DP Robinson 52 Topps?

[irv]

I noticed, just looking at 52 Topps cards of Robinson that some have a small mark, or comma, on the lower right border (facing you) and I was curious if this is a sign that distinguishes it from being an original, 1st print, or likely better known as the DP version?

I checked mine out and didn't notice that mark, and with me understanding/thinking that I have a first print Mantle, I assume my Robinson is as well?
(I found a Mantle link describing the 2 differences but no luck with the Robinson card?)

[ALR-bishop]

The front differences on the Robinson are the most subtle of the 3 high # DPs. The easiest way to tell the two Robinsons is the stitching on the baseball on the back, running left or right. There are subtle front differences in the grain on the bat and more reddish contrast on one version. Take a look at the PSA site description of the 1952 set. It is a good summary of the set in general and does discuss the front differences on all 3 DPs

See "PSA set Registry 1952 Topps baseball: More than meets the eye"

And hello from Ascunsion, Paraguay

[irv]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

The front differences on the Robinson are the most subtle of the 3 high # DPs. The easiest way to tell the two Robinsons is the stitching on the baseball on the back, running left or right. There are subtle front differences in the grain on the bat and more reddish contrast on one version. Take a look at the PSA site description of the 1952 set. It is a good summary of the set in general and does discuss the front differences on all 3 DPs

See "PSA set Registry 1952 Topps baseball: More than meets the eye"

And hello from Ascunsion, Paraguay

"Not discouraged? Press on, but also be advised that there are also three high number variations involving cards #311, #312 (Jackie Robinson), and #313: They are all double prints, the only ones you'll find in the high-number series. On each card's obverse, you'll find the stitching on the baseball pointing left or right, with all three variations featuring right-hand stitching.

On Mantle's card, his skin tone is darker, and there's a white printing dot alongside the left border at eye level that appears in the variation. There's also no black border around the Yankees logo, and the last "E" in his signature ends with the line pointing down. The outline around his name box is also jagged.

On Robinson's card, the differences are much more subtle. But you'll see less grain in the bat and more of a reddish color cast, plus the image appears to have less contrast. Lower contrast is also seen on the Thomson variation, along with a green line to the left of his cap and a very ragged border around the name box"

Thanks Al.

I guess the "comma" mark on the border doesn't mean anything then? Some cards may have it while others don't but it doesn't necessarily mean it's a 1st print or DP?

Enjoy your trip in Paraguay!

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by irv

On each card's obverse, you'll find the stitching on the baseball pointing left or right, with all three variations featuring right-hand stitching

Shouldn't this read, "reverse," not, "obverse?"

[irv]

Originally Posted by Eric72

Shouldn't this read, "reverse," not, "obverse?"

I thought the same thing until I looked it up.

"Obverse and its opposite, reverse, refer to the two flat faces of coins and some other two-sided objects, including paper money, flags, seals, medals, drawings, old master prints and other works of art, and printed fabrics. In this usage, obverse means the front face of the object and reverse means the back face. The obverse of a coin is commonly called heads, because it often depicts the head of a prominent person, and the reverse tails"

[ALR-bishop]

Will be home next week Irv and will check my two versions to see if one has the mark

[JollyElm]

What immediately jumps out at me is the topmost star in the left column (under the Dodgers logo). On one version it is nearly a full star, all yellow and what not. On the other version, most of this star is blacked out with just a crumb of yellow present.

[irv]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Will be home next week Irv and will check my two versions to see if one has the mark

Thanks Al.

Don't get too much sun!

Originally Posted by JollyElm

What immediately jumps out at me is the topmost star in the left column (under the Dodgers logo). On one version it is nearly a full star, all yellow and what not. On the other version, most of this star is blacked out with just a crumb of yellow present.

Good eye!

Not sure if that means much however as I have seen quite a few anomalies like that, especially with the team logos, on a lot of these 52 Topps cards.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by irv

I guess the "comma" mark on the border doesn't mean anything then? Some cards may have it while others don't but it doesn't necessarily mean it's a 1st print or DP?

That mark being on all of one variety depends on what caused it.

If it's from damage to the plate it won't be on all of that version, and some of us would consider it a different variety.
If it was from a scratch or gap on the mask used to make the black plate, then yes it will be in the same spot on all cards of the same variety depending on centering. It would also be on whatever card was below that one on the sheet, but in the top border, and only seen on cards centered towards the bottom.

Ist print wouldn't apply here, unless you find some way to show that the 52 High numbers were printed in two different runs. The doubleprints were on the same sheet as each other, it's just that there were two of each on the sheet and only one each of all the other cards. (If the mark in the border is plate damage then 1st print might sort of be right for ones without it. it would be more correct to say early state of the plate, as opposed to the damaged late state of the plate. A further complication would be the high numbers being printed from 2 or more different sets of plates, but I've never seen anything that would make me think it was.

Steve B

[irv]

Originally Posted by steve B

That mark being on all of one variety depends on what caused it.

If it's from damage to the plate it won't be on all of that version, and some of us would consider it a different variety.
If it was from a scratch or gap on the mask used to make the black plate, then yes it will be in the same spot on all cards of the same variety depending on centering. It would also be on whatever card was below that one on the sheet, but in the top border, and only seen on cards centered towards the bottom.

Ist print wouldn't apply here, unless you find some way to show that the 52 High numbers were printed in two different runs. The doubleprints were on the same sheet as each other, it's just that there were two of each on the sheet and only one each of all the other cards. (If the mark in the border is plate damage then 1st print might sort of be right for ones without it. it would be more correct to say early state of the plate, as opposed to the damaged late state of the plate. A further complication would be the high numbers being printed from 2 or more different sets of plates, but I've never seen anything that would make me think it was.

Steve B

Interesting info, Steve.

Thanks.

[toppcat]

Some more info on my blog:

http://toppsarchives.blogspot.com/20...leftright.html

[irv]

Originally Posted by toppcat

Some more info on my blog:

http://toppsarchives.blogspot.com/20...leftright.html

Thanks, Toppcat, that is some great info!

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by irv

I thought the same thing until I looked it up.

"Obverse and its opposite, reverse, refer to the two flat faces of coins and some other two-sided objects, including paper money, flags, seals, medals, drawings, old master prints and other works of art, and printed fabrics. In this usage, obverse means the front face of the object and reverse means the back face. The obverse of a coin is commonly called heads, because it often depicts the head of a prominent person, and the reverse tails"

I'm confused. Aren't the stitches on the back of the card?

Hence the reason I thought the word, "reverse" would be correct.