Good catch with your find on the variation on the variation of this card....here is another twist on this card. We all know that the YL can be found with the card number obscured on back. However, I also have a WL with the card number obscured on the back. Yet another variation on the already known variation....I have not seen the obscuration on the WL mentioned. Deans has one WL with a full and one with a partial obscuration on the back.

Seeing the same limited but recurring flaws on both the WL and YL versions begs the question, how did these flaws end on on both the WL and YL?

That could happen if the backs were printed first
Or if they printed backs on one press and fronts on another at the same time and swapped piles later.
Which sort of makes sense if they had a bunch of mistakes to fix. They'd done a bunch, stopped and while making the new plates simply went ahead and printed the backs.

There are lots of reasons to do stuff like that. There are a few cards from a number of different sets and it's hard to spot/prove where the normal order of colors wasn't followed. Some 81 fleer star stickers have the black printed before the blue on the front. Black is almost always printed last. If you have a stack, they'll be the light blue ones.

Thank you Steve, the process you describe makes sense with the print defects.....another question (may have long since been answered) revolves around why there are WL variations from this set in the first place? It does not appear that these WL cards are missing the yellow as (with the Perry card) the team's name is yellow.

Darren and Larry---I think I have all 4 now but would appreciate it if you would find any further double variation defects on less expensive cards :)

I have a yellow letter card coming to me with just a partial obscuring of the card number, so that adds yet another wrinkle to the case.

Here's an illustration of the partially obscured number mentioned above. The two cards in back are yellow lettered and the one in front is a white letter...

Attachment 293349

The general process was that they'd have a pasteup of the original art. pictures with borders etc, and that was photographed through filters to get a halftone for each color. (Some colors on some areas aren't halftones - the dot pattern like a newspaper picture)
Those negatives would be taped to an opaque piece of paper, or later, plastic. Some areas of that were cut away to expose what was intended to be printed making the "mask" which was basically a full sheet size composite negative for each color. That would then be used to make the plate.
Defects in the negatives could be fixed with a sort of red whiteout, or with red transparent tape.
All of that was done by hand.
So if the person making the mask goofed and left the name blocked off on the yellow plate the card would get a white name. After the decision to fix it, the mask could be altered to expose the name are, and new plates would be made.
The place I worked didn't have to do that in the time I worked there. We did have a few days of work when the camera guy took the pics for an entire booklet while he was under the influence of a liquid lunch and decided to clean the area just before doing the camera work. Thousands of spots from airborne dust that all had to be fixed - manually with that red whiteout.....they thought I had decent attention to detail so I got a space at a light table and a couple days working at fixing the masks.

Thank you once more Steve, your explanation as to why the YL were missing makes perfect sense

It is so maddening when someone makes sense in here, particularly if it is perfect sense :)

Sorry, I'll try to cook up some complete nonsense.......

Although it might be hard to come up with a more confusing process :D

1957 New York Yankees Greenie Ford
 

http://imagehost.vendio.com/a/204295...EENISH_NEW.JPG

..it's really noticeable in hand too....I'm re-arranging the furniture here at Schloss Garcia and came across these ,,,,,hey , just so long as they're centered...

..

Not sure if it was this thread or another one, but someone pointed out that the entire 57 set seems to have at least two versions of each card similar to the type of differences between the green tints and regular cards. Not green tint but noticeable differences in clarity and or coloring of the cards.

Was researching a 1971 Topps issue and came across this


http://40.media.tumblr.com/e075d0c31...dw57o1_500.jpg

1969 Perry
 

Darren/Larry---you think there are 7 versions or maybe 8 ?,,,white and yellow and each of those with partial or major distortion of number on back, and blue streak on front ( on both ?)

That is a cool card. I like this one too.

Al, interesting thought, I considered this last week but didn't think much of it as I have yet to see a copy with either of the distortions on the back AND the blue line. That is not so say a copy with both a line on front and distortion on back does not exist though.

To help me keep this straight, are these the already confirmed/identified variations of this card(when the degree of back distortion are considered separately)?:

1. YL, no line, no back distortion (yawn)
2. WL, no line, no back distortion
3. YL, blue line, no back distortion
4. WL, blue line, no back distortion
5. YL, no line, minor back distortion
6. WL, no line, minor back distortion
7. YL, no line, major back distortion
8. WL, no line, major back distortion

Unconfirmed:

9. YL, blue line, minor back distortion
10. WL, blue line, minor back distortion
11. YL, blue line, major back distortion
12. WL, blue line, major back distortion

Obviously, there are a number of combinations already identified for this card, but I would like to see an image of one of the last four possibilities posted. Even with the 8 possibilities that appear to have been identified, it maybe the first card with this many variant/variation possibilities that requires it's own 9 pocket page in my variation binder.

