Thoughts on 1971 Topps yellowless?

[onlychild]

Been meaning to post this for about a year....

Several years ago a 71 Munson sold on ebay for a crazy price. Seller said it was a yellowless version. Then, a few years ago, another yellowless Munson surfaced and although it was kinda' beat, it sold for well over $1,000, if I remember correctly.

Since then I have been on a quest to find one of any player. Finally found it a year or two ago, in a Garvey Rookie...even better since he was by boyhood baseball hero.

Since I know of three, I don't think it's an isolated printing defect but a variation, such as the famed 82 blackless. They are definitely not faded.

Anyone have any thoughts? Other examples to show?

Kevin Saucier
.
.
.

[GoldenAge50s]

Kevin--

Can we see your example?

[onlychild]

Here is the 71 Topps yellowless compared to a normal card. It was eventually graded and labeled "no yellow". It's very much like any other series missing a color, with open pixels.

Since it's not an isolated print defect, I believe it may be a true variation. I would like to see others...they are out there.




Kevin Saucier
.
.
.

[1966CUDA]

Here is a linke to a Clemente.

http://cgi.ebay.com/1971-TOPPS-630-B...item562fbc7977

[GoldenAge50s]

Thanks Kevin---Now I know what to look for!

[1966CUDA]

Here is a link to a Clemente.http://cgi.ebay.com/1971-TOPPS-630-B...item562fbc7977

[mightyq]

hmmm, it may be kevin, my only thing is the one you have without the yellow the whole card looks faded, the red is washed and so on, if you had a yellow-less with the same deep red and black border then it would be more conclusive. i am not sure on this one?

i just looked at cuddas clemente, looks like the same to me, a washed out card, could this account for the missing yellow? if i were you i would try the nonposrts board and ask todd riley, he seems to be very good with colors and the process.

[onlychild]

The normal Garvey is a borrowed pic that has had it's contrast darkened. The no yellow version has a nice black background as well. The red looks faded because it actually has yellow mixed in (more a very dark orange)...without the yellow it's a shade of pink. It's without a doubt not faded in the least. I'll try and get some close up scans to show the missing pixels (or white) where the yellow should be.

Thanks for the Clemente link. It's exactly what I was looking for. I've seen them called "white letter" version before but in reality it's not the case....it is yellowless.


Kevin
.
.
.

[onlychild]

Again, using the Garvey, here is the close up comparing a normal card to the missing yellow variation. Although this is just a small portion, the entire card is yellowless giving it washed-out or faded look at first glance. I believe many collectors have simply overlooked these for that reason.

Using a loupe will reveal the obvious.




Kevin Saucier
.
.
.