NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you write anything concerning a person or company your full name needs to be in your post or obtainable from it. . Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
T206s on Ebay
Pre-WWII Cards
Post WWII Cards
Vintage Memorabilia
Babe Ruth Cards
Ty Cobb Cards
Lou Gehrig Cards
Mickey Mantle Cards
Goudey Cards
Bowman Cards
T205s on Ebay
Tobacco "T" Cards
Caramel "E" Cards
Vintage Baseball Postcards
Football Cards on Ebay
Exhibit Cards
Strip Cards
Baking Cards
Sporting News
Playball Cards on Ebay

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Postwar Sportscard Forums > Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1651  
Old 10-06-2020, 01:06 PM
swarmee's Avatar
swarmee swarmee is offline
J0hn Raff3rty
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Niceville FL
Posts: 5,344
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by swarmee View Post
D-shaped print defect over Home on back.
Similar to the 1952 Topps Woodling above, here's another recurring splotch in the text box in 1952 Topps:

1952 Topps - [Base] #28.1 - Jerry Priddy (Red Back) [Good*to*VG‑EX]
Courtesy of COMC.com
__________________
--
PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head
PSA: Regularly Get Cheated
BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern
SGC: Closed auto authentication business
JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC
Oh, what a difference a year makes.
Reply With Quote
  #1652  
Old 10-06-2020, 02:02 PM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,768
Default

Like Woodling, the Priddy can be found with scarce front defects as well....a blue blob in lower left bottom front border or a red slash in bottom front center border. One of the blue blobs is on ebay now at a wishful thinking BIN. It also has the back defect seen on the COMC card, but the COMC card does not have the blue blob, so I guess they are not concurrent

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1952-TOPPS-28-JERRY-PRIDDY-RED-BACKS-TWO-2-PRINTING-VARIATIONS-DETROIT-TIGERS/263450562866?hash=item3d56e09132:g1wAAOSwf15aZAC ~

Last edited by ALR-bishop; 10-06-2020 at 02:07 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1653  
Old 10-07-2020, 08:47 AM
savedfrommyspokes's Avatar
savedfrommyspokes savedfrommyspokes is offline
member
Larry More.y
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,564
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gracecollector View Post
1961 Topps Checklist 3rd Series #189. Is this a known variation, or just a print defect? I find these intriguing as I can't figure out what would cause these boxy areas to occur, especially as text underneath them appears, the bottom box is either yellow or white, and the box varies in size. What's also interesting is that there are two recognized printing variations of this card - Type 1 with copyright on back beginning at card #263 and Type 2 beginning at #264. Of these 3 cards, one is Type 1 and two are Type 2. The last card also has the photo cropped very differently, as uniform number 14 is missing.
Due to the cropping differences, it appears that one of these three checklists are from different sheets and was printed/released with a different series.

So what I find interesting is that both checklists would end up with similar variations. However, after realizing that all three were sold on Oct 3 by the same ebay seller it started to make more sense. The seller is a high volume seller and more than likely uses a Fujitsu sheet scanner to accommodate their volume of scans. These sheet fed scanners are used by many of the higher volume sellers (Deans, GMcards, battersbox, etc). On these scanners there are different "factory" settings that allow for image adjustments and if the user does not have their settings correctly set, image adjustments similar to this will occur.

Several years ago I thought I had stumbled onto a never seen before variation. I bought a 68 Topps LL card from both Deans and GMcards that appeared to have this same RARE variation. When both cards were in hand and no variation was there, I realized what had happened...their scanner settings were off.


Coincidentally the same seller of these 1961 checklist cards sold the exact same 68 LL card I bought several years ago .... and as predicted, the image in their listing appeared identical to the image from the cards I had bought from both GM and Dean.

It appears Sirius needs to adjust the settings on their scanner to prevent variation hunters from thinking they have found some new variations.

