|
'63 Bombers Best
4 Attachment(s)
Curious as to what folks on here know about this card. Is "snow" in the background common? How would that "snow" affect a grade from PSA or SGC?
Do you guys look at these pics and hazard a guess at a grade? I've looked at some one Ebay and saw several with the "snow". Saw some PSA 7's that compared to this one or even looked worse. Just looking for educated guesses from those who deal with getting raw cards graded. Thanks, Chris |
I'm always more concerned about the bottom borders of the '63 cards. While your 'snow' would probably deduct, I think the corner wear is more telling.
IMHO - 2x PSA-6 |
It's possible it's not snow but surface wear instead. But if it is snow, I agree with the 6, maybe even a 5.5 due to the bottom right corner wear. If it's surface wear, it would max out at a 5, IMO.
|
While there is no official hobby recognition of it, you can find some of these cards in which the bat knob in his nether region looks to be airbrushed out , at least partially.
|
SGC - straight grade; no problemo. PSA - "PD" qualifier.
|
I hope you don't consider this hijacking the thread, but i wanted to talk a bit about the 1963 Bombers' Best 'airbrushed bat' variation. This one has always sorta stuck in my craw, existing somewhere in between the realms of actual variations and perceived variations.
On the left here is the 'normal' card and in the middle is Mick's airbrushed crotch (probably not a perfect example of one, but clearly the bat looks different than the card on the left). But pay particular attention to the blacker areas of the photo, and most notably, the pinstripes on the uniforms. The card on the left has very dark and prominent pinstripes, yet the middle card has much lighter, grayish pinstripes. And the main component of the crotch bat that 'changes' between the two examples is the shadowing surrounding it. These shadows are extremely light and almost disappear. To me, this points to the fact that maybe this variation could be the simple result of the black ink running low, and not the Topps folks actually airbrushing out the bat. If they only airbrushed that area, then the darkness everywhere else should be consistent, but it isn't. Those areas, too, are lighter. The card on the right is there to show yet another degree of lightness in the crotch area (Jesus, I've never said 'crotch' so often). Yet it does show relatively dark pinstripes. This card definitely doesn't match either the card on the left or the card in the center (although it is much more close to the 'normal' card on the left). And if you look at a quantity of these cards, you'll see such a wide range of darkness and sharpness appearing in that area. I dunno. Food for thought. https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4310/...aef2d244_b.jpg Technical note: these scans are all just ebay grabs, so they aren't perfectly consistent for the points I am talking about (for instance, the green of the middle card is lighter than the others), but they are very workable for the discussion at hand. |
Did not mean to get stuck in anyone's craw, or create crotch frenzies. I have no idea if this card in fact underwent any airbrushing. The fact the number of cards with the bat somewhat obscured seems small argues against it being an intended change. I tend to collect variant cards, whether the difference is intentional or a print defect or just a recurring difference. Here are two of mine. They look different to me. If others think not, that is certainly not something that sticks within my craw :)
http://i1267.photobucket.com/albums/...pspdztl4tk.jpg |
Quote:
|
2 Attachment(s)
Found mine while going through some stuff today. Not sure what version it is but 3-D glasses might help.:D
|
I guess we are lucky that no one with counterfeiting skills has taken a more graphic approach in editing that card :)
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:45 AM. |