Show...me...your print variations!

[Sliphorn]

I noticed that the red "CHECKLIST" in the left version is closer to the black border. It is not much, but was just enough to catch my eye.

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by Sliphorn

I noticed that the red "CHECKLIST" in the left version is closer to the black border. It is not much, but was just enough to catch my eye.

Good catch .....many of the checklists from 61 through the early 70s have some sort of minor variance such as this due to most of them being produced separately for two series of cards from each set. The copy on the left appears to be the one that appeared on the 2nd series sheet, while the other copy appeared on the 1st series sheet.

https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball-c...a/7135-81674.s

[JollyElm]

With the 1964 #102 Checklist, the easiest way to immediately see the different versions is to look at the player's mitt near his wrist. As you can see in Sliphorn's pics, one has a fully brown mitt and the other has a strip of the brown missing there. There seems to be an equal number of each version out there, so it definitely fits in with the 'printed in different series' scenario...or they were possibly both printed at the same time on the same sheet in the same series.

[Sliphorn]

Good eyes picking up the mitt colors. That is what I like with the group being able to spot things I missed. I also see these as being orange and not red. Am I color blind?

[ALR-bishop]

Thomas---can not remember if it was here or somewhere else that is was pointed out that this card has a recurring red dot defect on the back in the number. My red dot version seems to have more spacing on the front. Do you know if those differences coincide ?

[Sliphorn]

I'll check on the coincidence. I went to COMC and it appeared that they do NOT have specific issues. Good question.

[ALR-bishop]

My card with the red dot in the number on the back has the missing brown in the mitt on the front pointed out by Darren, and the defective IES in Series on the front pointed out by Steve, and the brighter orange border on the back pointed out by Thomas. Are these differences always consistent such there are just 2 versions ?

[shoeheart]

I love the unique proof variations ... cards printed prior to production and never made it further. Some are very obvious (like the 1977 Reggie), others not so much.

[shoeheart]

trying to list a few Cubs cards ....

[shoeheart]

Not sure if I'd call these proofs, variations, or prototypes. Obtained about 10yrs ago from Topps Vault ... these cards have fully-printed backs.

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by shoeheart

trying to list a few Cubs cards ....

I didn't know the Sizemore existed, the Cubs traded him to the Red Sox in August 1979 so I'm surprised the 1980 proof still had him as Cub. What is the difference on the 1980 Cubs Future Stars cards? I have compared them to the issued card and can't find a difference.

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

I didn't know the Sizemore existed, the Cubs traded him to the Red Sox in August 1979 so I'm surprised the 1980 proof still had him as Cub. What is the difference on the 1980 Cubs Future Stars cards? I have compared them to the issued card and can't find a difference.

The Sizemore card is a pretty neat card.....on the FS card, it looks like there are some cropping differences on the images for first two players pictured. The color of the "Cubs" in the banner is different also, but that might be because the card is a proof?

[Sliphorn]

I always assumed the 1949 Bowman set used 36-card sheets. These overprint examples are farther apart numerically than 36 by a long shot. Feller is #27 while the overprint is #99 Gustine. Kooks is #31 while the overprint is #103 Tipton. The difference between the two is 72 in both cases, likely two sheets? A mystery.

BTW, the card that is partially into the Kokos #31 is #32 Eddie Yost. Apparently the red commercial at the bottom got changed before too far along.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Sliphorn

I noticed that the red "CHECKLIST" in the left version is closer to the black border. It is not much, but was just enough to catch my eye.

I think the red is just printed low.

But the bottom of "ies" in series is different, so still a different card.

[Sliphorn]

How is "its" different? I am not seeing it. I assume you mean on the back with the World Series highlights? Thanks.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Sliphorn

How is "its" different? I am not seeing it. I assume you mean on the back with the World Series highlights? Thanks.

On the front, in the word series.

The ies on the left is missing an arc from the bottom of the letters. The one on the right is normal.