As of now, these are the only ones I can confirm:
1. YL, no line, no card # distortion
2. YL, no line, minor card # distortion
3. YL, no line, major card # distortion
4. WL, no line, no card # distortion
5. WL, no line, minor card # distortion
6. WL, no line, major card # distortion
7. WL, blue line on front, no card # distortion

I have only seen the blue line on the WL with the intact card number, not on any YL cards whatsoever and not on any distorted card # WL's...yet. But who knows what tomorrow will bring.

Your fav, dean, has a YL with the blue line....I did not notice this card until today though.

Normal back, right ? So 8 now ? Unknown if blue can be found with the 4 different distorted backs ? Who is in charge of finding that out ?

Nice job!! But it hurts my heart that you had to go the Dean-bag route to find it. :)

I know this is getting in beating a dead horse territory, but I have a Q on the 69 Perry. I think I have 6 of the 8 known possibles, but my Q for the print experts is how did it occur that both the YN and WN versions have have all 3 variants ( blue line front and partial or major distortion of number on back) ?

Check out what Steve said in post #882.

I did see that and can understand the 3 different backs showing up on both the YN and WN, but seems weird both would also have the blue streak front.

I imagine the actual layout of the Perry card was unchanged (and perhaps the two versions, with and without the blue streak, simply appeared in different places on the print sheet) between the white letter and yellow letter versions, because the absence of a color wasn't caused by editing the physical layout of the cards. Or it's possible the Perry cards were exactly the same in layout, but something occurred during the the printing of the cyan layer and the blue splotch appeared?

2 more
 

2 more, how would you describe these variants? I've looked at a lot of vintage cards but have never seen anything like the Fregosi... The other '61 has a "streak" what do you call that? Those I think are much more common.

That Fregosi has a Jay Johnstone wet sheet transfer on it...or the two cards were once stuck together and ripped apart??

The latter is probably very close.

69 Topps had a fairly complex layout, with different a and B sheets, and some doubleprints. (actually double prints and triple prints, a fine distinction)
So some cards have 3 positions, and most have 2.

Each color should be taken on its own, so the WN/YN is a change in the Yellow, but the Blue mark is a change to Cyan*.

So one of the positions could have had a fault in the Cyan layer, that they didn't fix. When they fixed the Yellow layer the new set of plates would have the fixed yellow, but still have one position with the unrepaired Cyan.
At the craziest not likely, but possible - A first set of plates gets made with a good cyan layer but a bad yellow layer. The cyan mask gets damaged, and later the yellow layer is fixed and new plates are made. Still later the blue is fixed, and the yellow is still fixed, resulting in three versions, two of which are very hard to tell apart. (Or mix in a hand done fix for the blue mark, which would be a pretty rare thing)

Think that can't happen? I just went through the 49 leaf set, and found three -four major changes, plus transitional cards. And that's just in a month or so of looking seriously for the different varieties on Ebay.

*It can also be a change in any or all the other colors, I'd have to see a high res scan or have one in hand to be sure. That would indicate a problem on the pasteup that got fixed.

Thanks for input Steve. Would you classify the WN v YN cards print defects or variations ? Same Q for 58 Y v Ws. I guess it would depend in part on what definition of a variation is assumed

My guess is that they were once stuck together. Does not seem likely that a wet sheet transfer could have occurred as these 2 cards were not part of the same series.

Agreed, that is not a wet sheet transfer. Has to be cards stuck together due to moisture during storage through the years.

I'd call those variations. And to me they're closer to what most people would call variations than a lot of what I keep as variations.

For the Y/Ws it's pretty clear that the yellow layer was set up wrong, and corrected. I suppose some could stretch that to say that setting the plate up wrong is a print error, but I think that runs afoul of stuff that's even more clear like the 79 Bump Wills.

My definition of a variation is really a loose one. I count anything that appears to be caused by a difference on the plate, or a clear difference in the cardstock or ink. Most of those differences are probably unintentional, I can't imagine the UV reactive backs on late 80's early 90's Topps were intentional.
Considering the range of stuff I'll set aside as "different" trying to determine intent is a rabbit hole I just don't choose to go down.

I do also save stuff that's obviously related to some production issue, either in printing, cutting packing, or even in the manufacture of the cardstock. I've got a card that has what I'd call a massive inclusion, something manufactured into the cardstock that's about half as big as a watermelon seed.

So
Registration problems
fisheyes
Inking problems
cardboard flaws
Die cut on the wrong end, or with the wrong pattern
All those go in the printing mistakes box

Cutting guidelines
Different screening
Die cuts that shouldn't have been obvious(88 score)
Different holograms
Marks from scratches on the plate
Consistent stray marks (not caused by ink spatter)
Printed on a different sort of cardstock (mostly 69 and 70 Topps)
All those go in the main set as variations.

