Topps and Fleer - sharing images?

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Rich Klein

OK if the photos were good, the production was bad in many cases. Either way, not as well done on that level as 1981 was.

Entirely true. The overall quality of the 82 set was substandard even by 1982 standards.

[deweyinthehall]

I'm working on something now where I am examining the images from Topps, Fleer and Donruss 1982 sets, and obviously Fleer is the least attractive, but what's become clear to me is that Topps isn't very good either. Not the design per se, but some of the image selection and quality, particularly the image quality in the traded set. For me, the Donruss set has by far the best looking images in 1982.

[Bigdaddy]

I thought Donruss went in the right direction from 1981 to 1982. Some of their 1981 cards were just atrocious, collation was terrible and the card stock was very thin. 1982 was much, much better and I agree, Donruss had the best looking cards in 1982.

Fleer on the other hand went downhill in 1982. Their 1981 cards were fairly nice for a new entry and they had some really good photos - Fernando, Reggie, George Foster, etc. 1982 however was pretty bad with fuzzy photos, bad color and just overall poor quality.

And Topps just kept chugging along, much like the Big 3 Detroit automakers in the mid to late 1970's and into the 80's.

At the time, for a couple of years, I could tell you the name of every card given the photo.

Originally Posted by deweyinthehall

I'm working on something now where I am examining the images from Topps, Fleer and Donruss 1982 sets, and obviously Fleer is the least attractive, but what's become clear to me is that Topps isn't very good either. Not the design per se, but some of the image selection and quality, particularly the image quality in the traded set. For me, the Donruss set has by far the best looking images in 1982.

[deweyinthehall]

Originally Posted by Bigdaddy

I thought Donruss went in the right direction from 1981 to 1982. Some of their 1981 cards were just atrocious, collation was terrible and the card stock was very thin. 1982 was much, much better and I agree, Donruss had the best looking cards in 1982.

Fleer on the other hand went downhill in 1982. Their 1981 cards were fairly nice for a new entry and they had some really good photos - Fernando, Reggie, George Foster, etc. 1982 however was pretty bad with fuzzy photos, bad color and just overall poor quality.

And Topps just kept chugging along, much like the Big 3 Detroit automakers in the mid to late 1970's and into the 80's.

At the time, for a couple of years, I could tell you the name of every card given the photo.

I LOVE the comparison of Topps to the Big 3! Perfect!

[mortimer brewster]

TO say Donruss Collation from 1981 was terrible is being too kind. I remember in the summer of 81 buying a whole wax box from my local corner store and getting only Yankees Royals or Tigers. The gum wasn't bad though.

[steve B]

The 81s had awful collation at first.

The local shop had a box where each pack had 11 of the 18 cards the same card. Not a bad deal for the kid who got 11 of Yaz, not so good for his friend who got 11 checklists.