Net54baseball.com Forums

Net54baseball.com Forums (http://www.net54baseball.com/index.php)
-   Modern Baseball Cards Forum (1980-Present) (http://www.net54baseball.com/forumdisplay.php?f=34)
-   -   1989 Fleer Randy Johnson #381 Marlboro Errors - 30 Years Later (http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=263992)

Hatorade 01-01-2019 12:00 PM

1989 Fleer Randy Johnson #381 Marlboro Errors - 30 Years Later
 
2 Attachment(s)
30 years ago today Fleer released their 1989 baseball product. Card #381 had multiple variations of the Marlboro ad being covered and some of those variations also contained what I believe to be a separate printing obstruction error as well. It appears that a rectangular shaped object(card stock?) obstructed part of the printing process and left a footprint that is located between his head and the word pitcher and runs parallel to the blue line. The rectangular discoloration almost appears to have some overspray around its perimeter. The printing error is on a pretty large percentage of cards that have green tinting and not on any of the cards with red tinting. Here we are 30 years later and this is another strange feature to the errors that I’ve never seen discussed.

Is this an obstruction printing defect? If so, during what part of the printing process did this take place?

We have about 800 scans of the cards done so I hope to be updating my Flickr page soon with all the images and also discuss some more details of the Marlboro variations.

bnorth 01-01-2019 12:55 PM

I find it crazy how little these are discussed. It is the rookie card of a HOFer with multiple error versions. Like the Ripken from the same set I absolutely love all the Randy Johnson error versions and have horded them for many many years.

I personally hated Randy as a player, I collect them because of all the cool variations. I can't be the only one that hated him because IMHO these should sell for WAY more than they do.

Hatorade, When you get the site updated please post it on here with a link.:)

CobbSpikedMe 01-01-2019 08:55 PM

Sorry for my ignorance on this topic, but I can't see the difference between the two images. Which one contains the obstruction you are referring to and what am I looking for?

Thanks in advance for your help.

AndyH

Hatorade 01-01-2019 09:17 PM

They are really fun cards to collect and rather affordable to do so. I heard about the errors around 10 years ago and thought it was really strange to not hear about a major 80's error until so much later and that such little was known about the cards 20 years after their release. They sure have flown under the radar a bit and maybe these two factors have contributed some to that.

I think its interesting that 2018 Topps cards have over 15 parallels with different colors, Fleer kind of did that with these cards 30 years ago and now this much later modern card companies are artificially recreating this for collectors. The Marlboro variations can almost be viewed as the much older predecessor to these modern variation cards, but with unknown production numbers for the specific variations.

Hatorade 01-01-2019 09:34 PM

Andy,

Sorry, both of those are examples of cards with the rectangle area from the obstruction on them. I uploaded 100 or so images onto my Flickr account before I realized that my remaining images were in pdf format and that I needed to have them as JPEG to upload. You can view multiple images of variations that either have or don't have the rectangle in the area left and above Randy's head there.


https://flic.kr/s/aHsmccCSY8

JoeDfan 01-02-2019 10:43 AM

Wow. I thought I had all the versions already.
Now I have to go home and dig them out again.

JustinD 01-03-2019 07:54 AM

I admit I have several copies but the faint differences are such minutia compared to the mostly easily identifiable Ripken differences make the Ripken so much more fun in my mind.

I think many collectors just need one copy and are satiated, but end up with the Ripken in uncensored first and then end up with scribbles, black box, white outs and sawcuts rather quickly.

Interested in hearing you talk about it to perhaps bring me to a new train of thought. Please add more info as the big Randy collectors and now you and Bnorth. :)

bnorth 01-03-2019 09:03 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by JustinD (Post 1841851)
I admit I have several copies but the faint differences are such minutia compared to the mostly easily identifiable Ripken differences make the Ripken so much more fun in my mind.

I think many collectors just need one copy and are satiated, but end up with the Ripken in uncensored first and then end up with scribbles, black box, white outs and sawcuts rather quickly.

Interested in hearing you talk about it to perhaps bring me to a new train of thought. Please add more info as the big Randy collectors and now you and Bnorth. :)

The very slight differences will drive you crazy with these cards. I have started to catalog them several times and never get it done. It was many years ago so my # might be off a little, At one time I had around 18-20 different versions cataloged.

Considering the extremely short period of time they printed them compared to the Ripken. They had to be making changes to it every few days with some done daily.

I will leave the so called completely clear sign version out of this. The rarest version IMO is the green scribble(scan). I have found 3 distinct versions of just this variation.