If for any reason I am wrong, I apologize...I would love to see in hand images of these three cards posted by the buyer(s) of the cards.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 67 7.jpg (66.2 KB, 331 views)
Reply With Quote
  #1654  
Old 10-07-2020, 10:29 AM
Fleerfan Fleerfan is offline
member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 48
Default

Thanks for the explanation about the scanner issues. That is what I thought might be causing some of these interesting looking variations I saw on some listings for 1965 Topps Football.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 1965 Topps Garron 1.jpg (77.3 KB, 329 views)
File Type: jpg 1965 Topps Garron.jpg (77.6 KB, 324 views)
File Type: jpg 1965 Topps Tolar.jpg (77.5 KB, 330 views)
File Type: jpg 1965 Topps Trull.jpg (77.5 KB, 320 views)
Reply With Quote
  #1655  
Old 10-07-2020, 11:12 AM
savedfrommyspokes's Avatar
savedfrommyspokes savedfrommyspokes is offline
member
Larry More.y
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,564
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleerfan View Post
Thanks for the explanation about the scanner issues. That is what I thought might be causing some of these interesting looking variations I saw on some listings for 1965 Topps Football.
You're welcome....it appears the 65 Topps FB cards you pictured are from the same larger volume seller who probably is using a Fujitsu 7160 and does not have his settings set correctly for card scanning.

A few years ago when I received my 68 LL card, I checked the settings on my Fujitsu scanner and I believe I had figured out that it was the "hole punch removal" option needed to be turned off to avoid these unique and random occurrences from appearing on scans of cards. Most of these sheet fed scanners are primarily designed for use with regular 20LB paper which may or may not have hole punches in them from being stored in a binder, however, with the correct use of options these scanners are great for scanning large volumes of cards front/back in a short period of time (2000/hr).
Reply With Quote
  #1656  
Old 10-07-2020, 12:47 PM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,768
Default

“Fascinating”.... Spock
Reply With Quote
  #1657  
Old 10-07-2020, 05:31 PM
JollyElm's Avatar
JollyElm JollyElm is offline
D@rrΣn Hu.ghΣs
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 4,918
Default

I ran across this odd and timely print anomaly today...

footballcardpumpkinmisprint01.jpg

Surely, I kid.
__________________
Check out my bucket(s). Virtually everything is available for trade:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/152396...57685904801706
http://s1226.photobucket.com/albums/ee404/JollyElm/
http://s1036.photobucket.com/user/elmjack44/library/

“I was such a dangerous hitter I even got intentional walks during batting practice.”
Casey Stengel

Spelling "Yastrzemski" correctly without needing to look it up since the 1980's.
Reply With Quote
  #1658  
Old 10-07-2020, 06:20 PM
swarmee's Avatar
swarmee swarmee is offline
J0hn Raff3rty
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Niceville FL
Posts: 5,344
Default

It did remind me of the possibility. There was a Magic the Gathering set in the 90s where the equipment wasn't fully cleaned after printing some Charlie Brown cards, and some of the Charlie Brown images were lightly imprinted in the background.
__________________
--
PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head
PSA: Regularly Get Cheated
BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern
SGC: Closed auto authentication business
JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC
Oh, what a difference a year makes.
Reply With Quote
  #1659  
Old 10-07-2020, 07:46 PM
Cliff Bowman's Avatar
Cliff Bowman Cliff Bowman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Near Atlanta
Posts: 1,377
Default

It might all be a plot by a few high volume sellers to sell ordinary run of the mill cards to unsuspecting error collectors that would otherwise just sit in their inventories.
__________________
“interesting to some absolute garbage to others.” —- “Error cards and variations are for morons, IMHO.”
Reply With Quote
  #1660  
Old 10-14-2020, 12:43 AM
71buc's Avatar
71buc 71buc is offline
Mikeknapp
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Great NW
Posts: 2,095
Default

I dont generally collect such things but this card fits nicely in my collection. The team photograph is printed on the non gloss side of the card stock and the back of the card is printed on the glossy side of the card stock. There is also a wet transfer of the back of the card on the front of the card. This is the first version of this card with these printing anomalies I have encountered.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg reverse_priont_72.jpg (77.9 KB, 291 views)
__________________
https://www.collectorfocus.com/collection/71buc