A few can be hard to decide, like if one color foil should have been used but a different color was. Technically an error, so I'd file it there. Which may seem to contradict the placing different holograms as variations, but the different holograms were often a difference between series. (Like one hockey year where the main set has one hologram, but the update set was packed with low # cards and all of them had the next years hologram)

And yes, it's about as confusing as it can be. That's one of the reasons I don't get worked up about the variation/not a variation question.

Thanks as always for your input Steve. My definition is more narrow but as you know I collect recurring print oddities whatever they are, and agree the 69s and 58s could involve intentional changes in the printing process either way.

Not sure if we did this one. The one on the bottom left is pretty tough. The slight differences on this one remind me of those on the font of the 55 Sullivan (106) and 56 Pepper ( 103), and the back of the 56 Schmidt (322)

http://i1267.photobucket.com/albums/...g?t=1511027364

Here is another example of a variant, that has slight differences, that could be considered a progressive variant like Al's 55 Elliot card. With the 1972 Topps 534 Hickman card, the known variation is the example with no green on the team name. In looking, I found a few examples that have just a very light green instead of only the yellow.

What I find interesting is that no other cards (at least none that are known) from this series have a similar color variation to them. Not sure what caused this progressive variation to occur(on this card only), but my guess is Steve would be able to help explain the cause.

Some people call the #607 Frank Duffy card a variation due to the coloring differences in the shadowy areas of the team name, relatively similar to the Hickman you illustrated above. What I found was on the print sheet there were multiple Duffy cards represented, and one of them had the much lighter shadowing on it--although all the other coloring and all of the other cards looked perfectly fine. So it seems to have been an 'error' in the actual layout of the cards and not some freakish anomaly in the printing process. I'm wondering if the Hickman variation was created in the same manner.

Acouple of defects similar to the one Patrick posted of Lee Maye

http://i1267.photobucket.com/albums/...ps5645d48f.jpg

This print variation, caused by a color shift, is the Yankee logo on the cap appearing green instead of white. I could only find this copy.

That's an interesting one; the red and black passes are registered, but the blue and yellow (make green!) passes are both mis-registered to the right the same amount.

Actually gives it a pretty cool 3-D affect to the face.

More fun with colors.

Thomas-- now you need one showing him as right hander

The 1969 Gaylord Perry train keeps a rollin'...I think. At least it's possible it does.

In looking at some more Perry cards (not mine), I noticed some have a thin bolt of electricity emanating from his hat into the sky. You can see it pretty clearly to the right of the SF logo on the card to the left. So I started looking to see if all of the back number variations we were talking about come with and without this anomaly on front.

Attachment 297507

The card on the right doesn't have this bolt, but...it may in fact actually be there, only not as electrified, and perhaps just a dull bluish line that blends into the sky?? I'm not sure. So I say check your Perry cards again and see if it appears. (The versions posted earlier in this thread seem to have something there.) If there's clearly no lightning bolt there, please post a scan/pic of it.

This shows how far the sickness can go. Now we are looking for cards with nothing there. :)

If the bolt exits in different forms, or exists on some cards but not others, and exists in both yellow and white, and on each kind of back, how many versions are possible :eek:

I have 7 of the 8 I thought I was looking for, now have to check them for bolts

I am gullible but wonder if there IS a right-handed version out there, which I doubt.

Unlike the 55 Bowman Littlefield card, the 82 Fleer Littlefield card offers the opportunity to collect both a right and left handed version.

Sorry Thomas, bad joke reference to this one...Opps, Larry beat me to it

http://www.vintagecardprices.com/pics/1920/130921.jpg
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51hTx4mqirL.jpg

Here are 3 versions of 1974 Topps Fergie Jenkins #87. The left (top sky lines) and center cards (left side blue "snow") are recurring and the right card is the common.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/MP...=w1920-h928-no

75
 

Hi, guys. Enjoy the thread. Any ideas on this Robin Yount and what variant you would call it? Thinking just missing ink, right? Have you seen other '75s like this or '75 Younts? sHoping your answer is "sun fading" but methinks the one area of orange makes it not the case.

If I had to guess, I'd say that card was in the sun for a long time, and that curved rectangular area was due to a price sticker being affixed to the holder it was in.

Yep, sun fading with a price sticker over it. Not a variation, just damaged.

There is a recurring print defect or variance of this card. Copies posted on page 1 of this this thread.

Of course, for 75's there's this one.

http://www.net54baseball.com/picture...pictureid=3555

No sign of fading anywhere but the photo area. And pulled from a commons box, so if it was selectively faded, that's a bit of work for maybe 10 cents.

There must be more of them, I just haven't seen any.