1) The blob/scribble covering Marlboro This is the version pictured.

2) Same as above with added black bar through the middle of the blob/scribble.

3) This one took me a few years to find. This one only has the black bar and you can clearly see the tops of the l and b in Marlboro.

CobbSpikedMe 01-03-2019 08:10 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatorade (Post 1841522)
Andy,

Sorry, both of those are examples of cards with the rectangle area from the obstruction on them. I uploaded 100 or so images onto my Flickr account before I realized that my remaining images were in pdf format and that I needed to have them as JPEG to upload. You can view multiple images of variations that either have or don't have the rectangle in the area left and above Randy's head there.


https://flic.kr/s/aHsmccCSY8

Hatorade,

Are the slightly darker rectangular boxes that I've circled what you are talking about? Again, sorry for my ignorance here, I'm just trying to learn something new.

Thanks again,

AndyH

bnorth 01-03-2019 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CobbSpikedMe (Post 1842156)
Hatorade,

Are the slightly darker rectangular boxes that I've circled what you are talking about? Again, sorry for my ignorance here, I'm just trying to learn something new.

Thanks again,

AndyH

Yes those are the rectangles he is referring to.

Hatorade 01-04-2019 08:08 AM

2 Attachment(s)
Andy

Yes, as Ben confirmed, those are two examples of the rectangles. The rectangles can be very faint as well as others that are more prominent. I was hoping someone could answer if this is an obstruction from something that was possibly a small piece of cardboard or from something else during the printing process. Would the area be progressively effected as the item got in the way and essentially caused a more prominent rectangular stamp on the cards from the area continually being blocked? Also, if there was an item obstructing the printing process once it was removed would the rectangular area instantly disappear? Anyone's help here would be greatly appreciated.

Ben

I think you are essentially correct on those green scribble versions. Is the attached image pretty close to version #3?

I also wanted to take step back and post a link to our fellow board member's site with a ton of info on the Marlboro errors. The site has been essential for knowledge on these cards and moving the general discussion forward on them. I think the site probably lead to some of the flip changes at BGS, which is really cool. There are 13 cards pictured in the article and I wanted to get Dylan, Ben and others' opinions regarding the cards pictured all being different variations or if, for example, the two green or red cards pictured are the same card with slight differences resulting from something that Fleer had done inadvertently.

https://junkwaxgems.wordpress.com/20...ro-variations/

bnorth 01-04-2019 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatorade (Post 1842252)
Andy

Yes, as Ben confirmed, those are two examples of the rectangles. The rectangles can be very faint as well as others that are more prominent. I was hoping someone could answer if this is an obstruction from something that was possibly a small piece of cardboard or from something else during the printing process. Would the area be progressively effected as the item got in the way and essentially caused a more prominent rectangular stamp on the cards from the area continually being blocked? Also, if there was an item obstructing the printing process once it was removed would the rectangular area instantly disappear? Anyone's help here would be greatly appreciated.

Ben

I think you are essentially correct on those green scribble versions. Is the attached image pretty close to version #3?

I also wanted to take step back and post a link to our fellow board member's site with a ton of info on the Marlboro errors. The site has been essential for knowledge on these cards and moving the general discussion forward on them. I think the site probably lead to some of the flip changes at BGS, which is really cool. There are 13 cards pictured in the article and I wanted to get Dylan, Ben and others' opinions regarding the cards pictured all being different variations or if, for example, the two green or red cards pictured are the same card with slight differences resulting from something that Fleer had done inadvertently.

https://junkwaxgems.wordpress.com/20...ro-variations/

Yes from your picture that looks like the 3rd version.

Dylan has a great site, the green scribble I have pictured is from his site. I have a horrible time getting scans that show the Marlboro section clearly.

Yastrzemski Sports 01-05-2019 03:51 AM

With the Johnson and Ripken there are several distinct variations made where the original plate was altered. That is clear.
It is important to keep in mind that cards are printed on a printing press - and it is an imperfect process. Sometimes there is too much of one color ink and too little of another. Sometimes there is ink spray. Sometimes a plate moves and the colors are out of register. There may also be human error involved. There may be bleeding, smudging, etc, etc. If you look at 100 examples of the any one card, you can find lighter, darker, blurry, crisp, yellow tint, red tint, and so on.
Johnson had a few different versions - but those are limited to the actual alterations on the plate. The others have to be classified as print defects.

jacksoncoupage 01-05-2019 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yastrzemski Sports (Post 1842517)
With the Johnson and Ripken there are several distinct variations made where the original plate was altered. That is clear.
It is important to keep in mind that cards are printed on a printing press - and it is an imperfect process. Sometimes there is too much of one color ink and too little of another. Sometimes there is ink spray. Sometimes a plate moves and the colors are out of register. There may also be human error involved. There may be bleeding, smudging, etc, etc. If you look at 100 examples of the any one card, you can find lighter, darker, blurry, crisp, yellow tint, red tint, and so on.
Johnson had a few different versions - but those are limited to the actual alterations on the plate. The others have to be classified as print defects.

