Iconic card you Want but you don't like the set/image.

[campyfan39]

It is fascinating the way different people view things. 56 Mantle is in my all time top 5 favorite and maybe #1.

Originally Posted by ValKehl

I think the 1956 Topps Mantle is the ugliest of all the regular-issue Bowman and Topps cards of Mantle. This said, I still have this 1956 Topps Mantle card that I pulled from a pack when I was a kid! But, I'll happily trade it for a pre-War cards I want.

1955 may have been the year my folks got our first (b&w) TV set. Perhaps this is why I have always liked the 1955 Bowmans. Bowman cards weren't available where I bought my cards as a kid, but I was able to get some from my buddies via trades. IMHO, the 1955 Bowman Mantle is a much nicer looking card!
Val

[JollyElm]

To me, there's a bit of a weighted balancing act in play with regard to the '56 Mantle card. I, personally, think he looks quite creepy in the headshot. Yowza. But that background is one of the greatest in-action images in the history of baseball cards. So it's easy to give less weight to his face and a helluva lot more weight to him catching that ball in the stands to deem it a beautiful card overall.

[SAllen2556]

About 4 years ago I bought a starter set of about 350 '69 Topps. I loved the photography of the cards especially compared to my sets from the 70's. It seemed like a great set to put together because the high numbers weren't expensive. But what I didn't realize was that were a ton of just ugly, strange cards that year. The Houston cards and all the other black-hatted / no hatted cards made for a pretty disappointing set to collect the entire thing. I wish I had just collected the hall of famers. The Bench card is still one of my favorites.

s-l400.jpg

[Rookiemonster]

I wonder if they would have made a 1955 topps mantle if it would have had that
Face shot. As I know that the 1955 -56 share the head shot image. We could have had two years of that mug !!!! Aaaaahhhhhh shucks

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by campyfan39

It is fascinating the way different people view things. 56 Mantle is in my all time top 5 favorite and maybe #1.

Have to agree with you. The '56 Mantle is an iconic card and one of his best looking issues, period. His face looks weird how? He's smiling, and that's what Mick looked like when he smiled, you can see it in film too from that period. That is also one sweet catch he's reaching out to make in the action shot. '56 Topps is generally considered one of the best looking sets of all time - and the Mantle is one of the best looking cards in it.

[ALR-bishop]

A little like Jack Nicholson's smile in The Shining

[jchcollins]

Here's a card from a set that most people like, but I've seen more than a few complaints about the image: the 1965 Topps Ernie Banks. Most cards from the set are either posed batting shots or normal portraits. But Ernie for some reason seems to be a super close profile shot. I've seen people say it's cropped too close. I've always loved the card and don't really care, but this could meet the requirement for an "iconic set" but a bad image...

[Gr8Beldini]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Here's a card from a set that most people like, but I've seen more than a few complaints about the image: the 1965 Topps Ernie Banks. Most cards from the set are either posed batting shots or normal portraits. But Ernie for some reason seems to be a super close profile shot. I've seen people say it's cropped too close. I've always loved the card and don't really care, but this could meet the requirement for an "iconic set" but a bad image...

I think they took a bunch of profile shots for the awful Embossed insert set. Topps didn't have a better picture of Ernie than this? I equally hate the 1970/72 Dick Allen cards.