1971 Pirates Ticket Quest:
82 of 153 regular season stubs (54%), 14 of 14 1971 ALCS, NLCS , and World Series stubs (100%)

If you have any 1971 Pirate regular season game stubs (home or away games) please let me know what have!
Reply With Quote
  #1661  
Old 10-14-2020, 05:26 AM
swarmee's Avatar
swarmee swarmee is offline
J0hn Raff3rty
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Niceville FL
Posts: 5,344
Default

Interesting: a real "flip stock" as they're called in Topps Heritage.
__________________
--
PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head
PSA: Regularly Get Cheated
BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern
SGC: Closed auto authentication business
JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC
Oh, what a difference a year makes.
Reply With Quote
  #1662  
Old 10-14-2020, 07:38 AM
71buc's Avatar
71buc 71buc is offline
Mikeknapp
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Great NW
Posts: 2,095
Default

Thanks for that information. I was unaware that Topps is currently intentionally making "flip stock" cards. Although it is unlikely to possess much value, is it safe to assume this one in my collection is a rarity?
__________________
https://www.collectorfocus.com/collection/71buc

1971 Pirates Ticket Quest:
82 of 153 regular season stubs (54%), 14 of 14 1971 ALCS, NLCS , and World Series stubs (100%)

If you have any 1971 Pirate regular season game stubs (home or away games) please let me know what have!

Last edited by 71buc; 10-14-2020 at 07:38 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #1663  
Old 10-14-2020, 09:11 AM
savedfrommyspokes's Avatar
savedfrommyspokes savedfrommyspokes is offline
member
Larry More.y
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,564
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 71buc View Post
I dont generally collect such things but this card fits nicely in my collection. The team photograph is printed on the non gloss side of the card stock and the back of the card is printed on the glossy side of the card stock. There is also a wet transfer of the back of the card on the front of the card. This is the first version of this card with these printing anomalies I have encountered.
Very nice find Mike. While I have seen many examples of wet transfers over the years, this is the first flip stock anomaly from 60s/70s I have seen.
Reply With Quote
  #1664  
Old 10-14-2020, 11:43 AM
steve B steve B is offline
Steve Birmingham
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: eastern Mass.
Posts: 6,449
Default

I saw a handful of 72s like that offered years ago. Maybe in the 90's?
The asking price was way too high for me at the time.

It's really nice to see one.
Reply With Quote
  #1665  
Old 10-16-2020, 04:18 PM
swarmee's Avatar
swarmee swarmee is offline
J0hn Raff3rty
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Niceville FL
Posts: 5,344
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleerfan View Post
Thanks for the explanation about the scanner issues. That is what I thought might be causing some of these interesting looking variations I saw on some listings for 1965 Topps Football.
Here's a Dean's Card listed on COMC.

1966 Topps - [Base] #373 - 1966 Rookie Stars - Jack Hiatt, Dick Estelle [EX]
Courtesy of COMC.com
__________________
--
PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head
PSA: Regularly Get Cheated
BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern
SGC: Closed auto authentication business
JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC
Oh, what a difference a year makes.

Last edited by swarmee; 10-16-2020 at 04:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1666  
Old 10-22-2020, 04:14 PM
Sliphorn Sliphorn is offline
member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 129
Default 1957 Error Cards

These likely were parts of three-card salesman samples. The correct versions are on the top left of the two sample cards and the error right under it. The two right versions of each are the correct # and info versions from the correct cards. The ones at the bottom are the cartoon that is also used on the errors. Notice that the error cartoons do not have all of the red ink. The cartoon on the correct Whitey Ford has the answer on two lines only, while the error card above it uses three lines with a hyphen. I did a lot of research using COMC to find the Billy Martin cartoon that was used in the DeMaestri error card. I believe the sample cards had two of these on either side of a third player who had the commercial on the back, as is seen on the Frank Robinson card back.