While this is true for many scrutinized and popular variations, this is not so simple regarding the Randy Johnson changes. In fact, my blog noting 13 variations is just meant as a simplified guide to the amount of distinct “types” which there are definitely more than four of even when removing print flaw/plate shift type aberrations from the equation.

I have personally seen far more variations in these cards than I had at the point of publishing that article. If you take a decent size sampling of any one of the major “types” I.E. “red box” “green tint” etc etc, you’ll find that there are several variations within each. Real variations where alterations were made to the plate as efforts to obscure the sign. Shape of the bar over the word, box size, and saturation and density of coloring/masking over sign area and on and on. These are NOT the same as color tone differences due to different ink levels and plate alignment. After 16 years of studying thousands of copies of these cards, I am very confident that there exists at least a couple dozen unique versions of this card.

And finally, for the record, I am no longer confident that a clear version ever made its way into packs. The one and only image I’ve seen, also shown on my blog, no longer feels convincing to me that photoshop wasn’t involved. I’d like to be wrong and with this card, anything is possible but I remain skeptical.

bnorth 01-05-2019 06:02 PM

1 Attachment(s)
[QUOTE=jacksoncoupage;1842730]While this is true for many scrutinized and popular variations, this is not so simple regarding the Randy Johnson changes. In fact, my blog noting 13 variations is just meant as a simplified guide to the amount of distinct “types” which there are definitely more than four of even when removing print flaw/plate shift type aberrations from the equation.

I have personally seen far more variations in these cards than I had at the point of publishing that article. If you take a decent size sampling of any one of the major “types” I.E. “red box” “green tint” etc etc, you’ll find that there are several variations within each. Real variations where alterations were made to the plate as efforts to obscure the sign. Shape of the bar over the word, box size, and saturation and density of coloring/masking over sign area and on and on. These are NOT the same as color tone differences due to different ink levels and plate alignment. After 16 years of studying thousands of copies of these cards, I am very confident that there exists at least a couple dozen unique versions of this card.

And finally, for the record, I am no longer confident that a clear version ever made its way into packs. The one and only image I’ve seen, also shown on my blog, no longer feels convincing to me that photoshop wasn’t involved. I’d like to be wrong and with this card, anything is possible but I remain skeptical.[/QUOTE]

Is the supposed clear sign card pictured on you website the same one that ended up in a PSA slab. They look the same, but I can't find a pic of the PSA one right now.

I have never been comfortable with that card for a few reasons. The main one being that the only clear part of the sign is the white part. Because I know there is a real card out there I figured it was altered. If it was a real clear sign card everything would be clear. The cowboy would be easier to see and the top of the sign would be the bright red it is supposed to be.

There is another version like the one on the left but with way less red ink. I believe that version was altered to make the "clear sign" version. They look exactly the same except the white area has been cleaned up on the altered(IMHO) card.

Hatorade 01-05-2019 07:59 PM

2 Attachment(s)
Here is a copy of the clear version in the PSA slab that I saved from another thread. I’ve also attached a photo of the Marlboro ad from The Vet that I found.

Athos01 01-07-2019 04:20 PM

Johnson Clear Marlboro
 
Hi guys! My name is Kevin, and I am the owner of the clear sign PSA 9 Johnson Marlboro.

I purchased this card on eBay about 10 years ago, as I've never seen a Marlboro this clear. I have been collecting cards for 30 years now, and have opened tons and tons of '89 Fleer. I am a huge Bill Ripken collector and other errors as well.

It is unfortunate that all of you believe my card is a fake. I know I sent Dylan a small pic years ago of the Marlboro sign on my card, and the pic posted by Hatorade is of my card.

I would be happy to show you the card in person at the 2019 National convention. I have no reason at all to photoshop this card.

