Show...me...your print variations!

[ALR-bishop]

Keep it handy Bob. We will get to # 306 in the 52 Thread in no time

[ALR-bishop]

[4reals]

1973 #590


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[4reals]

1971 #496 thought bubble


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[swarmee]

Nice; those are called "blobs" on some cards.

[ALR-bishop]

Wonder what he was thinking ?

[savedfrommyspokes]

Similar to the recurring missing number on back of the 1969 485 Perry card, here his teammate is missing a letter of his last name in a recurring fashion.

[ALR-bishop]

[4reals]

Don’t know if this has been covered before but the word “league“ is misspelled on the back of the 52 Campy. Does a correct variation exist?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ALR-bishop]

Not as far as I know, but there is a back variant of the card. It is listed in the H&S super set. I would post one but it would be 214 days premature in the 52 Gallery thread

https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrE...fyYbEWXalG85c-

[swarmee]

1958 Topps - [Base] #101.2 - Bobby Richardson (yellow name) [SGC*80*EX/NM*6]
Courtesy of COMC.com

In this yellow name variation, there is another variation where the top of the 'h' in Richardson is white. Recurring print defect, as seen also in this copy.


1958 Topps - [Base] #101.2 - Bobby Richardson (yellow name)
Courtesy of COMC.com

[ALR-bishop]

Looks like on some versions the bottom of the h is impacted

[slidekellyslide]

I didn't read this entire thread, but I did do a search for Morgan and didn't see any hits for a 1966 Topps printing variation so if it is posted already I apologize.

I was looking through my 66 set in my binder last night when I saw something on my Morgan card below the S in Astros...I took it out to see if I could scrape it off and saw that it was actually red print. I looked through ebay and found the exact print error on only one other listing. I searched google images and saw another like this.


here is the one on ebay
https://www.ebay.com/itm/19379652802...MAAOSwNTpf1DJH

Here is mine and a graded one I found in google images

[CardPadre]

….
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sliphorn]

I found these print errors at a card show last Saturday. The dealer had MANY 1953 Bowman Color cards for sale.
#19 Dark has a gold and a green dot on the NY logo in the bottom example. There are MANY of these on eBay as well as the correct version.
#34 Coan has yellowish dash over the letter on the cap in the top version. I saw one of these on eBay so it is not a one-off.
#103 Ennis has a yellow dot on the cap in the middle one and a green raindrop over his left eye in the lowest one. I have seen MANY of the yellow dot versions on eBay.
#124 Dressen has a red spot on the bill of his cap in the lower example. I am not sure how many of these are out there.

[JollyElm]

This is deja vu all over again, as I think maybe this has already been posted before? It seemed quite familiar to me when I 'discovered' it.

There's a definitive black line/hair hitting Carl's hat on a good number of these cards. Seems to me it probably wasn't corrected, so to speak, but the print sheet had the card in two different positions, one with the black line and one without, and (based on a quick look at COMC) the cards were seemingly printed in equal numbers...

1971mortonhair.jpg

[wdwfan]

Not sure if this is considered a print variation or just a card that missed a certain step of the process. But I found this checklist with Checklist in red today in a random notebook at my LCS. They had the regular one right next to it. As I said, not sure if it's a print variation or it just missed a step in the process of being made.

[savedfrommyspokes]

Most non-1st series checklists from 1961-72 Topps' sets have some sort of minor variation as they were typically printed in two different series. This "variation" has been documented for years.

[ejstel]

Sorting through some 1973's and saw this Billy Wilson #619 with the bottom of the baseball solid black (below the number). Out of 10 or so I have 2 like this.

The ink and print looks all the same...ie no variation in the laces tint when looked at in the light vs the black ink shining (if it was colored in)

Can anyone else confirm the variation?

Best,
Ed

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by ejstel

Sorting through some 1973's and saw this Billy Wilson #619 with the bottom of the baseball solid black (below the number). Out of 10 or so I have 2 like this.

The ink and print looks all the same...ie no variation in the laces tint when looked at in the light vs the black ink shining (if it was colored in)

Can anyone else confirm the variation?

