That is a tough one Cliff. I looked for a long time. Saw a reference to it in some hobby publication

https://img.comc.com/i/Baseball/1957...&size=original
1957 Topps - [Base] #97 - New York Yankees Team
Courtesy of COMC.com

Recurring print defect on right side of the image border.

Darn John, did you have to find it on a Damn Yankees team card ?

I noticed on these copies of Ron Fairly cards that the lower left border on one copy is yellow while the lower left border on the other copy is blue. The Marty Keough card adjoins at the bottom of the Fairly card and predictably also has yellow/blue on the corresponding lower right edges.

Each copy appears on one edge of their respective slit. In the images of the sheets, there appears to be a white border around the edges, so where do the blue and yellow colors on the edges come from?

a color shift during printing

A color shift from the adjacent slit?

1963 Topps cards that were printed on the left edge or the right edge will have different colors if they are miscut, for whatever reason. Dean's Cards has them listed as variations which I think is ridiculous. https://www.deanscards.com/search?s=...opps+fornieles

One of Dean's Fairly cards is centered 52/48 and still had a sliver of color on the side edge.

I am only seeing Dean show the variations on the four green cards bottomed cards.

With the two cards on the opposite end of the row from the Fairly and Keough cards also having yellow and blue edges would seem to rule out a color shift from the opposing slit. However, a yellow/blue color shift on each of the green rows as Kevin indicated would make the most sense.

Here is another color shift oddity with a green bottomed 1963 Topps card

1954 Topps WB
 

I have read with interest some of the dialogue/speculations about the printing of the 54 Topps, but I hadn't seen this error/variation posted. Here is one scan with Dave Philley having a slit edge mark, and another with a wrong back of Tom Qualters.

Attachment 660052

Attachment 660053

1954 Topps WB
 

I have read with interest some of the dialogue/speculations about the printing of the 54 Topps, but I hadn't seen this error/variation posted. Here is one scan with Dave Philley having a slit edge mark, and another with a wrong back of Tom Qualters.

Attachment 660052

Attachment 660053

1972 Miscuts
 

I picked up a lot of 1972 Topps and these were some of the more egregious miscuts.

Nice miscuts Walt!

https://img.comc.com/i/Baseball/1954...&size=original
1954 Topps - [Base] #208 - Grady Hatton
Courtesy of COMC.com

Recurring print defect - line through the O,N of Hatton.

Good one John

1964 topps 102 checklist can be found with and without dot in number box and found a couple of tri colors backs

1951 Bowman Hank Sauer "Refractor"
 

I am relatively new to sports card collecting and this is my first post to the forum, so please forgive me for my lack of knowledge or posting etiquette. For obscure reasons, I became interested in Bobby Thomson's "Shot Heard Around the World" and putting together the Giant's boxscore from that game. While searching for 1951 Bowman NY Giants, I came across this Hank Sauer (I knew he was a Giant at some point but not in 1951) on Ebay. I quickly examined it and realized wrong team, but something caught my eye. I thought I was looking at a refractor. Closer examination reveals the printing defect which gives an interesting appearance of his bat. It seems the printing defect predominately affects the top half of the card although there seems to be something off throughout. I thought by sending it for grading to PSA, they might give me some clues to other similar defects. I did not know it at the time, but PSA has stopped providing modifiers such as PD and only gives a numeral score that incorporates the old modifiers which is why I think the card only scored a "4" (not important). It turns out of all the 257 Hank Sauer cards ever graded, only one received a modifier in the past (according to PSA customer support, they don't track the breakdown of modifers). I was hoping the group could give further thoughts about this particular printing defect. In my research, I could not find evidence of similar ones in the 1951 Bowman series. Thanks

Hi Mike,

Welcome.

What you have there is a card with print misregistration, which is considered to be neither a print defect nor a variation. Cards like that don't typically receive any premium but they can be kind of cool.

My guess is that the card received a 4 not because PSA applied any modifier to it but because lately grading companies have become very harsh in grading vintage.

I agree with John with it being a print offset and not any kind of variation. The ones with a small offset like yours typically bring a little less money that a card with good print registration. Now if the print offset was off 3 times as much or more they do command a premium from us oddball collectors. The big print offset cards are among my favorite.

Thanks John and Ben for your insights. I didn't suspect it was worth a premium but thought the print defect/offset gave it a somewhat unique effect, especially how it impacted the bat.