As for the questions regarding clarity, the pic was a close-up of Randy, and he was nowhere near the OF bleachers. Additionally, it does not appear to be an extremely bright and sunny day, so the sign itself may have shadows from the sun on the red part at top and the cowboy as well.

bnorth 01-07-2019 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Athos01 (Post 1843393)
Hi guys! My name is Kevin, and I am the owner of the clear sign PSA 9 Johnson Marlboro.

I purchased this card on eBay about 10 years ago, as I've never seen a Marlboro this clear. I have been collecting cards for 30 years now, and have opened tons and tons of '89 Fleer. I am a huge Bill Ripken collector and other errors as well.

It is unfortunate that all of you believe my card is a fake. I know I sent Dylan a small pic years ago of the Marlboro sign on my card, and the pic posted by Hatorade is of my card.

I would be happy to show you the card in person at the 2019 National convention. I have no reason at all to photoshop this card.

As for the questions regarding clarity, the pic was a close-up of Randy, and he was nowhere near the OF bleachers. Additionally, it does not appear to be an extremely bright and sunny day, so the sign itself may have shadows from the sun on the red part at top and the cowboy as well.

Hi Keven, Thank you very much for posting on this forum. I would love to see it in hand but probably won't be at the National. I did send you a private message(PM) through this site with a request for a scan.

bnorth 01-07-2019 05:23 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Here is a much better pic of the PSA graded card. My bad that I did not correct Dylan when he said it could be photo shopped because I do have a long time card friend that has seen the card in hand.

I can't give a 100% opinion on the card without seeing it myself in hand or a super high resolution scan to check out the print dots(pattern). I will say there is a couple small things that make me lean more towards unaltered from the new better picture.

bnorth 01-07-2019 05:23 PM

1 Attachment(s)
double post

jacksoncoupage 01-07-2019 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Athos01 (Post 1843393)
Hi guys! My name is Kevin, and I am the owner of the clear sign PSA 9 Johnson Marlboro.

I purchased this card on eBay about 10 years ago, as I've never seen a Marlboro this clear. I have been collecting cards for 30 years now, and have opened tons and tons of '89 Fleer. I am a huge Bill Ripken collector and other errors as well.

It is unfortunate that all of you believe my card is a fake. I know I sent Dylan a small pic years ago of the Marlboro sign on my card, and the pic posted by Hatorade is of my card.

I would be happy to show you the card in person at the 2019 National convention. I have no reason at all to photoshop this card.

As for the questions regarding clarity, the pic was a close-up of Randy, and he was nowhere near the OF bleachers. Additionally, it does not appear to be an extremely bright and sunny day, so the sign itself may have shadows from the sun on the red part at top and the cowboy as well.

Hi Kevin,


I had forgotten the handle/email of who I’d been emailing with at the time and hadn’t heard anything in them in some time or seen another copy or even anyone with info or a pic that wasn’t your copy so figured that it wasn’t a legitimate item. Having looked at the new pic posted, I’m absolutely in the camp that it is a legitimate card and happy to know that it’s (they’re?) out there.

Hoping to see more discussion on this card and ultimately another example or two to look over. Certainly there should exist more than one. At this point, it’s lookihg to be a scarce as the Checklist w/ positions (and perhaps changed at the same time?).

JoeDfan 01-08-2019 09:48 AM

Well darn it
 
Just when I thought I was out...you guys pull me back in!!!!!!!!!!

Now I have to find this version too. Or my collection cannot be complete.

I gotta stop reading these posts!:mad:

Lol.

Sean

Hatorade 01-08-2019 01:45 PM

5 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by bnorth (Post 1841880)
The very slight differences will drive you crazy with these cards. I have started to catalog them several times and never get it done. It was many years ago so my # might be off a little, At one time I had around 18-20 different versions cataloged.

Considering the extremely short period of time they printed them compared to the Ripken. They had to be making changes to it every few days with some done daily.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yastrzemski Sports (Post 1842517)
With the Johnson and Ripken there are several distinct variations made where the original plate was altered. That is clear.
It is important to keep in mind that cards are printed on a printing press - and it is an imperfect process. Sometimes there is too much of one color ink and too little of another. Sometimes there is ink spray. Sometimes a plate moves and the colors are out of register. There may also be human error involved. There may be bleeding, smudging, etc, etc. If you look at 100 examples of the any one card, you can find lighter, darker, blurry, crisp, yellow tint, red tint, and so on.
Johnson had a few different versions - but those are limited to the actual alterations on the plate. The others have to be classified as print defects.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacksoncoupage (Post 1842730)
I have personally seen far more variations in these cards than I had at the point of publishing that article. If you take a decent size sampling of any one of the major “types” I.E. “red box” “green tint” etc etc, you’ll find that there are several variations within each. Real variations where alterations were made to the plate as efforts to obscure the sign. Shape of the bar over the word, box size, and saturation and density of coloring/masking over sign area and on and on. These are NOT the same as color tone differences due to different ink levels and plate alignment. After 16 years of studying thousands of copies of these cards, I am very confident that there exists at least a couple dozen unique versions of this card.