It could be argued if it is a variation or a print flaw, but I saw two on COMC and one on Dean's Cards so it is definitely recurring.

[Northviewcats]

Was going through a stack of 1955 Topps and came across this printing error on the back of the Fowler card. The words "Year," & "Life" are at the top and printed in black ink not green. The word "Topps" is printed not in the baseball but just below it. And to Top it off the title bar is printed below the Stats line. The cartoon says ? Puzzlers. I suppose the real puzzle is how this happened.

Thanks for looking,

Joe

[swarmee]

The green screen went over the sheet when it was an inch out of alignment. The words at top are actually from the bottom of the card above it. Cool find, though is it just a bad registration issue.

[ALR-bishop]

Good one Joe

[Cliff Bowman]

I don't remember if this one has been mentioned here or not, Topps replaced Ed Bouchee with a second Jim Bunning on the 1958 Second Series sheet creating a double print of Bunning, making a photo cropping variation similar to the eleven double printed cards in the 1963 Topps Fifth Series sheet. The pinstripe hits the Tigers emblem in the center of the circle and the T on his uniform is cut off at the end on one version, the second version has the pinstripe more to the left hitting the Tigers emblem circle and the end of the T on his uniform is visible.

[ALR-bishop]

Either you or someone else told me about this one because I have both.

Still looking and hoping for a pulled Bouche proof

[Sliphorn]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

I don't remember if this one has been mentioned here or not, Topps replaced Ed Bouchee with a second Jim Bunning on the 1958 Second Series sheet creating a double print of Bunning, making a photo cropping variation similar to the eleven double printed cards in the 1963 Topps Fifth Series sheet. The pinstripe hits the Tigers emblem in the center of the circle and the T on his uniform is cut off at the end on one version, the second version has the pinstripe more to the left hitting the Tigers emblem circle and the end of the T on his uniform is visible.

I bought the other version of this that I needed but see something that looks like a "Y" on the left version kind of coming up above the bottom box. Am I seeing things? Thanks.

[swarmee]

1954 Bowman - [Base] #72 - Eddie Yost
Courtesy of COMC.com

Yellow sun at top border of this Yost is a recurring print defect.

[4reals]

Not sure if these have been mentioned previously but went through a stack of ‘55 Topps I rescued from a local seller and found two print variations.

1) Lou Limmer #54 can be found with a broken team logo box and a full complete box. On ebay, out of about 100 examples, I saw about four broken box examples.

2) Bob Purkey #118 can be found with and without a distinct blue dot next to his armpit. On ebay, this variation is pretty close to 60/40 with the blue dot variation having a slight edge.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Collectorsince62]

Check out this '72 Brock with the back of the card bleeding through to the front. I've had this card in my collection for 49 years and never noticed it before now. This thread has changed the way I look at cards!

[swarmee]

Yep, most people usually call those "wet sheet transfers" and they're sometimes found on T206 cards.

[G1911]

Here's a fun one. This defect is recurring, though the exact placement of the black splotch over Hamilton's face changes. I though it was a one off for awhile, but I've seen a few, and seen this black ink splotch problem on 0 other cards in the set.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by 4reals

Not sure if these have been mentioned previously but went through a stack of ‘55 Topps I rescued from a local seller and found two print variations.

2) Bob Purkey #118 can be found with and without a distinct blue dot next to his armpit. On ebay, this variation is pretty close to 60/40 with the blue dot variation having a slight edge.

On the Purkey, I don't think there is a no dot version. It looks like it is either this big bold blue dot, or a fainter greenish dot in the same location (attached). Anyone have a true 'no dot'?

[ALR-bishop]

I have the blue and green/yellow dot versions. No dotless

Wonder if card was originally printed with the blue defect and there was later intervention to mask it some. No way to know I guess

[ALR-bishop]

[savedfrommyspokes]

Recurring pink on right side of the 'NY" logo on Alou's cap......

[Sliphorn]

Originally Posted by G1911

On the Purkey, I don't think there is a no dot version. It looks like it is either this big bold blue dot, or a fainter greenish dot in the same location (attached). Anyone have a true 'no dot'?

