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 > Modern Baseball Cards Forum (1980-Present)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old 10-09-2020, 09:16 AM
Hatorade Hatorade is offline
member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 47
Default

Steve B was kind enough to answer a few of my questions on the specifics of the printing process with these cards a few years ago. It seems that all the Johnson errors likely shared the same image on the negative for the black plates and that the common version cards were likely corrected by altering the original art for the negative used to make their black plates. The editing of the errors therefore likely took place in the negatives and plates for the three other colors. It would be great to hear more from Steve B or someone else with printing experience to discuss where/how exactly those changes happened. Would the fact that multiple versions were being produced at the same time point to the plates on each press producing their own “version”?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Hatorade View Post
Attachment 223184
PSA and BGS have a difficult time differentiating the error card from the common card in too many instances. One easy way for them to never make this mistake again is observe this small hair like object found on the bottom left of the card where the second vertical white line hits the lower blue line. I've termed the object a "short hair". The short hair is not on any of the common versions and is on every error variation I've seen. How can this same object have appeared on all the different error variations? What changed that it didn't show up on the common version?
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve B View Post
As far as how it got there it's pretty simple. Not easy to tell exactly what way but a few easy ones.
It was there when the original pasteups were photographed so it was on the negative used to produce the black plates.
or
It was a scratch on the black plate that made the errors.
or
It was a scratch on the negative used to make the black plates for the errors.
Whatever the exact reason, making any of the corrected versions meant making new plates from altered negatives, or from entirely new negatives from a corrected pasteup . And either the bit of fiber was gone from the pasteup, or the resulting negatives never got scratched.
Steve B
* It's "possible" there were transitional cards using a mix of old and new plates, but considering that removing the Ad was because of a federal law the whole set was probably redone all at once.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hatorade View Post
Steve, thanks for the feedback. I have a very limited understanding of the process used to print the cards and very much appreciate your perspective. As I understand it, Fleer used 2 printing facilities to make the cards. Would that rule out that the scratch was on the black plate that made the errors, because there would have been more than one plate for 2 separate facilities? You mentioned that it’s possible that there are transitional cards using a mix of old and new plates and I believe that is what happened for all the cards that aren’t the final corrected version. Fleer wasn’t able to immediately cover the Marlboro sign completely and what they did was edit the cards in a way that they transitioned from the ad only being slightly obscured with tinting and still visible, to the ad being tinted so heavily that the ad is mostly unable to be seen and all these cards have the black hair. This editing was done in most part over the ad itself and at some point they changed the editing process to cover more than just the Ad, but the entire rectangular area on the upper right part of the card with a consistent blacking out that resulted in the final corrected version, and no more black hair. It seems that a similar situation occurred with the Billy Ripken errors from the set. The scribble, white out and double die edits where used by Fleer to edit the ad before they could produce the black box versions to cover the error, even though they had already begun producing the Johnson cards in their final edit form. Why couldn’t Fleer just edit out the ad more completely with their early attempts instead of having the cards slowly transition from lightly tinted to heavily tinted and why would they have so many unique attempts at covering the Marlboro sign?
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve B View Post
There would have been way more than even two plates.
That the line is on so many versions means it was most likely on the negative, so it got onto all the plates made during the transition from error to corrected. It goes away on the corrected versions? If that's always the case then the corrected ones were printed from a plate made from a new negative.
The transitional ones could have been done by altering the negatives for one or more of the other colors. Probably while they were waiting on the new negative for black to be done from altered original art.

It would be unusual for two different companies to share a negative. More likely is that one company started first. Maybe producing the cards for Wax boxes? I think those were released first with the other formats following a bit after. So company A does cards and has errors like the Johnson and maybe the Ripken that have to get fixed right away. Company B starts a bit later maybe doing the ones for cellos or vending or whatever. But they've been told about the problems and are either given corrected art to work from or do less obvious corrections. (Probably the first case)

Both companies probably ran multiple presses, and over a print run as large as 89 fleer they would have had to replace the plates a few times.

