1952 Topps Gray Back 3rd Series HELP SOS!

[thatguywithadot]

awesome and thanks for the replies guys. I had came to the conclusion they were not the only thing i was and am still interested in learning about and discussing if possible is:

1. Is their a particular reason for why the backs of these cards red ink mix that resulted in their final hue i cannot match up with any "creambacks"?

2. were there different white stocks as to my knowledge the answer so far is no due to it only being purchased and qc manageable due to it only being in 3rd series...

reason i ask that is because the marshall cannot be matched on the back against any cbs yet and i have exhausted ebay 90 day capabilities and any archived back photos i can source along with the front being over yellow saturated ink wise...

Rojek is profoundly different from all the cbs more drastically on the back along with having its own unique mix up of the shade of the red ink on the backside also.

3. if they are cbs i would love to be able to be pointed toward others i could reference and or links to learn about the potential cb differences that exist for posterity.

Again ask only because from my extensive non gray comp of availability of sold or posted and in registry the cbs always look identical in stock so far and the red ink shade that comes out as a result of the interaction of the white stock with the mix.

This is what ultimately led me hear to ask just what are these simply because i do know for a fact with my printing knowledge background for the half tone process etc and studying the only reason for this differential along with an ink mixture deviance from recipe is also not on the same consistent cardstock backside of all cbs regardless of number in 3rd series i have digested thus far.

If not grays then am i just looking at some anomalous variants that exist in neither realm and are the result of a possible last runout of piecing available mats together or just a deviance in creamback consistently that does exist and i have just not been able to see in whats imagery available?

4. I am 100% confident nonetheless that the stock of rojek is not that of a cream and also could not place a gray to it either with exception of a registry reference through 54 to a gray back showcase in which the poster shows that they identified 1 tipton with the dirty front but a white back... not relevant unless you conceive that this is not the same stock of a cb but also not that of what grays are and thus leads me to ask is this a weird combo of gloss front with a different stock from the atypical cb?

sorry for all the questions just am intrinsically curious as to whether you veterans have encountered what is deemed non grays aka creams that happen to also not be on the only cb stock i can find shown identically carbon copied across the 3rd series much less a given card number within?

Also last question but in all the cb digestion i noted miinute details consistent with the stock differentials of white stock that all showed a full bold ink saturation that caused incredible consistency in the fill spots like the nameplate and portrait border and could only find non bleed deep saturation ink fill that ended with spotty less bold in anything that was subsequently labeled grays?

thanks for the patience and insight here gentlemen. Forewarning i am not trying to shoehorn and find validation for mine being a gray or non cb just am enamored with the history of production of this set and the craziness of the first topps run that caused all these anomalies to continue to present mysteries to the community to date. I ended up here due to same conclusion that this was not atypical gray stock so could not figure what it was ultimately because i also know these are not the creamback stock that is displayed everywhere in every card in the series posted consistently without any deviation ive been able to spot in any significant deviation of any kind...

[thatguywithadot]

also not trying to challenge the opinions but rather find more clarity in my observations ultimately and explanation to gain further knowledge and insight. Would love to at least know i am not crazy in seeing that these are of zero likeness to the creamback consistencies of stock color and ink hue mixes that grace every 3rd series cream i can find currently available to view the backs. for shts and giggles i am going to pull backs of listings in a sec to do a side by side of each to justify why i am saying and asking what i am asking.

[swarmee]

I think you're going down a rabbit hole that's completely unnecessary for you. But if it for some reason brings you joy, have at it.

There are plenty of other more interesting topics I will choose to participate it, and leave this one for you to puzzle out.

[thatguywithadot]

LOL copy that boss...

can i ask a short and sweet question and get another awesome answer then hopefully from you guys.

Do all creambacks in the 3rd series appear virtually and practically identical when viewing in all experience?

Ill exit stage left as i continue to understand i am not worthy of investigative talk with this community.

Thanks for the replies thus far and appreciate it greatly.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by thatguywithadot

my answers in red

1. Is their a particular reason for why the backs of these cards red ink mix that resulted in their final hue i cannot match up with any "creambacks"?

a couple reasons. The inks were hand mixed at the time, and could vary. Red is also one of the least colorfast colors.
And
the inks while they appear opaque are slightly translucent, so the color of the underlying stock affects how you see it.

2. Were there different white stocks as to my knowledge the answer so far is no due to it only being purchased and qc manageable due to it only being in 3rd series...

short answer, yes. The stock used was inexpensive and while they generally got lots with consistent quality there was a range that was acceptable for what they paid.
It was more common earlier, but if the fiber slurry in the papermaking machine was a bit too watery, one solution was to throw a couple bales of straw into the macerator to thicken it up. If it got used fairly quickly, you can get sheets of stock with easily visible straw fibers.
So fiber length etc will be mostly consistent, there will usually be outliers.

reason i ask that is because the marshall cannot be matched on the back against any cbs yet and i have exhausted ebay 90 day capabilities and any archived back photos i can source along with the front being over yellow saturated ink wise...

