I got a quick look at these last night, but didn't get a chance to respond before I had to unplug my electronics because of severe thunderstorms coming through. Sorry for the late reply.
I didn't see anything disqualifying. There's fairly uniform corner and edge wear, and the light surface scuffing apparent on Ernie's face is comparable to what I see on some of my cards from the same era. There's some water staining, or heavy soiling on the front bottom of the Aaron. It looks right to me, at least in the picture. Nothing appears to be artificially aged, but I'd really want to see it in person to be sure.
I don't recall off the top of my head if the '54 Topps set had any back variations (like the '56 Topps set, with its white and gray back), so my question is, does the paper loss on the Aaron back look like what you guys would expect? The back appears a tad lighter than what I'm used to seeing, but it could just be the picture itself. I compared the Banks back to the back of a PSA-graded '54 Banks, paying careful attention to the Topps logo within the baseball, the stitching, and the proximity of the type to the graphic. None of the spatial issues that I know were present in some reprints (especially the '52 set). These are the kinds of things that fakes often mess up on.
My gut reaction is that you've got two authentic cards there.
__________________
Building these sets: T206, 1953 Bowman Color, 1975 Topps.
Great transactions with: piedmont150, Cardboard Junkie, z28jd, t206blogcom, tinkertoeverstochance, trobba, Texxxx, marcdelpercio, t206hound, zachs, tolstoi, IronHorse 2130, AndyG09, BBT206, jtschantz, lug-nut, leaflover, Abravefan11, mpemulis, btcarfagno, BlueSky, and Frankbmd.
|