The atypical manner in which Fleer edited the Marlboro sign makes tracking/cataloging these cards a challenge. As Dylan mentioned, the differences in the cards are multi-faceted. Whereas, most errors are straight forward and appear in either of two forms, the error or the corrected version. This is not the case with the Johnson Marlboros. As Adam mentioned, the process used to print these cards will lead to print defects, printing discrepancies and other human errors. After acquiring several cards we discovered several specific items that occur with the cards. We created a database to track not only the differences in the sign area, but also these print features that are common denominators . The print features are not what make the specific cards different, but they are a way to go about highlighting the changes/differences that occurred in the variations.

“The Pube” - This tiny black hair like feature is on every error card I own and I’ve never seen it on any of the final corrected versions. PSA has mislabeled the error and common cards quite frequently and by just noting if this item is in the card they can prevent this from happening.

“The Rectangle” - I’ve discussed this some, but this feature shows up on Green tints, Box with Bubble and Box versions.

“The Squiggle” - This interesting feature looks like an upside down questions mark. Card #639 Davis/Puckett has a variation with three marks that look very similar to this.

“The Grey Stain” - This feature shows up on Green tints and Box with Bubble cards.

“Recurring Print Dots” - There are tons of these recurring print dots.

There are several others, but I’ll dig into all of these more as we go. Being a completist and collecting these cards isn’t a great combination.

jp1216 01-08-2019 02:52 PM

"The Pube" :o is one of the more interesting aspects. Clearly dating the non-corrected or fully corrected version(s). I still think what makes this card so neat is that nobody knew about it for years! It was a VERY early correction by Fleer.
That upper rectangle - is that simply a print offset of the blue border below? Still, very nice find! Here is another close up of the 'Clear' Marlboro.
http://www.billripken.com/bucket/PSA9_Johnson_Clear.jpg

Athos01 01-08-2019 06:22 PM

I have all those checklists with positions from 1989 Fleer too. They are impossible to find. There are 7 checklists in the set, and each checklist only has player positions listed on the front of the card, and not the back.

Athos01 01-08-2019 06:23 PM

Thanks for posting that bigger pic Jon!

Athos01 01-08-2019 06:33 PM

The Johnson Marlboro versions were fixed extremely early in Fleer's print run, certainly way before the FF was caught and the crazy corrections took hold.

I've seen 1989 Fleer with print codes dating back to mid-November 1988. My guess is the clear Johnson was corrected at least partially within a day of the first official print run. I too am curious as to why another "clear" version has not shown up yet. This card is far scarcer than the 1990 Topps Thomas NNOF, and that card is always in the news.

The Treadway target was not an early error contrary to popular opinion. This card along with the checklists with positions were random short-run "errors" and were not early errors that Fleer corrected.

Hatorade 01-08-2019 07:57 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Thanks for sharing the image of the clear version Kevin. That is a truly special card. Would you mind sharing how many of the Johnson errors you own? Have you come across any of the blue versions? They seem to be the 2nd rarest of the error variations. I’ve attached an image of Ben’s blue card he shared earlier.

Hatorade 01-08-2019 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jp1216 (Post 1843682)
"The Pube" :o is one of the more interesting aspects. Clearly dating the non-corrected or fully corrected version(s). I still think what makes this card so neat is that nobody knew about it for years! It was a VERY early correction by Fleer.
That upper rectangle - is that simply a print offset of the blue border below? Still, very nice find! Here is another close up of the 'Clear' Marlboro.
http://www.billripken.com/bucket/PSA9_Johnson_Clear.jpg

I really appreciate your feedback Jon. The blue line does appear to be at the same exact angle and width as the rectangle. I’m not very familiar with many of the intricacies of the printing process. Would just the portion that Andy circled show up with the offset and not the entire blue line? It looks like there is almost an area of white over spray surrounding the rectangle.

bnorth 01-09-2019 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatorade (Post 1843785)
Thanks for sharing the image of the clear version Kevin. That is a truly special card. Would you mind sharing how many of the Johnson errors you own? Have you come across any of the blue versions? They seem to be the 2nd rarest of the error variations. I’ve attached an image of Ben’s blue card he shared earlier.