The Ripken corrections were probably a bit more of an emergency than the Johnson. Johnson ran up against a federal regulation (So did a lot of diecast cars) And the feds were probably ok with a simple "oops! we're fixing it, won't happen again" The Ripken was a bit of a thing in even mainstream media, and not the sort of PR they wanted. So they made a few different sorts of corrections. The knob area could have simply been erased from plates on the press to make the whiteout versions, the scribbles were probably scratched into the plates -also while the plates were still on the press.
The "double die" ones are just a result of bad registration. You'll find that sort of thing on lots of cards, it just got noticed on Ripken because everyone was looking at thin figures printed in multiple colors which makes them prone to that sort of "doubling".
Steve B
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 10-09-2020, 12:38 PM
Statfreak101 Statfreak101 is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 36
Default

Awesome stuff - really love the information and transparency on this topic!
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 10-21-2020, 08:54 AM
mybestbretts mybestbretts is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 407
Default randy johnson

This really has nothing to do with Randy Johnson, except I was going through my Brett photos and this one looks like the same location as the johnson shot
Attached Images
File Type: jpg brett photo with marboro ad on scoreboard.jpg (73.8 KB, 153 views)
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 10-24-2020, 04:44 PM
hockeyhockey hockeyhockey is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 176
Default

sorry if this was already posted somewhere in this monster of a thread, but were the ripken FF and johnson marlboro sign cards only available in a certain packaging? or was it just based on when the cards were produced? didn't know if rack packs vs wax packs vs complete sets mattered. thanks!
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 10-24-2020, 04:55 PM
Statfreak101 Statfreak101 is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 36
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyhockey View Post
sorry if this was already posted somewhere in this monster of a thread, but were the ripken FF and johnson marlboro sign cards only available in a certain packaging? or was it just based on when the cards were produced? didn't know if rack packs vs wax packs vs complete sets mattered. thanks!
Found in racks, cellos, and wax. Not in factory sets.

All was dependent on when the cases were produced/packaged.
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 10-24-2020, 05:13 PM
hockeyhockey hockeyhockey is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Statfreak101 View Post
Found in racks, cellos, and wax. Not in factory sets.

All was dependent on when the cases were produced/packaged.
awesome, thanks for the info!
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 11-03-2020, 08:34 AM
bnorth's Avatar
bnorth bnorth is offline
Ben North
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 6,544
Default

Anybody have any "tricks" they use to be able to see the sign better? As I have gotten older I find it way harder to tell them apart.

A couple things I do. Make sure to look at them in a room(or outside) that has as much sunlight as possible. At night with just lights on in a room they all look like box cards to me. The yellow line printing error Bill Ripkens are the same way. Can't see the line without good sun light.

I have also found taking pics with a 10X loupe of the sign area using my phone helps. Then up load them to my computer and compressing it to 25% of original size helps a lot.

Anybody else have any tricks they use?

Also, besides the 2 very light red tint and the 3 or 4 known blue tints what is considered the rarest version. I have been away from super collecting them for some time. Back several years ago the green scribble was considered the toughest.
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 11-03-2020, 10:18 AM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,763
Default

Hey Ben, I have a few versions of this and and the Ripken card that I picked up years ago, but never got into collecting them to the depth you are talking about. Do you think all of these different versions are from the original printing process or were some created after the fact. I know some of my Ripkens are fakes, not sure about the Johnsons. Agree with you about old eyes, and that would keep me from getting back into these things to any greater degree
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 11-03-2020, 10:37 AM
bnorth's Avatar
bnorth bnorth is offline
Ben North
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 6,544
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALR-bishop View Post
Hey Ben, I have a few versions of this and and the Ripken card that I picked up years ago, but never got into collecting them to the depth you are talking about. Do you think all of these different versions are from the original printing process or were some created after the fact. I know some of my Ripkens are fakes, not sure about the Johnsons. Agree with you about old eyes, and that would keep me from getting back into these things to any greater degree
I have also seen a lot of fake/altered Bill Ripken cards. Never seen it in the Randy Johnson versions. I did think the 2 super rare Johnson versions might be altered cards. After some testing I was wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 11-03-2020, 11:43 AM
Statfreak101 Statfreak101 is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 36
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALR-bishop View Post
Hey Ben, I have a few versions of this and and the Ripken card that I picked up years ago, but never got into collecting them to the depth you are talking about. Do you think all of these different versions are from the original printing process or were some created after the fact. I know some of my Ripkens are fakes, not sure about the Johnsons. Agree with you about old eyes, and that would keep me from getting back into these things to any greater degree
Upon having done a good amount of research on the Johnson card and collecting of it, I have never seen anyone go to the extent of faking or reprinting this card. Surprisingly, this card still flies under the radar as of today! Which, is fine with me.
Reply With Quote
  #161  
Old 11-03-2020, 11:51 AM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 6,763
Default

