Trading Card Database Photoshopping Shenanigans

[BaltOrioles]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

There are three of each. First printing with the copyright inside of Tony the Tiger's scarf with Palmer error .649 pct and Flanagan error 57 strikeouts. Second printing with the copyright to the right of Tony the Tiger and both cards corrected to Palmer .650 pct and Flanagan 56 strikeouts BUT no copyright next to Orioles team emblem. Third printing is identical to second printing but has copyright next to Orioles team logo. Let me know which ones you have and which ones you need and I will see if I have doubles.

Thanks Cliff. I have all three Jim Palmers, but need the 1st and 2nd printing of the Mike Flanagan. I have the 56 strikeouts with the copyright next to the Orioles logo.

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by BaltOrioles

Thanks Cliff. I have all three Jim Palmers, but need the 1st and 2nd printing of the Mike Flanagan. I have the 56 strikeouts with the copyright next to the Orioles logo.

I'll see what I can find.

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by BaltOrioles

Thanks Cliff. I have all three Jim Palmers, but need the 1st and 2nd printing of the Mike Flanagan. I have the 56 strikeouts with the copyright next to the Orioles logo.

I found six 2nd printing extra 1979 Kellogg’s Mike Flanagan cards but no extra 1st printings. Some first prints are next to impossible to find. ETA: Here is a scan of the first printing 1979 Kellogg's Mike Flanagan, it's the only one I have and it's still in the unopened pack.

[Cliff Bowman]

Update, the Trading Card Database deleted the scans for the bogus 1975 Hostess Burt Hooton and bogus 1979 Kellogg's Carl Yastrzemski, and also the incorrect scans for the 1966 Topps Bob Heffner Purple Trees and the 1979 Kellogg's Ron Guidry and are letting me send the correct scans. Getting them to add the 1966 Topps Bob Heffner Pink Trees variation and include the variations for the two Pirates in the 1971 OPC set and eliminate the 1979 Kellogg's second print 33 triples error variation will be the next step.

[swarmee]

Are they going to ban the original submitter of those images? ;-)

[JollyElm]

I always include the 'lens flare' (my term) card to the purple tree variation grouping. Is this what you mean by the pink trees version, or is it something else?

1966heffner432purpletree.jpg

I have a couple of them.

[Cliff Bowman]

Yes, the one on the left is the Purple Trees and the one on the right is the Pink Trees. I would have never tried to get these listed as bona fide variations but they already had a Purple Trees variation listed and the scan that someone sent in for it was just a normal 1966 Bob Heffner card.

[Cliff Bowman]

Here are the two 1971 OPC variations for anyone not familiar with them, they are the only OPC variations that I am aware of other than that 1969 card with the very subtle line shift on the back that was discovered here recently.

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

Yes, the one on the left is the Purple Trees and the one on the right is the Pink Trees. I would have never tried to get these listed as bona fide variations but they already had a Purple Trees variation listed and the scan that someone sent in for it was just a normal 1966 Bob Heffner card.

I have one of my 'lens flare' cards off in Bobby's group sub. I'm assuming it will get a PD qualifier, but I digress. Whereas the 'purple tree' version features the foliage itself colored wrongly, the pink version has extraneous white areas involved there too. I guess that's what really differentiates it. It's almost like there was a weird explosion of ink happening. To me, the 'problem' with calling it pink, is that arguments will start over whether or not the purple (in a particular card) is light enough to qualify as the pink version. Just my personal preference, I guess. Ha ha.