Rojek is profoundly different from all the cbs more drastically on the back along with having its own unique mix up of the shade of the red ink on the backside also.

inking levels could vary along with the color "as mixed"

3. If they are cbs i would love to be able to be pointed toward others i could reference and or links to learn about the potential cb differences that exist for posterity.

Again ask only because from my extensive non gray comp of availability of sold or posted and in registry the cbs always look identical in stock so far and the red ink shade that comes out as a result of the interaction of the white stock with the mix.

This is what ultimately led me hear to ask just what are these simply because i do know for a fact with my printing knowledge background for the half tone process etc and studying the only reason for this differential along with an ink mixture deviance from recipe is also not on the same consistent cardstock backside of all cbs regardless of number in 3rd series i have digested thus far.

If not grays then am i just looking at some anomalous variants that exist in neither realm and are the result of a possible last runout of piecing available mats together or just a deviance in creamback consistently that does exist and i have just not been able to see in whats imagery available?

4. I am 100% confident nonetheless that the stock of rojek is not that of a cream and also could not place a gray to it either with exception of a registry reference through 54 to a gray back showcase in which the poster shows that they identified 1 tipton with the dirty front but a white back... Not relevant unless you conceive that this is not the same stock of a cb but also not that of what grays are and thus leads me to ask is this a weird combo of gloss front with a different stock from the atypical cb?

Sorry for all the questions just am intrinsically curious as to whether you veterans have encountered what is deemed non grays aka creams that happen to also not be on the only cb stock i can find shown identically carbon copied across the 3rd series much less a given card number within?

Also last question but in all the cb digestion i noted miinute details consistent with the stock differentials of white stock that all showed a full bold ink saturation that caused incredible consistency in the fill spots like the nameplate and portrait border and could only find non bleed deep saturation ink fill that ended with spotty less bold in anything that was subsequently labeled grays?

Thanks for the patience and insight here gentlemen. Forewarning i am not trying to shoehorn and find validation for mine being a gray or non cb just am enamored with the history of production of this set and the craziness of the first topps run that caused all these anomalies to continue to present mysteries to the community to date. I ended up here due to same conclusion that this was not atypical gray stock so could not figure what it was ultimately because i also know these are not the creamback stock that is displayed everywhere in every card in the series posted consistently without any deviation ive been able to spot in any significant deviation of any kind...

in general, topps was remarkably consistent from the start considering how much they produced.
That being said, they also were nothing if not predictably inconsistent, as you'd expect a high volume printer of the era to be. Nearly every set has some degree of stock/ink color/glosscoat outliers well into the 1990's and maybe beyond. On some it's entire sets or portions of sets printed on two different stocks. On others, it's just an occasional strange card or small batch.
Some are just difficult..... Many 70's cards have gloss that either yellows or doesn't, or that gets absorbed in to unprinted areas so it's not as glossy there - or not - maybe... Still totally unsure on those.

[G1911]

There are a lot of Topps series that use multiple stocks that are vaguely the same color but clearly distinct and remain generally "uncatalogued". 1955 Topps series 1 (or 1 and 2? One of the more interesting ones, it confirms a series cut off that is otherwise unknown, 1-110 come two ways), 1966 Topps (series 6 is beyond obvious, but it runs through the first 4 at least as well), 1969, 1970 have a cream and a white that appears to have nothing to do with toning, etc. I don't believe 1952 series 3 has one off memory that I have noticed, but I will take out my set and check if there may be multiple white/creams.

I only have one gray back, which I got for $2 at a show and didn't notice until I got home it wasn't the white. I like back stock variations, because I like boring variants and master sets, but the price these have gotten too seems to me very excessive for what they are.

[thatguywithadot]

Definately couldnt agree more but find its a by product of the baseline prices of significance attached to the set and in 52 topps case, its the most universally recognized and quite arguably face of sports card collectingbthrough the mantle card and its cover usage for sports publications through the years that have bought an appraisal that doesnt follow economics and maintained it ironically somewhat. That being said also, steve as always i love you insights and some of these things i was aware of but also the intrinsic info into the fiber and mixing process is pure gold. At the end of the day was asking because if these were worth more than the couple bucks i paid for the interest of hard copies to keep for reference id just sell them lol and buy some "worth" truly a couple bucks LOL. I would love to master collect this set as i love to with what i do but im a price reasonability kinda guy so its just a tempting thing for now.