Notice on the closeup of the cartoons, that there is some difference in the colors as well as sentence structure on one.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 1957 #25 DeMaestri Error RV.jpg (78.1 KB, 246 views)
File Type: jpg 1957 #37 Wynn Error RV.jpg (78.3 KB, 242 views)
File Type: jpg 1957 Robinson Ad Panel Back.jpg (80.6 KB, 240 views)
File Type: jpg 1957 Robinson Ad Panel Front.jpg (75.5 KB, 236 views)
File Type: jpg 1957 #25 Cartoon CU.jpg (82.0 KB, 196 views)
File Type: jpg 1957 #37 Cartoon CU .jpg (80.7 KB, 194 views)

Last edited by Sliphorn; 10-25-2020 at 02:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1667  
Old 10-22-2020, 04:55 PM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,768
Default

Neat stuff Tom.
Reply With Quote
  #1668  
Old 10-23-2020, 09:58 AM
swarmee's Avatar
swarmee swarmee is offline
J0hn Raff3rty
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Niceville FL
Posts: 5,344
Default

The #37 that was recently sold on eBay (Early Wynn front, Don Drysdale back, Frank Torre card #) was one I gave the seller the identification of being a salesman sample in a Facebook group. Sold for $150 as a BIN/BO. I was predicting a sale price closer to $50.
__________________
--
PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head
PSA: Regularly Get Cheated
BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern
SGC: Closed auto authentication business
JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC
Oh, what a difference a year makes.
Reply With Quote
  #1669  
Old 10-23-2020, 11:35 AM
swarmee's Avatar
swarmee swarmee is offline
J0hn Raff3rty
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Niceville FL
Posts: 5,344
Default


1957 Topps - [Base] #294 - Scarce Series - Rocky Bridges
Courtesy of COMC.com

Blue splotch on left border is a recurring print defect.
__________________
--
PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head
PSA: Regularly Get Cheated
BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern
SGC: Closed auto authentication business
JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC
Oh, what a difference a year makes.
Reply With Quote
  #1670  
Old 10-30-2020, 06:23 AM
JollyElm's Avatar
JollyElm JollyElm is offline
D@rrΣn Hu.ghΣs
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 4,918
Default

Here's an odd one that is quite easy to find.

The 1972 Series 6 checklist can be found with a pair of smudgy dark areas interfering with the names near the bottom. They are usually quite similarly placed across multiple cards, but there is some variation to where they appear (I believe).

s-l1600-14.jpgs-l1600-13.jpgs-l1600-5.jpg
__________________
Check out my bucket(s). Virtually everything is available for trade:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/152396...57685904801706
http://s1226.photobucket.com/albums/ee404/JollyElm/
http://s1036.photobucket.com/user/elmjack44/library/

“I was such a dangerous hitter I even got intentional walks during batting practice.”
Casey Stengel

Spelling "Yastrzemski" correctly without needing to look it up since the 1980's.
Reply With Quote
  #1671  
Old 10-30-2020, 01:31 PM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,768
Default

This card has two version; copyright left or copyright center left on back. In checking those two in my set the defect Darren highlights is on my center left card. Does it appear on both versions or just that one ?
Reply With Quote
  #1672  
Old 10-30-2020, 02:40 PM
Kevvyg1026 Kevvyg1026 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 220
Default 1972 checklist

Perhaps one version of the checklist is from series 5 printing and the other from the series 6 printing
Reply With Quote
  #1673  
Old 10-30-2020, 03:50 PM
JollyElm's Avatar
JollyElm JollyElm is offline
D@rrΣn Hu.ghΣs
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 4,918
Default

Those pics are just screengrabs, so I don't know which version(s) of the back they have, but there are undoubtedly some found on COMC where the backs can easily be seen.
__________________
Check out my bucket(s). Virtually everything is available for trade:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/152396...57685904801706
http://s1226.photobucket.com/albums/ee404/JollyElm/
http://s1036.photobucket.com/user/elmjack44/library/

“I was such a dangerous hitter I even got intentional walks during batting practice.”
Casey Stengel

Spelling "Yastrzemski" correctly without needing to look it up since the 1980's.
Reply With Quote
  #1674  
Old 10-30-2020, 04:02 PM
aronbenabe aronbenabe is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 116
Default Show...me...your print variations!

