For those who doubt what they see....
Here are some technical details of my file.

Here is the date area enlarged 200% from Le Pendu's original posted jpeg:
(Note that as I said earlier, this jpg looks to me like it has been digitally "cleaned up" at some point by some well-meaning soul. I don't believe the numbers of the date have been tampered with, but I guess we can't be certain. Get me an untouched original scan file, if you like, and I'll re-do it.)


Here it is with my newly repaired "1" and "6"


Here are some relevant notes:


Here is a view of the three patches I did, with their layers in "Overlay Mode" so that you can see the image of the patches apart from the original background:


Note that I constructed my three patches from the curl of the "2". They are further shaped by skewing, and shaping with a feathered eraser. Their layers are set to "Darken Mode" so that only pixels that are darker than the underlying base original will be visible. In other words, the black "ink" of the number segment on the patch is darker than the underlying gold, so it becomes visible. The bits of the gold background that are on the patch will either blend into the original background, since they are roughly the same value, or they will disappear where they overlay the original black segments of the number that are on the original base layer, because they are lighter than the black.

In my original post, I also removed a portion of the blob that is at the end of the "c" form. I believe it is an artifact of the grain, caused by the break, or an extraneous blob of ink. Note that it is not really attached to the main body of the "c", as a serif would be, nor is it shaped like a serif. (In this enlarged view, I've left it alone.)

Ah. Right. Child's play, really.

Thus demonstrating the difference between knowing what you're doing and the rest of us (me, that is). Thanks for this, OnePotato.

Very good work One Potato,but for me the " c " is an 8
As I said I first transferred colour image to black an white and then to a negative image,to see if there any signals of
treads that suggest remains of a number as Ross said.
For me there isn t any.
Well One Potato you seems more qualified than I to try make the "c" an 8,just if you want of course.
I remind keep in mind my Baroque thesis and that Chosson deck was reworked.

Eugim

Hello all,

I like this various attemps to date Chosson.

I saw the original and unique deck in Solothurn Swiss last august 2007 and was authorised to take all the deck in numeric pictures.
I also zoomed on date of course and may be this pictures could help all the crew to go ahead or change hypothesis.

Up to One potato or others to decide.

I like Caldwell thesis because it is very logical regarding Marseille card makers (Sellon and others) and bussiness ways of this time (buying moulds and tools for exemple of old card makers or competitors).
Just thinks about Grimaud House who bought Arnould (and Arnaud and many others) materials inclusive moulds in Paris.
Regarding small place in the figure, I rather vote for a 6 than an 8 digit.

It remind me also another historical detail:
On François Tourcaty deck, some Card maker effectively cut of some part of wood of moulds as to "erase" crowns and Church symbols on some cards. Same for some names too.
I suppose it was just after the French 1789 Revolution during the "Terror years". About 3 years duration If I remenber well.
Of course it was for another good reason it was made but this historical fact shows us that moulds were manipulated by various owners and had to pass through History and censors.
We have never t forget that cardmaker and Tarot cards was firstly a Bussiness with his very paractical laws.

Bonsoir from Marseille France

Yves Le Marseillais

Wow, OnePotato, that is fascinating work. Thank you for showing us how you did this. Myself, I am for sure swayed to the 6 camp, but would love to see if you can make an 8 fit in the spot or not. (well as soon as you are done with the ceiling painting!)

Yves, do you have a photo that you can share with us here, of this particular card? I would love to see it, especially given O.P.'s suggestion that the image we are using right now may have been digitally cleaned up.

Hello again,

I try to send a picture right now. 270 Ko in Jpeg
Hope it will help.

Yves

Hello Yves and Prudence...
Surely One Potato done a great work,so for that I requested him if he could try an "8 " attempt.
1-Is useful to compare I think Chosson with Conver as it been done many times.As I said after again saw all the entirely deck that they have many differences between them.
For example see the Angel as Cupid on VI card of Chosson deck.Isn it more baroque,more Rubens drawn ?
If it s true that place Chosson deck much more latter than the 1760 of Conver.
2-I attempted to upload attached 3 cards untouched from Chosson that ours new member Marc Rainville show in his site Tarotchoco (see his profile) //Yves,by the way he is French speaking form Canada.
But the images seems to weighty for the job.
I could send via e mail or you can enter in Marc wonderful site.

Eugim

As it worked and also for pleasure of eyes , here is full card.

Yves

Merci Bon Ami !

Here I attached the "c " untouched (black & white ) in its normal place and reversed to place above the first to make an 8.
If One potato "heard" we could see another attempt to discuss ahead.
I can t have the skill to to that with my Genius tablet pen

Ça Ira !!! (Everything will be okay ! )

Eugim

Yves Le Marseillais wrote:As it worked and also for pleasure of eyes , here is full card.

Yves

We are indebted, thanks Yves!