I had never seen the Mazzilli or the Revering before but I knew they had to exist because they were next to the Niekro and the Clark on the 1980 D*uncut sheet. I found both of them recently on eBay. I can't remember if the Jones and the Vail from the 1980 B* uncut sheet have been mentioned here before, but it has the same flaw as the Niekro-Mazzilli.

Yount
 

Thanks for the responses on the Yount, I think you are dead on. But what about these two? The Butkus has a dark strip near bottom, so not a sticker/sun fade issue on this? Missing ink? Thanks!

Same as the Yount, sitting in a sports card store glass display case faded by sunlight. They both have the rectangle in the upper right corner where the price tag protected the small area from sunlight fading. Apparently both cards had the bottom edge covered by another card or something else that shielded the sunlight.

print variations
 

Lil some for ya



https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/58kAA...Bu/s-l1600.jpg
[br]
https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/d7MAA...sO/s-l1600.jpg
[br]
https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/QNgAA...rn/s-l1600.jpg
[br]
https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/atEAA...8p/s-l1600.jpg
[br]
https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/NyEAA...02/s-l1600.jpg

Is the Murray handcut?

All of the 1979 Topps baseball with 1978 backs were either handcut or or more professionally cut by a third party well after 1979. They were only made as a practice run in 1979 with left over 1978 backs and were never meant to be distributed but some of the sheets made it out the backdoor.

Thank you Cliff, as always, spot on input.

Besides the 73 Topps with the wacky backs, how many other Topps issues from the 70s-90s can be found with a different issue on the back due to scraps getting out the back door? I have one of the 91 Topps cards with a baseball front and a FB back, but was not sure what other years may have something like this.

I forget which year, but there were baseball backs with non-sticker mork and mindy sticker fronts.

There were also 78 baseball backs inside bazooka boxes
and black hole card backs inside bazooka boxes.

They were also 1978.

Thanks Cliff.

I have one or two, but I was too lazy to go find them. :D

The 79front/78 backs were originally sold by a dealer I think from the Baltimore area, in strips. What I heard was that they knew where Topps printer dumped trash, and had a bit of a find one day being there at the same time as the truck that had Topps stuff.
I have a strip I ordered back then, not sure where it is but I know I didn't cut it. It got a bit squashed in shipping, put me off mailorder for a few years.

Topps must have had a ton of leftover 78back only sheets.

Steve B

Found this limited, but recurring print variant on the 69 455 Siebert card. Above the first "I" in Indians there is what appears to be a pen mark, but it is indeed a recurring mark. This is another variant that looks much more obvious in hand.

67 Siebert
 

Larry---had not seen that one. I do have the one with a blue line to right of the bill of his cap, one with a broken spot in that same "I", and one with a reddish brown color between his legs. Isakur has the first two of those up on ebay now

Different year, that one is the 1967 :D. Same photo, though.

My Bad:(

Even worse, in checking my set I have that one. I need a "normal" one

I thought I was losing my mind looking at other 69s looking for these other variations, being a 67 explains why I was not finding them?!?!

I would like to say I was just being devious rather than stupid....but

1957 #75 Piersall
 

I noticed on two of my versions of this card that there is a little red line to the left side from his right ear down to the left margin. Obviously it is recurring and common to find.

Also have one with red dot to to left and below ear

http://i1267.photobucket.com/albums/...g?t=1515966703

Red at bottom ?

http://i1267.photobucket.com/albums/...g?t=1516056947

That's probably just a misaligned sheet going to the magenta plate.

I agree with you John. The vast majority of variants it his thread are really just unintended print defects. I tend to collect any that are recurring or involve a card for which I already have other variants.

My theory is that if you look hard enough and long enough you can probably find some print variance on any card, particularly pre 80 sets.

Here is a good example of a print variant caused by a misaligned plate.....look at Dan Osinski's eyes,,,on the top card his eyes appear "normal", on the middle card his eyes appear to be looking more downward than the top card while the bottom card his eyes appear to be looking up. His eye positions appear to correlate with the shift of the image upwards or downwards. With the top card, the image is centered (equal white around the image). The middle card has the image shifted down while the bottom card has the image shifted significantly upward.

I would call that middle one 'ole crazy eyes.'

I am not exactly sure what to call this....it almost looks like a solar flare on this card.

Something far less dramatic but similar exists on a very few Tom Sturdivant cards from the same set

Always love 62T variations side by side.
RayB

Nice cards Ray, and more dignified than the 59 bird poop variant of Brandt that Bob offered in post 835

Here is another who-dun-it, kind of like the 72 McNertney, except the finger (thumb?) print is on the back instead. On the back of this 71 165 card, to the right of the Cesar's image, there is a limited but recurring print. The print also causes some smudging on Cesar's bio stats.

Cool find, will have to pick one up for my fingerprint collection.