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

[4reals]

1972 Topps Young Willie Stargell #343
Copyright symbol missing along with partial T.C.G. missing.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[butchie_t]

Did a quick check. Pop’s is gonna be a bit of a hard find.

[4reals]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[4reals]

1972 Topps Al Oliver #575





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[4reals]

1963 Topps Don Leppert #243. Vertical magenta line at right border. Somr have it, some don’t.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[4reals]

Every 1963 Tony Stallard #419 has a red square in the upper left corner. At least every one that I’ve seen. If one without exists and you own it I would go out on a limb and say it’s scarce.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[4reals]

1964 Topps #16 John Boozer “snot rocket” variant




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[butchie_t]

Hahaha, looks like he is blowing a booger bubble.

[ALR-bishop]

Couple of follow ups to prior posts

[Elberson]

Ok, sorting my 1965 Topps and found an over inked 431 cardinals RC.

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by Elberson

Ok, sorting my 1965 Topps and found an over inked 431 cardinals RC.

The few I have seen over the years on eBay were much more severe where the black ink completely covered Briles’ name, I think yours would be a transitional error. Unfortunately I was never able to pick one up, Al probably has one. ETA: found this scan from WorthPoint.

[Lucas00]

'61 Post Red.

Extreme difference in quality and color with this card. No premium for either.

You can get a perfect registration Blue bgrnd.

Or a gray slightly out of focus one.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Lucas00

'61 Post Red.

Extreme difference in quality and color with this card. No premium for either.

You can get a perfect registration Blue bgrnd.

Or a gray slightly out of focus one.

I've given up on them all, but most 1961 Posts can be found with this like with widely varying color differences in the images that seem to relate to different productions and not just differing levels of ink at the moment a particular sheet was ran.

[JollyElm]

I'm assuming it's already known, but besides the color difference, I noticed there is also a big cropping difference between those two 1961 Post cards. Most notably the amount of hand appearing below his chin...

1961postschoendienst.jpg

[Kenmarks]

The two Red Schoendienst cards look different because they came from two different cereal panels. The top card came from a 12 oz Post Toasties panel and the bottom one came from a 14 oz Raisin Bran panel. It is common (in fact a certainty) that a player's cards coming from different box panels will have differences. Could be color. Could be picture cropping (look at the difference in the Schoendienst hand at the bottom of these two cards and you certainly see more of his hand in the lower card). Adhesive marking (or lack of) on the back of the card is another clue for some of the players.

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by Kenmarks

The two Red Schoendienst cards look different because they came from two different cereal panels. The top card came from a 12 oz Post Toasties panel and the bottom one came from a 14 oz Raisin Bran panel. It is common (in fact a certainty) that a player's cards coming from different box panels will have differences. Could be color. Could be picture cropping (look at the difference in the Schoendienst hand at the bottom of these two cards and you certainly see more of his hand in the lower card). Adhesive marking (or lack of) on the back of the card is another clue for some of the players.

Um...you do realize you referred to the exact same thing I did (with pictures) in the very post before yours (and 48 minutes earlier), right?????

[whiteymet]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

Um...you do realize you referred to the exact same thing I did (with pictures) in the very post before yours (and 48 minutes earlier), right?????

Sorry, I don't see where you referenced the cards came from two different cereals as Ken did, nor did you ID the cereal "flavors", or the adhesive markings that he noted.

Thus I don't think you can say quote "you do realize you referred to the EXACT same thing I did" Rather he EXPANDED on the differences. And noted one thing of many in his post that mentioned the same cropping difference as you did

I thought NET 54 was there for information/learning etc. not who is first with information.

[Lucas00]

Wow, thanks for the comments, I had no idea. I figured the contrast was so stark this had to be noticed by people before. Are other players cards this obviously discernible? I guess because both are meant to be just as they are neither can be a variation. Hence why I've never heard of post cereal variations.

[Sliphorn]

I just saw that my card had the yellow line at the top so I bought the other one as a contrast. These are very common in both versions. A look on eBay shows that about 90% do not have the line and 10% DO have the line. The "ear ring" appears to show up on the lined versions.

[Kenmarks]

Originally Posted by Lucas00

Wow, thanks for the comments, I had no idea. I figured the contrast was so stark this had to be noticed by people before. Are other players cards this obviously discernible? I guess because both are meant to be just as they are neither can be a variation. Hence why I've never heard of post cereal variations.

All players who made appearances on multiple panels have multiple card variations ... one unique variation for each of the appearances. Now some are easier to spot than others. But the differences are there. Color is not the best way to determine variations because during production, colors can change a bit. Amount of ink. Different print runs. Stuff like that. But it is an indicator. Picture cropping is the best and most certain determinate. As I said, whether a not a card has packaging adhesive marking on the back is a clue. Also differences in the narrative occur occasionally with one box having a word or two different from another for a player.

There are a handful of advanced Post Cereal collectors who go after a Master Set for each of the Post Cereal card promotions. A Master Set is a card for every cereal box panel a player made an appearance on. It is challenging but there are reference book out there written by Dan Mabey that help and let one know the universe of a master set in terms of how many variations each Baseball player has out there in each of the sets (I wrote a similiar book on the 1962 Post Cereal Football Promotion).