How many of the Johnson and Ripken variants ( and which ones ) do you guys think were intended by the manufacturer (as opposed to unintended differences occurring in the printing process )
Reply With Quote
  #162  
Old 11-03-2020, 01:11 PM
bnorth's Avatar
bnorth bnorth is offline
Ben North
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 6,544
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALR-bishop View Post
How many of the Johnson and Ripken variants ( and which ones ) do you guys think were intended by the manufacturer (as opposed to unintended differences occurring in the printing process )
The only altered ones are the Bill Ripken cards. White Out cards IMHO they are all 100% fake. Show me one in hand and I can tell you within seconds how it was altered/made. I have never seen a single one that was not obviously altered from the way it left the printing press. Then there are the hole punch cards. Supposedly it was something Fleer actually done to a few cards. Problem is anyone with a hole punch can make one. I have also seen a ton of the fake saw cuts, but there are also a ton of real ones.

eBay is flooded with a ton of counterfeit Bill Ripkens of all variations and has been for over a year.

On both cards all the changes were intentionally done by Fleer. The printing process doesn't make alterations. Printing errors are way different that what went on with those 2 cards.
Reply With Quote
  #163  
Old 11-03-2020, 01:25 PM
hockeyhockey hockeyhockey is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 176
Default

what's weird to me is that you can find a marlboro johnson in a wax box, and then find a blacked out johnson in the same box. maybe that's just normal, or maybe the box had packs from a different box.
Reply With Quote
  #164  
Old 11-03-2020, 02:40 PM
Statfreak101 Statfreak101 is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 36
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyhockey View Post
what's weird to me is that you can find a marlboro johnson in a wax box, and then find a blacked out johnson in the same box. maybe that's just normal, or maybe the box had packs from a different box.
This is 100% accurate.
Reply With Quote
  #165  
Old 11-03-2020, 02:52 PM
Statfreak101 Statfreak101 is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 36
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyhockey View Post
what's weird to me is that you can find a marlboro johnson in a wax box, and then find a blacked out johnson in the same box. maybe that's just normal, or maybe the box had packs from a different box.
I have opened many wax boxes from sealed cases and have found this to be true.

Just weird.
Reply With Quote
  #166  
Old 11-20-2020, 09:18 AM
steve5838 steve5838 is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 32
Default

Just hanging out with RJ... I couldn't resist taking a picture of this latest low tint pickup as I pulled it out of the envelope and viewed it in the sun light. Steve
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 20201120_101736.jpg (72.5 KB, 60 views)
Reply With Quote
  #167  
Old 11-20-2020, 10:11 AM
bnorth's Avatar
bnorth bnorth is offline
Ben North
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 6,544
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steve5838 View Post
Just hanging out with RJ... I couldn't resist taking a picture of this latest low tint pickup as I pulled it out of the envelope and viewed it in the sun light. Steve
Nice card. It's amazing how much difference looking at them it direct sun light makes.
Reply With Quote
  #168  
Old 11-20-2020, 07:04 PM
steve5838 steve5838 is offline
member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 32
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bnorth View Post
Nice card. It's amazing how much difference looking at them it direct sun light makes.
Thanks, Ben. It is so cool how some versions seem to stand out so well in the sunlight. Here is another raw one I got last week but took it outside to get a picture in the same sunlight. Also low tint but this one has a little more redness. For me it's like going to a museum... I could look at these all day long and not get bored. Steve
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 20201120_195906.jpg (77.4 KB, 52 views)
Reply With Quote
  #169  
Old 11-25-2020, 04:42 PM
Athos01 Athos01 is offline
member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 11
Default

Cards look great Steve, I'll have to try that same thing!!!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
1980's, 1989 fleer, error cards, randy johnson, variations



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 Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
1989 fleer Randy Johnson hoebob69 Modern Baseball Cards Forum (1980-Present) 63 02-24-2018 01:07 PM
New 89 Fleer Randy Johnson Marlboro error version? bnorth Modern Baseball Cards Forum (1980-Present) 4 03-04-2016 07:21 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:47 PM.


ebay GSB