Anyone know how common this is with the 1971 Topps?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG_4590.jpg (2.6 KB, 172 views)

Last edited by aronbenabe; 10-30-2020 at 04:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1675  
Old 10-30-2020, 04:22 PM
swarmee's Avatar
swarmee swarmee is offline
J0hn Raff3rty
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Niceville FL
Posts: 5,344
Default

You mean the oversaturated orange? My guess would be it got a second pass through one of the inking stages.
__________________
--
PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head
PSA: Regularly Get Cheated
BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern
SGC: Closed auto authentication business
JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC
Oh, what a difference a year makes.
Reply With Quote
  #1676  
Old 10-30-2020, 04:23 PM
aronbenabe aronbenabe is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 116
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by swarmee View Post
You mean the oversaturated orange? My guess would be it got a second pass through one of the inking stages.

Ah, thanks for the explanation...seems right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #1677  
Old 10-30-2020, 07:18 PM
swarmee's Avatar
swarmee swarmee is offline
J0hn Raff3rty
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Niceville FL
Posts: 5,344
Default

For future questions, I would recommend 1) uploading smaller scans and 2) giving us your actual question, instead of making us figure it out based on your crazy oversized scans... ;-)
__________________
--
PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head
PSA: Regularly Get Cheated
BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern
SGC: Closed auto authentication business
JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC
Oh, what a difference a year makes.
Reply With Quote
  #1678  
Old 10-30-2020, 11:22 PM
steve B steve B is offline
Steve Birmingham
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: eastern Mass.
Posts: 6,449
Default

I for one like the crazy oversized scans! There's so much I can see that just can't be seen on smaller scans.
Reply With Quote
  #1679  
Old 10-31-2020, 08:20 AM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,768
Default

There are some minor back variants in some of the Leader cards in the 91 Topps set involving either a complete or broken circle around the MLB copyright. Neither are apparently hard to find, but if you have old eyes, they are hard to see. I could not make them out with the scans on eBay or COMC. A fellow board member was able to send me what I needed ( the Hasselhoff Cheesburger man), and even in hand I needed a light and magnifying glass to see the differences.

It is of course ridiculous to care about such differences in cards, but since I do, I appreciate bigger scans as I get older. But they do distort threads when posted. I can still remember, as a low tech guy, being stumped early on in how to size pics for posting. It still presents problems for me on occasion
Reply With Quote
  #1680  
Old 10-31-2020, 08:31 AM
savedfrommyspokes's Avatar
savedfrommyspokes savedfrommyspokes is offline
member
Larry More.y
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,564
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALR-bishop View Post
There are some minor back variants in some of the Leader cards in the 91 Topps set involving either a complete or broken circle around the MLB copyright. Neither are apparently hard to find, but if you have old eyes, they are hard to see. I could not make them out with the scans on eBay or COMC. A fellow board member was able to send me what I needed ( the Hasselhoff Cheesburger man), and even in hand I needed a light and magnifying glass to see the differences.

It is of course ridiculous to care about such differences in cards, but since I do, I appreciate bigger scans as I get older. But they do distort threads when posted. I can still remember, as a low tech guy, being stumped early on in how to size pics for posting. It still presents problems for me on occasion
Like Al, I like the larger scans when details are hard to see .... even in hand.

But if there is a need to use a larger scan to see specific details on a card, at least crop down the image to just the card itself.
Reply With Quote
  #1681  
Old 11-08-2020, 04:43 AM
LuckyLarry's Avatar
LuckyLarry LuckyLarry is offline
L@rry T1p+0n
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,136
Default

__________________
Member of OBC (Old Baseball Cards), the longest running on-line collecting club www.oldbaseball.com
Reply With Quote
  #1682  
Old 11-08-2020, 03:24 PM
swarmee's Avatar
swarmee swarmee is offline
J0hn Raff3rty
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Niceville FL
Posts: 5,344
Default