Collecting Post master sets is so much more challenging and fulfilling than going after other sets. Rather than a basic Post set of 200 cards, one is looking for many more cards. For example in the 1962 Post master set there is something like 550 cards. And all variations are not printed equally in terms of quantity. The popular cereal aimed at kids (Sugar Crisp, Alpha-Bits) have cards that are very common. Large boxes because families were cost conscious are also very common compared to smaller boxes of the same cereal. At the other end of the scale, adult focus cereal are less available. And if a player came on a small Grape-Nuts box ... good luck. So very tough.

Price guides have never recognized many variation. Mostly on narrative differences due to a player being on two different boxes.

Did I put you to sleep?

[whiteymet]

Originally Posted by Kenmarks

All players who made appearances on multiple panels have multiple card variations ... one unique variation for each of the appearances. Now some are easier to spot than others. But the differences are there. Color is not the best way to determine variations because during production, colors can change a bit. Amount of ink. Different print runs. Stuff like that. But it is an indicator. Picture cropping is the best and most certain determinate. As I said, whether a not a card has packaging adhesive marking on the back is a clue. Also differences in the narrative occur occasionally with one box having a word or two different from another for a player.

There are a handful of advanced Post Cereal collectors who go after a Master Set for each of the Post Cereal card promotions. A Master Set is a card for every cereal box panel a player made an appearance on. It is challenging but there are reference book out there written by Dan Mabey that help and let one know the universe of a master set in terms of how many variations each Baseball player has out there in each of the sets (I wrote a similiar book on the 1962 Post Cereal Football Promotion).

Collecting Post master sets is so much more challenging and fulfilling than going after other sets. Rather than a basic Post set of 200 cards, one is looking for many more cards. For example in the 1962 Post master set there is something like 550 cards. And all variations are not printed equally in terms of quantity. The popular cereal aimed at kids (Sugar Crisp, Alpha-Bits) have cards that are very common. Large boxes because families were cost conscious are also very common compared to smaller boxes of the same cereal. At the other end of the scale, adult focus cereal are less available. And if a player came on a small Grape-Nuts box ... good luck. So very tough.

Price guides have never recognized many variation. Mostly on narrative differences due to a player being on two different boxes.

Did I put you to sleep?

Ken is one of the most knowledgeable experts on all things Post cereal as well as 1962 and 1963 Jello cards. Anything he says you can take to the bank!

[4reals]

1968 Topps Vern Fuller #71. Yellow streak on hat.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[4reals]

1968 Topps Glenn Beckert #101 partial right black border missing.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GeoPoto]

Mr. Elm, sir, you need to put down the coffee cup, get off the ledge, and find a cool spot to sit in. Yes, he appeared to elaborate on without acknowledging your earlier post. Might be a misdemeanor, but definitely not a felony. You also get credit for the images. But you need to drop the matter now. It's not the hill to die on.

Sent from my motorola edge 5G UW (2021) using Tapatalk

[steve B]

I type pretty slowly. And while I'm typing I cant see if another response comes in that's similar.
When stuff like this happens, and it does occasionally, I just figure the other guy either started earlier or types faster.

[4reals]

Can I just say I love all of you. Mainly because we all share the same joys of cardboard but also because all of you have a vast amount of knowledge to share with everyone else regarding the cardboard. That knowledge over the years/decades inevitably has spilled over into each one of our lives in one way or another and we will inevitably from time to time share the same information or in my case, sometimes share photos of previously mentioned variations already mentioned in this fun, lengthy thread. I appreciate the grace others have shown me and try my best to extend the same to others. Ken, Fred, and Elm have all been wonderful to deal with in the past and are all tremendous assets to this community. All much more so than myself.

Having said that, would anyone like me to mail this to them for free?

[ALR-bishop]

Many pages earlier in this tread, in a moment of mass hysteria, some off us discussed doing an index to all the variants in here. After a brief aborted attempt we gave up and let it roll on. At times, when I wonder before posting something if I should first go back and check the 33 pages of prior scans to see it it was already posted, I always decide, screw that.

But I once did go back through all the pages when we were around 30 and there is some really cool stuff in here

[mikemb]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Many pages earlier in this tread, in a moment of mass hysteria, some off us discussed doing an index to all the variants in here. After a brief aborted attempt we gave up and let it roll on. At times, when I wonder before posting something if I should first go back and check the 33 pages of prior scans to see it it was already posted, I always decide, screw that.

But I once did go back through all the pages when we were around 30 and there is some really cool stuff in here

About a year or so ago I was looking for 1965 Topps variations (still am). I looked at all the pages in this thread over a period of a few days. It was really fun.

After I finished I realized I could do a search of just this thread for 1965 Topps. Glad I looked at everything though.

Al, your posts are always great and your collection is fantastic. Thanks for sharing it with us.

Mike

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Many pages earlier in this tread, in a moment of mass hysteria, some off us discussed doing an index to all the variants in here. After a brief aborted attempt we gave up and let it roll on. At times, when I wonder before posting something if I should first go back and check the 33 pages of prior scans to see it it was already posted, I always decide, screw that.

