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

Originally Posted by JollyElm

Are you certain the black is legitimately under the green text?? With the relative 'slickness' of the green ink as compared to the super absorbency of the dull, non-coated cardboard, it seems likely the card was written on by a kid with a magic marker and it isn't some bizarre printing variation. That would account for the black marker being murky on top of the green words. Occam's razor and all that. Plus, there was no black ink (black plate) involved in the printing of 1975 Topps backs.

I did a test on a 75 common card with a black marker, the ink covered the letters.Also when you look at the Gibson card at different angles under a bright light with a 10x jewelers loupe the mark is behind the green letters

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by rgpete

I did a test on a 75 common card with a black marker, the ink covered the letters.Also when you look at the Gibson card at different angles under a bright light with a 10x jewelers loupe the mark is behind the green letters

I have found that a 1200dpi or better scan works much better than a small 10X loupe. Also compare the black ink on the back of your card to the black ink on the front of another 75 Gibson card under a cfl, halogen, and black light to make sure the ink reacts the same under those 3 different light sources. Some swear by only black lights, I find them to be the least useful unless the card was altered by a modern marker/ink.

2 more scans

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by rgpete

2 more scans

Scan quality is greatly reduced when posting. Do you have a cfl bulb in a dark room? If so go in there and hold the front of the card right by the bulb and tilt it back and forth and notice how the black is still a nice dark black. Now do the same with the black on the back. The blacks front/back should look EXACTLY the same when doing this. Most black markers will look more greyish than dark black when you do this.

last one

[steve B]

Tough call on that one.

The black on the back would seem to be from a marker for sure. Not a printed mark.

Where it gets tough is deciding whether the green is actually over the marker. If the marker has water based ink it might be repelled by the oil based printers ink. An oil based marker would cover the oil based ink.

The second set of scans really looks like it shows some black visible under the green. What a very close look would show is if the black appears to be under because it's filling in small holes in the green.


This is the sort of thing I'd file under "cool but hard to prove" could a Topps employee have scribbled on the cardboard with a marker and that cardboard got printed on? Yes, Topps was pretty lax back then. Even into the early90's.
I have a couple cards that were marked by crayon that I got from packs. I know they're for real, but if it wasn't a glossy card with the gloss printed over the crayon It would be impossible to prove.
Another would be the two halves of a hockey card that came out of the pack torn in half. Saw it pulled, but it's impossible to prove other than that it has no other wrinkles and is cut nice and clean. I've tried duplicating it, but can't. Still a very tough thing to explain.


Steve B

[ALR-bishop]

If you do take Ben up on his suggestion, do not let anyone see you doing it or you may be asked to take some psychological tests

[ALR-bishop]

Somewhere here there is a thread with the same issue involving a different card. If I can remember the card I will try to find the thread

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Somewhere here there is a thread with the same issue involving a different card. If I can remember the card I will try to find the thread

I believe you are thinking of the 1961 Topps Clay Dalrymple, someone here had one with the Phillies hat colored in with a black marker, but that person was convinced that it was a legitimate variation and that it was printed that way on the sheet.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

I believe you are thinking of the 1961 Topps Clay Dalrymple, someone here had one with the Phillies hat colored in with a black marker, but that person was convinced that it was a legitimate variation and that it was printed that way on the sheet.

Yes Cliff that is my card. I have looked at it under every type of light imaginable. With a top lighted 100X microscope and the black ink on his hat matches the black ink in the rest of the card exactly.

EDITED to add I even soaked the card for 4 hours and tried to remove some of the black on his hat with a q-tip with no luck.

Burden of proof 2 more scans of black spots. They can be seen on the previous scan