1974 Topps - [Base] #5 - Hank Aaron Special (1966,1967,1968,1969)
Courtesy of COMC.com

Black dot on the top right border is a recurring print defect.
__________________
--
PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head
PSA: Regularly Get Cheated
BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern
SGC: Closed auto authentication business
JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC
Oh, what a difference a year makes.
Reply With Quote
  #1683  
Old 11-09-2020, 01:53 PM
savedfrommyspokes's Avatar
savedfrommyspokes savedfrommyspokes is offline
member
Larry More.y
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,564
Default

I can't remember if the "dotted" line print variation located on the upper left of the 1970 389 Jim Shellenback cad has been discussed before or not. However, I came across my first copy and wondered if the dotted line extended onto the card above. The answer is yes, but only a small part of the line can be seen along the bottom edge of the 70 Topps 388 Bryon Browne card.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 70Browne.jpg (73.6 KB, 155 views)
File Type: jpg 70 browne.jpg (74.8 KB, 157 views)
File Type: jpg 70Shellenback.jpg (47.4 KB, 154 views)
Reply With Quote
  #1684  
Old 11-09-2020, 06:30 PM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,768
Default

The left Browne has two defects and the second may cross over too

Last edited by ALR-bishop; 11-09-2020 at 06:43 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1685  
Old 11-15-2020, 10:37 AM
Sliphorn Sliphorn is offline
member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 129
Default 1955 Bowman Wrong Backs

I never go after the wrong backs that are rampant in this hobby UNLESS they are the common versions of cards. Thesis the case in the 1955 Bowmans where the Bolling and Johnson wrong backs are the commons. I scanned these recently for Mike Cady and was amazed to find out that the Johnson backs have the card numbers that correspond to the players on both. The Bollings have the same card number even though the back is otherwise incorrect. The Bollings BOTH have #48 even though Frank is #204. Ernie and Don Johnson have the correct numbers. I hope folks can follow me on this. I had never noticed that the error cards had this variety.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 1955 Bowman #048 Milt Bolling RV.jpg (80.6 KB, 132 views)
File Type: jpg 1955 Bowman #157 ErnieJohnson RV.jpg (80.2 KB, 136 views)
File Type: jpg 1955 Bowman #204 Frank Bolling RV.jpg (81.2 KB, 122 views)
File Type: jpg 1955 Bowman #101 Don JohnsonRV.jpg (80.6 KB, 123 views)

Last edited by Sliphorn; 11-15-2020 at 02:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1686  
Old 11-15-2020, 02:42 PM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,768
Default

One of the few times a post by Tom did not send me scrambling to find some card
Reply With Quote
  #1687  
Old 11-16-2020, 10:32 AM
Sliphorn Sliphorn is offline
member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 129
Default Reply to Post

Thankfully I did not find some obscure unknown variation or error this time. I just was ignorant of this fact.
Reply With Quote
  #1688  
Old 11-18-2020, 03:53 PM
JollyElm's Avatar
JollyElm JollyElm is offline
D@rrΣn Hu.ghΣs
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 4,918
Default

For you no black blob, but large fisheye fans...

s-l1600-18.jpg
Jim-Northrup-(No-Blob).jpg
1726877579178062410.jpg
__________________
Check out my bucket(s). Virtually everything is available for trade:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/152396...57685904801706
http://s1226.photobucket.com/albums/ee404/JollyElm/
http://s1036.photobucket.com/user/elmjack44/library/

“I was such a dangerous hitter I even got intentional walks during batting practice.”
Casey Stengel

Spelling "Yastrzemski" correctly without needing to look it up since the 1980's.
Reply With Quote
  #1689  
Old 11-18-2020, 04:12 PM
aronbenabe aronbenabe is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 116
Default




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #1690  
Old 11-18-2020, 04:17 PM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,768
Default

Tommy looks a little out of sorts....and big, really big
Reply With Quote
  #1691  
Old 11-18-2020, 04:35 PM
swarmee's Avatar
swarmee swarmee is offline
J0hn Raff3rty
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Niceville FL
Posts: 5,344
Default