You are spot on as I did a cloud of my two and see a goldish dot that replaced the blue one. It is likely an attempt to get rid of the blue one.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Sliphorn

You are spot on as I did a cloud of my two and see a goldish dot that replaced the blue one. It is likely an attempt to get rid of the blue one.

I just noticed on your blown up images that there is a second smaller spot of blue, on both your copies, by his armpit area. I will have to pull mine and look at others to see if this is consistent on all cards.

Seems odd they would not just cover up the spot with white ink, instead of the yellowish greenish goldish color. Can't really think of another good explanation for it than what you propose.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by G1911

I just noticed on your blown up images that there is a second smaller spot of blue, on both your copies, by his armpit area. I will have to pull mine and look at others to see if this is consistent on all cards.

Seems odd they would not just cover up the spot with white ink, instead of the yellowish greenish goldish color. Can't really think of another good explanation for it than what you propose.

Because the process doesn't use white ink.

If the defect is on both the blue plate and the yellow plate, that means it's from somewhere in the process of making the plates. And one that ended up on the mask for both colors.

If you redo the image to fix the blue mask, but not the yellow, the blue dot will go away, but you'll still have the yellow one. Which they may or may not have corrected since it's not as obvious, and the color separations were relatively expensive at the time.

[4reals]

Pm me if anyone want to pick up this “ghost” off of me.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JollyElm]

This 1970 Topps #670 Ron Santo shall forevermore be known as 'Ron Splotcho.' Check out the lower left corner of the white bordered box. The first card is the 'normal' version and the other three have a large, dark splotch in that grey area, running into "Ron." It doesn't affect the white outline of the box at all, but it seems to go hand in hand with the darkened area of dirt in that same area...

1970santosplotch.jpg

Here's a better/larger representation...

3258095__07514.1641919896.jpg


They're very easy to find, so not much of a rarity.

[butchie_t]

I had come across this example a while ago.
Someone spilled the blue ink on Bruce's card. Front, top left. No bleed through on the back. And it is interesting to me that it is contained to the picture and no bleed over onto the white border.

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by butchie_t

I had come across this example a while ago.
Someone spilled the blue ink on Bruce's card. Front, top left. No bleed through on the back. And it is interesting to me that it is contained to the picture and no bleed over onto the white border.

The card was printed that way, it’s one of my favorite types of print errors and I grab them if they are priced fairly.

[butchie_t]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

The card was printed that way, it’s one of my favorite types of print errors and I grab them if they are priced fairly.

Well, I must have gotten it from a pack then. I did not buy it and it was in my 1970 cards that I have lugged all over the nation between then and now.

Cheers,

B. T.

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

This 1970 Topps #670 Ron Santo shall forevermore be known as 'Ron Splotcho.' Check out the lower left corner of the white bordered box. The first card is the 'normal' version and the other three have a large, dark splotch in that grey area, running into "Ron." It doesn't affect the white outline of the box at all, but it seems to go hand in hand with the darkened area of dirt in that same area...

#698 Tom Tresh is the counterpart to the Santo, they were side by side on the sheet.

[John1941]

Here's a recurring defect I found looking through my dad's cards, where the text is repeated. I also found a Harmon Wages (also a Falcon) with a similar variation, though not as pronounced.

[ALR-bishop]

Neat one John. You would have to be sober to see it 😊

[G1911]

Originally Posted by John1941

Here's a recurring defect I found looking through my dad's cards, where the text is repeated. I also found a Harmon Wages (also a Falcon) with a similar variation, though not as pronounced.

Well, I got two more to chase down to finish this set now! Thank you for these

[deweyinthehall]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

#698 Tom Tresh is the counterpart to the Santo, they were side by side on the sheet.

The Santo was the final card I needed 25 years ago when I completed my set - I always thought I had one with a unique stain on it, but I guess not - and it is interesting that it doesn't obscure the white border at all. I checked and sure enough my Tresh is similarly stained.

[jason.1969]

Not a true variation but nonetheless a magnificent specimen this group may enjoy.

[ejstel]

Wow
..so cool to see these!
Was it a find or a special auction?

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk