not taking the time to research it right now - that is, the NGS eventually just numbered all pages sequentially.

In some cases, as in your example, the pages just weren't numbered. In other cases, the NGS used large Roman numerals, but maintained the sequence such that the last Arabic numbered page + the total of the Roman numbered pages = the next Arabic numbered page number.

I like your methodology, it keeps us going back to enjoy the old issues, as well as putting a new perspective on them.

Thanks for the insights!

Mel 

[George Thomas Wilson]

Thanks Mel,

I appreciate the response.  This particular issue has "21 Pages of 4-Color Work" advertised on the cover.  As for standardization, I think this was a hybrid.  The pages I described before include 5 color (or colorized) images,  The other 16, on pages 297 to 312, had color photos on both front and back, they all had page numbers, and they were of the same paper stock as the issue.

Nothing particularly significant about this.  Just thought it interesting.

Tom

[Scott T. Shier]

Tom,

I've been doing the same thing in recent times. I am keeping my correlating 19-- year out at finger's tip so I can go through 1912, when it's 2012, etc. As you described. 

I was wondering about the color-plate numbering inconsistencies last year a few times when I found myself looking at them and then looking at the rest of the numbering and looking again at the plates. I thought "what was their M.O. on this?". 

- Scott 

[Melvin L. De Vilbiss]

Scott,

This is pure speculation on my part, but I believe this was just another one of those "growing" pains the Society had to go through.

It probably had to do with the logistics of adding color print, which required special printing processes, as well as tradition, i.e. recall the "plate" system used through Jan 1902.

A company gets set in its ways, e.g. printing process, and a newer, faster, and/or more logical method comes along. It takes time to convince the "old guys" to even begin to change, then there is a transition period.

The gist of what I'm trying to say is: they used "Plate #'s" to identify full page pictures/maps and supplements; transitioned to just page numbers (while everything was still black and white); then when color enhancement came of age, they slipped back into a "form of plate #'s" by using capital Roman numerals (but kept the page sequence as if actually counting the page numbers); then eventually decided that just numbering everything with Arabic numbers was the simplest way to go (probably coinciding with the print process allowing the colored pages to be produced right along with the black and white pages.

Again - this is reasoned (I hope) speculation on my part.

Mel