Quote:
Originally Posted by ALR-bishop
I tend to think of the black stars and the border irregularities as print defects like the 58 Herrer and 57 Bakep. Such defects can be found in virtually every Topps set, more so in these days of internet access to more scans of more cards. I tend to distinguish them from variations that were intentionally created by a manufacturer to correct or update a card ( such as the 59 Spahn DOBs or trade/option card variations).
I have corresponded with some who think the black star is a variation rather than a print defect based on their knowledge of the printing processes used. I guess I will never know for sure, but for whatever reason the hobby recognizes some print defects as variations. The Herrer and Bakep have long historical roots in the hobby that precede grading, but the 61 Fairly shows print defects can still be elevated to variation status today.
|
Al,
Some good points. In my mind, I separate variations from other types of printing anomalies using the following standards of evaluation:
Stray print lines and print spots do not constitute a legitimate variation. A little extra green or red here or there was a normal part of the printing process in the 1950s and 1960s and should not be noted separately in price guides or online databases of sports cards. One example of this would be the 1957 Gene Bakep "error." To me, this card is no different from any of the 1952 Topps cards that possess a degree of excess red ink on their reverse side, partially or completely obscuring some of the text.
A noticeable change in the structural elements of a card (e.g., the border of a card, the player's name, a color change that affects one of the major print or design elements on front or back, etc.) DO constitute a legitimate variation. Examples would be the T206 Magie, the 1952 Campos (both types), the DPs in the 1952 Topps series, the 1958 Herrera, the 1957 Sherman (in football), and the 1990 Frank Thomas, to name a few. Within this category would be both major and minor variations.