I got that blue card from COMC and am sure it was altered to be blue instead of green. It also has a very heavy layer of gloss on it compared to a normal 89 Fleer card.

Hatorade 01-09-2019 08:51 PM

5 Attachment(s)
I’ve seen 5 of the blues since I’ve been collecting the errors. Ben’s copy, 2 PSA 9’s I bought a few years ago(both pictured with a 2nd zoomed image of each), another card on Ebay that I missed around the same time that I purchased the 9’s and the 5th is a card I saw back in 2014 that I saw as a completed sale(also attached). They all seem legit. These versions are the easiest to read the letters in Marlboro that I’ve seen outside of Kevin’s clear card. The way that they are tinted doesn’t really fall in line with all the other versions though.

Athos01 01-10-2019 06:49 PM

Hey guys. I don't know exactly how many Johnson Marlboro-type errors I have, probably about 100 or so.

I only have the one "clear" sign version.

A version that doesn't get a lot of pub has a mid-level greenish filter placed over the entire sign. None of the words "Marlboro" nor the cowboy are obscured. There is just what looks like a green filter over the ad. Very, very tough version. It looks similar to the blue version shown above.

While I am sure the Ripken '89 Fleers have been faked from time to time, there are FF reprints, white scribble reprints, and white out fakes; however, I am pretty convinced that there are very few, if any, fake Randy Johnson Marlboro cards. This is not a card that people are getting rich off of.

bnorth 01-10-2019 08:42 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Pretty sure this is the green version used to make the blue cards. Sorry for the bad picture, when I find my blue card and one of my green versions I will update with a much better scan. I pulled these off the web.

As far as the comment about why would someone fake/alter a cheap card. Because scammers will do almost anything to make even $.25 on a card. Just look at the guy that this forum exposed switching out T206 cards in those newer Topps holders. Scammers actually love people that think no one fakes cheap cards.

Hatorade 01-29-2019 09:12 AM

2 Attachment(s)
Attachment 342557I finished up scanning all the Marlboro errors we have.We have 1120 cards, 310 PSA graded and 92 graded by BGS. I’ll be posting them all to My Flickr page soon so that anyone can view them and compare them to their own variations. Unfortunately the graded cards don’t scan real well. I still have to go through and crop all the images down to a size that works better to view on Flickr before I post them as well. I came across this little beauty towards the end of the scanning process. It looks very similar to some of the box versions,but the color is very different. It appears to me to be a dark blue version. You can’t really tell from the image, but with some decent light you can read the Marlboro lettering pretty well. There’s a pretty big jump from the other blue cards I’ve seen to this version. Does anyone have any blue cards that they could share an image of?

bnorth 01-29-2019 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatorade (Post 1850036)
Attachment 342557I finished up scanning all the Marlboro errors we have.We have 1120 cards, 310 PSA graded and 92 graded by BGS. I’ll be posting them all to My Flickr page soon so that anyone can view them and compare them to their own variations. Unfortunately the graded cards don’t scan real well. I still have to go through and crop all the images down to a size that works better to view on Flickr before I post them as well. I came across this little beauty towards the end of the scanning process. It looks very similar to some of the box versions,but the color is very different. It appears to me to be a dark blue version. You can’t really tell from the image, but with some decent light you can read the Marlboro lettering pretty well. There’s a pretty big jump from the other blue cards I’ve seen to this version. Does anyone have any blue cards that they could share an image of?

That is a very cool card. 1120 WOW, I guess I don't have as bad of a hoarding problem as I thought.:D