How do those "no blobs" get graded as straight 8s without a PD qualifier?
__________________
--
PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head
PSA: Regularly Get Cheated
BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern
SGC: Closed auto authentication business
JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC
Oh, what a difference a year makes.
Reply With Quote
  #1692  
Old 11-18-2020, 07:32 PM
aronbenabe aronbenabe is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 116
Default

Does anyone know how common these print variations are for the 1970 Topps Baseball set?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #1693  
Old 11-18-2020, 10:48 PM
steve B steve B is offline
Steve Birmingham
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: eastern Mass.
Posts: 6,449
Default

The overly dark 70 Topps are a bit unusual, but they are out there.

I should give mine another closer look and see if I can spot what actually caused them.
Reply With Quote
  #1694  
Old 11-19-2020, 10:02 AM
savedfrommyspokes's Avatar
savedfrommyspokes savedfrommyspokes is offline
member
Larry More.y
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,564
Default

I am not sure which is rarer....charcoal grey 70s or the use of grossly oversized images w/o any description....appears they are both fairly common and recurring.
Reply With Quote
  #1695  
Old 11-19-2020, 10:13 AM
aronbenabe aronbenabe is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 116
Default

Thanks Steve and Spokes for your replies


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #1696  
Old 11-19-2020, 12:49 PM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,768
Default

There is a thread or discussion within a tread ( maybe this one) on the charcoal 70s
Reply With Quote
  #1697  
Old 11-21-2020, 09:29 PM
gracecollector gracecollector is offline
Brad W.
member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Huntley, IL
Posts: 84
Default

savedfrommyspokes was exactly correct. These turned out not to be true defects. The seller's scanner was to blame. Sorry for any confusion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by savedfrommyspokes View Post
Due to the cropping differences, it appears that one of these three checklists are from different sheets and was printed/released with a different series.

So what I find interesting is that both checklists would end up with similar variations. However, after realizing that all three were sold on Oct 3 by the same ebay seller it started to make more sense. The seller is a high volume seller and more than likely uses a Fujitsu sheet scanner to accommodate their volume of scans. These sheet fed scanners are used by many of the higher volume sellers (Deans, GMcards, battersbox, etc). On these scanners there are different "factory" settings that allow for image adjustments and if the user does not have their settings correctly set, image adjustments similar to this will occur.

Several years ago I thought I had stumbled onto a never seen before variation. I bought a 68 Topps LL card from both Deans and GMcards that appeared to have this same RARE variation. When both cards were in hand and no variation was there, I realized what had happened...their scanner settings were off.


Coincidentally the same seller of these 1961 checklist cards sold the exact same 68 LL card I bought several years ago .... and as predicted, the image in their listing appeared identical to the image from the cards I had bought from both GM and Dean.

It appears Sirius needs to adjust the settings on their scanner to prevent variation hunters from thinking they have found some new variations.

If for any reason I am wrong, I apologize...I would love to see in hand images of these three cards posted by the buyer(s) of the cards.
Reply With Quote
  #1698  
Old 11-22-2020, 09:13 AM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,768
Default

Brad-- glad you posted those. I for one learned something about that scanning issue
Reply With Quote
  #1699  
Old 11-22-2020, 01:19 PM
savedfrommyspokes's Avatar
savedfrommyspokes savedfrommyspokes is offline
member
Larry More.y
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,564
Default

"Blackless-ing"?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 1.jpg (74.5 KB, 47 views)
Reply With Quote
  #1700  
Old 11-22-2020, 02:43 PM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,768
Default

Clearless ?
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
1966 Topps High # Print Variations 4reals Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) 9 04-27-2014 07:05 PM
Are these variations or print defects? savedfrommyspokes Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) 16 02-09-2013 12:52 PM
Well known print defects. Do variations exist without? novakjr Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) 9 01-28-2011 05:32 PM
Finally confirmed - d311 print variations exist! ("bluegrass" variations) shammus Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 8 09-03-2010 08:58 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:49 PM.


ebay GSB