But I once did go back through all the pages when we were around 30 and there is some really cool stuff in here

I would suggest one thing that might make it a bit easier to at least see if a variation has been listed earlier. Be sure to put the name of the card you are showing, not just "small green blotch below eye". I try and do this with all of my net 54 posts-- leave an identifier. When you go to google, type the name of the identifier and net54, and it should pull up a link. Obviously this doesn't help much for players with common names or superstars who have hundreds of related posts, but it can help. For example, Swarmee just posted a Bowman card of Lloyd Merriman. I googled Merriman net54 and the first link shown is the one he just posted, and the google listing said it was under "Show me your print variations" p. 55. Also worked for Beckert shown on the same page. You might have to sift through a few listings, but I have found it helpful many times on specific matters I know are buried somewhere on net54. Obviously this system would work best if everyone did it, but hey, baby steps.

[swarmee]

Yep, that's why I like linking images from COMC. They contain the basic card information for reference.

[Exhibitman]

I bought a small collection last week and it had these:



Looks like Topps screwed up an entire 1986 update sheet and someone got a really crappy set out of it. Wish it had the Bo-Bonds-Canseco...

[swarmee]

1963 Topps #242 Hank Aaron Ernie Banks Power Plus: recurring border break at top right corner.

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by swarmee

1963 Topps #242 Hank Aaron Ernie Banks Power Plus: recurring border break at top right corner.

Probably already mentioned, but the recurring black print mark seen on bottom edge of the #242 card lines up with the black mark on the bottom edge of the 1963 Topps #224 Roarke card.

[jchcollins]

Guessing this is just a yellow print shift error and not a variation, but I thought it was cool enough to take home from the LCS yesterday. 3D Al!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Guessing this is just a yellow print shift error and not a variation, but I thought it was cool enough to take home from the LCS yesterday. 3D Al!

Yellow and Black are both shifted. That's why the Tiger is still colored yellow properly.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by swarmee

Yellow and Black are both shifted. That's why the Tiger is still colored yellow properly.

Ah, thanks. That makes sense. (I'm relatively a novice at these...) Also there is supposed to be red in the Tiger's mouth that I don't see, I think.

[Orioles1959]

Hi fellow obsessed card collectors. I just found out about this cool site a few weeks ago and reading through from page 1 has been a fun and intriguing process. I've learned a lot from many of you because I read and absorb your observations and celebrate both the rarities and commonplace cards you display and describe here. A few weeks ago I was reading what you folks talked about in the 2017 time frame and ventured out and bought some nice treasures that you talked about back then. I just got to this final page a couple days ago and decided to come out of lurk mode and thank you all for what you've built here. Mike

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by Orioles1959

Hi fellow obsessed card collectors. I just found out about this cool site a few weeks ago and reading through from page 1 has been a fun and intriguing process. I've learned a lot from many of you because I read and absorb your observations and celebrate both the rarities and commonplace cards you display and describe here. A few weeks ago I was reading what you folks talked about in the 2017 time frame and ventured out and bought some nice treasures that you talked about back then. I just got to this final page a couple days ago and decided to come out of lurk mode and thank you all for what you've built here. Mike

Welcome to the boards, Mike.

[4reals]

Welcome, Orioles1959. Here’s one…I obtained a 1971 Topps set and observed that my Danny Doyle #352 has black ink bleed at bottom. Not sure how reoccurring it is but a quick eBay search discovered at least one other just like it.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by 4reals

Welcome, Orioles1959. Here’s one…I obtained a 1971 Topps set and observed that my Danny Doyle #352 has black ink bleed at bottom. Not sure how reoccurring it is but a quick eBay search discovered at least one other just like it.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I came across this Bench (mine is the raw copy), and found another (the PSA copy).

I recently joined a FB 71 group and the owner/admin of the group accused the seller of the 3rd copy of offering a card that is "OBVIOUSLY MARKED"???

[4reals]

1971 Topps Howie Reed #398 green ink bleed on back.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[steve B]

Originally Posted by 4reals

1971 Topps Howie Reed #398 green ink bleed on back.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And very slight stock difference.

[johnlenhardt]

Hi, Some time ago I noted on my variations sheet that there were the 2 variations below for 1978 Topps. However I am not sure what I am looking for. Would anyone have examples they could share?

#137 Kusick with large fish eye at Twins
#215 Evans with/without large G on catcher's shoulder

[ALR-bishop]

1978

[johnlenhardt]

Awesome - Thanks Al.

[Cliff Bowman]

I wasn’t aware of the 1978 Craig Kusick, it looks just like the ‘hockey puck’ on the 1986 Topps Johnny Grubb.

[johnlenhardt]

Hi Cliff, Not aware of the 1986 Topps Johnny Grubb. Where is that puck variation located?

[Geomorphic]

Is this considered a "variation"? Very cool and interesting take on the original IMO

[butchie_t]

A registration (or print) defect. But still a nice addition to a master set.

Congrats.

Butch

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by Geomorphic

Is this considered a "variation"? Very cool and interesting take on the original IMO

Like Butchie says no but it is awesome.