1967 minnie rojas variations

[steve B]

Cards like this are a bit of a puzzle.

Pretty much all Topps cards have differences in color for a variety of reasons.

Over/underinked on one or more colors is certainly one of the first things I think of.
As is a slight misregistration. If magenta and cyan are supposed to overlap to make purple and are a tiny bit off, the purple looks more reddish purple.

it can also look reddish purple if the Magenta is overinked.

The plate can be overexposed or overdeveloped, making the dots larger (Very slightly, but it affects the perceived color)

The ink can be mixed differently. This happens less the more they go with a strict CMYK. 70's cards can have different mixes, I don't think the current stuff can.
Different shadings of the cardstock surface can affect color.
As can the slight glosscoat if it darkens with age.

Then there's a whole group of cards I haven't figured out yet.

If there's a misfeed, the blanket can get two impressions. Differing pressure somewhere can make these be slightly off. Mimicking overinking. It can also happen during adjustment of the registration. Some dark blue cards show clear doubling of the dots like I'd expect when this happens.

The problem is that doubling of that sort is not common. Misfeeds don't happen all that regularly, and adjustment is only a few sheets. Even going with a high speed web press adjustment cards would only be a tiny portion of production.

But these darker doubled cards are actually really common, usually around a 50/50 mix or close to it.

I think it's possible for the plate to get a bit of double exposure if it's moved slightly.
Or maybe by something in the screening process?
Or.........?????????


So are they misprints? Print errors? Simple variants caused by the adjustments of whoever was running the press that day?

And if a card is 50/50 dark and light, is it because they did multiple runs? If for instance they print a full run of cards for the preorders, then make new plates and do a run to cover later additional orders, and one was inked more heavily than the other for the entire run. How to classify that?

A prime example from new stuff is the new GQ and A+G usually have two different cardstocks. One is white. The other slightly off white. Some cards maybe all Come both ways. And have for a few years. Once I started paying attention, I tried to find a pattern. Were either from a particular product? No, I found both in both hobby and retail, and in "wax" blaster boxes, and jumbo packs. So I started looking as I opened packs figuring it was early and late print runs. Nope! Both could be found in the same pack.

My current idea is that it's related to shortprints and whether the unusual ones were printed alongside the shortprints. Which would make them shortprints as well. I suspect a bit of sorting will prove that wrong too.

Whatever they're called if someone collects and studies them that's ok. I sort of do, but don't really put any premium on it. If I spot one in a boxful I'm buying from I might buy one of each, or just whichever one seems odd at the moment. I don't think they're an appropriate addition to a formal master set. If someone wants nothing to do with it I totally get that. Why have 2-3 or more complete sets with some slight common difference? That would take up a LOT of space.

Steve B