steve5838 03-04-2020 01:06 PM

Randy Johnson Marlboro Clearest Version
 
3 Attachment(s)
Hi. My name is Steve and I have been collecting 1989 Fleer Randy Johnson Marlboro cards for the last couple years. I'm a big fan of the card and keep an eye out, in particular, for graded ones with the clearer versions of the Marlboro sign. Thanks to many of the people posting on this and other boards I was able to view pictures of the various versions along the way including what appeared to be the only known instance of the "clearest version" (as noted in the above thread the card is owned by Kevin and graded a PSA 9). I always hoped to see the card in person and wondered whether more of these "clearest version" cards were out there. Anyway, last week I was lucky enough to stumble upon another "clearest version" card on eBay under the listing title "1989 Fleer RANDY JOHNSON PSA 9 Rookie RC See Pics - CLEAREST MARLBORO SIGN EVER!". As I reviewed the listing over breakfast something about the card kept nagging at me even beyond the clarity of the Marlboro sign. I came back to this board and compared the card in the listing to the clearest version owned by Kevin. The sign clarity in the two cards looked pretty similar (at least to my eyes) AND SO DID THE PSA CERT NUMBER. To my shock the PSA cert on this card (15790561) was just one number off the cert on Kevin's card (15790562). I looked the two cards up on the PSA site. Both cards are in the PSA database but unfortunately no documented previous sales of either card are listed. My guess is that the two cards were graded in the same batch and whoever originally submitted Kevin's card for grading also submitted this one. Beyond this I don't know anything about the card's origin (beyond the listing description that "Hello, I am new to eBay and I’m selling my dad’s stuff"). In any case, I knew I would kick myself later if this fell through by waiting for a counter offer to come back so I checked out with "Buy It Now". The card arrived today and I'm super excited about it. I'm attaching some pictures. I don't post much but figured that this new sliver of information could be interesting to a very small group of others and may add a new layer to the ongoing story surrounding this card. In case you're interested, you can probably still view the original listing on eBay by searching recently sold items too. Steve

steve5838 03-04-2020 02:21 PM

Video Clip
 
I made a quick video showing the card from different angles and posted it on YouTube at https://youtu.be/k7AGFtb0DVo
I apologize in advance that the video goes in and out of focus a bit but it was the best I could do with my phone. Interestingly there is no red squiggle on my card but the pube is there. I don't really understand the printing process but maybe the red squiggle originated with the initial/partial red overlay added on part of the Marlboro lettering? Of course I'm really not sure but wanted to put this out there in case anyone else was interested. Steve

bnorth 03-05-2020 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve5838 (Post 1959699)
Hi. My name is Steve and I have been collecting 1989 Fleer Randy Johnson Marlboro cards for the last couple years. I'm a big fan of the card and keep an eye out, in particular, for graded ones with the clearer versions of the Marlboro sign. Thanks to many of the people posting on this and other boards I was able to view pictures of the various versions along the way including what appeared to be the only known instance of the "clearest version" (as noted in the above thread the card is owned by Kevin and graded a PSA 9). I always hoped to see the card in person and wondered whether more of these "clearest version" cards were out there. Anyway, last week I was lucky enough to stumble upon another "clearest version" card on eBay under the listing title "1989 Fleer RANDY JOHNSON PSA 9 Rookie RC See Pics - CLEAREST MARLBORO SIGN EVER!". As I reviewed the listing over breakfast something about the card kept nagging at me even beyond the clarity of the Marlboro sign. I came back to this board and compared the card in the listing to the clearest version owned by Kevin. The sign clarity in the two cards looked pretty similar (at least to my eyes) AND SO DID THE PSA CERT NUMBER. To my shock the PSA cert on this card (15790561) was just one number off the cert on Kevin's card (15790562). I looked the two cards up on the PSA site. Both cards are in the PSA database but unfortunately no documented previous sales of either card are listed. My guess is that the two cards were graded in the same batch and whoever originally submitted Kevin's card for grading also submitted this one. Beyond this I don't know anything about the card's origin (beyond the listing description that "Hello, I am new to eBay and I’m selling my dad’s stuff"). In any case, I knew I would kick myself later if this fell through by waiting for a counter offer to come back so I checked out with "Buy It Now". The card arrived today and I'm super excited about it. I'm attaching some pictures. I don't post much but figured that this new sliver of information could be interesting to a very small group of others and may add a new layer to the ongoing story surrounding this card. In case you're interested, you can probably still view the original listing on eBay by searching recently sold items too. Steve

Congrats, awesome pick up. I got a email about this card last night and then see it posted on here.:)

steve5838 03-05-2020 08:51 AM

Thanks, Ben. I appreciate it. I'm usually not this lucky and still can't believe it. The whole thing has me feeling like a little kid at Christmas. Silly but true. :)

JoeDfan 03-05-2020 09:40 AM

WOW. That is awesome!

mrdbrooks77 03-06-2020 11:20 AM

That is amazing

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

steve5838 03-06-2020 11:43 AM

More pictures
 
1 Attachment(s)
Thanks! Someone on another site asked me to post more close up pictures of the card. I don't have a scanner but here are some more I took with my phone. The scratches near the lower right hand corner are on the case and not the card. Hopefully uploading doesn't compress the quality too much. Steve

lowpopper 03-06-2020 11:31 PM

Will you have this card at the National in AC? I want to see it in person.

