![]() |
1952 #28 Jerry Priddy
1 Attachment(s)
I have an article I did comparing black backs vs. red backs in this set with scans. This one appears to have been cropped. It is the only one that seems to have this issue. The sky in the top one (black back) looks thicker than on the lower red back version. You can see the item at the very top left mostly NOT there in the lower version. I also see that the small gap at the upper left is wider in the red back version. The dark color on the lower left is thicker in the red back version.
Why was this cropped and none of the others? |
2 Attachment(s)
Quote:
|
Tom— see post # 250 on page 4 of the Topps 1952 Gallery Thread for some other oddities for this card
Cliff--Willy is likely worth more than Bob |
1 Attachment(s)
Here is a print variation I had not seen before....
of course Lauraslazy has though ! https://www.ebay.com/itm/31366368159...hNds8&LH_BIN=1 |
Do you know that seller Larry. He/she sure comes up with a lot of variants. Do they do it themselves or are they a clearinghouse ? They do negotiate and are dependable
|
Quote:
Between Barry Isak and this seller, via ebay they both seem to maintain a decent selection of the print variation type cards that we all seem to enjoy chasing. |
I know Barry pretty well. Beyond variations he has a great deal of expertise in Fleer issues from the 60s and 70s. He has steered me to some stuff not even included on the Fleer Sticker Blog
|
Quote:
|
1971 printing error
1 Attachment(s)
Found this printing error in a box of 1971 Topps that I got in the other day.
Best regards, Joe |
Cool looking defect Joe
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:43 PM. |