steve5838 03-08-2020 06:16 AM

Greg: I wasn't planning to attend the National this year. Honestly I haven't been to a card show since the late 80's so haven't really given it much thought. So the not-so-short answer is I'm not sure but probably not.

lowpopper 03-08-2020 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve5838 (Post 1960521)
Greg: I wasn't planning to attend the National this year. Honestly I haven't been to a card show since the late 80's so haven't really given it much thought. So the not-so-short answer is I'm not sure but probably not.


Think about it. I'm interested in seeing this
card and of course...possibly buying it.

:cool::cool::cool:

jacksoncoupage 05-11-2020 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Athos01 (Post 1844262)

A version that doesn't get a lot of pub has a mid-level greenish filter placed over the entire sign. None of the words "Marlboro" nor the cowboy are obscured. There is just what looks like a green filter over the ad. Very, very tough version. It looks similar to the blue version shown above.

I have recently updated the blog post I did on these back in 2009-10 and have been thinking a bit about which versions appear to have dried up or what I haven't seen much of. This is a very good example. I must have sold 3-4 in lots over the last ten years but I can't really recall seeing a copy for sale over the last few years. Of course, this now makes me want a copy!

Another thing I have noticed as a regular buyer of low-priced "box" versions, is that there appears to be a blacked out sign version where the sign does not run straight across to Randy's head, instead, it has the telltale gap of a coverup/edited version. The first copy I owned was picked up around 2008-2010 at some point and while I noted it, didn't give it any special consideration. I've probably picked up 50+ box versions (not to mention the 100s scrutinized online) in the years since and have only found two others. I've studied the copies and magnified the area and can't see any red, green or box outline to them. For now, I consider this to be the lone "rare" version among the box-out types. Perhaps someone(s) here with a large sample size could check through theirs?

Hatorade 05-13-2020 09:15 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by jacksoncoupage (Post 1979693)
Another thing I have noticed as a regular buyer of low-priced "box" versions, is that there appears to be a blacked out sign version where the sign does not run straight across to Randy's head, instead, it has the telltale gap of a coverup/edited version. The first copy I owned was picked up around 2008-2010 at some point and while I noted it, didn't give it any special consideration. I've probably picked up 50+ box versions (not to mention the 100s scrutinized online) in the years since and have only found two others. I've studied the copies and magnified the area and can't see any red, green or box outline to them. For now, I consider this to be the lone "rare" version among the box-out types. Perhaps someone(s) here with a large sample size could check through theirs?

From your description it sounds to me like a very dark version of the “black box” card from your site. I went through my scans and posted the one image I found that matches up. There were several others that were very dark, but I could still make out the ad area slightly on them. It’s interesting because the majority of error variations fall into a box category (green, red, black) but the darkest of the black box versions are actually a rare card to track down. Is the card I posted similar to the card you are referencing?

jacksoncoupage 05-14-2020 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatorade (Post 1980530)
From your description it sounds to me like a very dark version of the “black box” card from your site. I went through my scans and posted the one image I found that matches up. There were several others that were very dark, but I could still make out the ad area slightly on them. It’s interesting because the majority of error variations fall into a box category (green, red, black) but the darkest of the black box versions are actually a rare card to track down. Is the card I posted similar to the card you are referencing?

Yes, very similar/maybe the same. I held my current copy under a number of light sources and tilts and couldn’t make out a defined box but I’d bet it is what you’re describing. Either way, seems the harder of the “box” types to locate.

Statfreak101 05-21-2020 03:52 PM

https://ibb.co/Z1NQDfk

https://ibb.co/8dv0HMP

https://ibb.co/zXY7BFn

Any chance you guys are referring to the card shown in the pics? If so, I have come across a few of those in my pursuit of Johnson variation cards from 1989 Fleer.

jacksoncoupage 05-21-2020 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Statfreak101 (Post 1982935)
https://ibb.co/Z1NQDfk

https://ibb.co/8dv0HMP

https://ibb.co/zXY7BFn

Any chance you guys are referring to the card shown in the pics? If so, I have come across a few of those in my pursuit of Johnson variation cards from 1989 Fleer.

No, those are the “common” box versions. The one I brought up a few posts back does not have a discernible rectangle around the sign.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:41 PM.