1981 Fleer error cards

[donmuth]

I was going through my box of 1981 Fleer baseball and found a small group of Don Zimmer cards. All of the cards except one had his name, manager, circle around the Red Sox logo, and border in black ink (pic on right). One however is clearly gray in all of those areas (pic on left). All other aspects of the cards appear to be the same (color front and back, etc.).

I haven't done an exhaustive search through my box of '81 Fleer, but I didn't quickly find other cards with similar gray vs. black on them. Does anyone know if this is an acknowledged error card or common printing defect with '81 Fleer? I know '81 Fleer has a ton of other errors and variations from the 3 print runs, but I haven't found mention of thhis specific one on any of the online error/variation checklist sites that I use from time to time.


Thanks!
Donny

[Mark17]

That just looks like the black ink was running out during the print run, and not an actual variation.

[ALR-bishop]

Mark- how would you define a real variation ? ��

The 82 Blackless have been recognized by SCD and PSA as variations

But I agree with you they are print defects

Neat card Donny

[Mark17]

On his Zimmer cards pictured, one has full black and the other has some, but not the full, black. I suppose during that print run, as the black was becoming less and less bold, you could consider each one it's own variation.

As in, 100% black ink present, 99% black ink present, 98% black ink present... and maybe the one pictured is 15% black ink present, and so on.

So it's a question of how ridiculous someone wants to take the "variation" concept. I've seen some 1962 Topps McCovey cards with great color, and others that look dull. Are they "variations?" Is a card cut off center vs. one that is centered a "variation?"

My understanding is that the 1982 have no black (0 %.)

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Mark- how would you define a real variation ? ��

The 82 Blackless have been recognized by SCD and PSA as variations

But I agree with you they are print defects

Neat card Donny

[ALR-bishop]

In 82 there are transition cards going from black to gray, gray to traces, and then to Blackless

Agree with you the parameters of what is or should be a variation are mysterious and chaotic. Hence the 61 Fairly with just a trace of green in the baseball on the back recognized by PSA even though that defect exists in several 1961 Topps cards.

[steve B]

On 81 Fleer, and several other sets from around then, if you check the black closely on a number of cards you'll notice that there are some with entirely opaque black, and some which are slightly transparent- it's possible to see some of the other colors behind the "black".

I'm not sure if this is from a different ink, or the printers somehow thinning the ink to make it last longer. It usually isn't a situaton where the ink is running out.
The Zimmer shown here I believe IS an ink running out problem.


If you get into ink color differences, DO NOT look at the backs of 81 Fleer.
There are at least 3 different ink colors that I believe relate to at least three different press runs.

[donmuth]

for everyone's thoughts on this

After finding this gray Zimmer, I went through the box and pulled out several other of the recognized variations (little finger, etc.) plus some HOFers and potential HOFers that I hadn't parsed out before. So maybe not a total waste of time.

Thanks again!

[Rich Klein]

Originally Posted by steve B

On 81 Fleer, and several other sets from around then, if you check the black closely on a number of cards you'll notice that there are some with entirely opaque black, and some which are slightly transparent- it's possible to see some of the other colors behind the "black".

I'm not sure if this is from a different ink, or the printers somehow thinning the ink to make it last longer. It usually isn't a situaton where the ink is running out.
The Zimmer shown here I believe IS an ink running out problem.


If you get into ink color differences, DO NOT look at the backs of 81 Fleer.
There are at least 3 different ink colors that I believe relate to at least three different press runs.

We know there were at least 3 different print runs because of the confirmed and "legit" variations some of which were corrected at different times during 1981.

Some of the later variations (and I'm going from memory here so if I'm off forgive me) include getting Kevin Saucier's name spalled correctly on the back and getting Jesse Jefferson's team correct.

Rich

[bluejay4eva34]

Originally Posted by Rich Klein

We know there were at least 3 different print runs because of the confirmed and "legit" variations some of which were corrected at different times during 1981.

Some of the later variations (and I'm going from memory here so if I'm off forgive me) include getting Kevin Saucier's name spalled correctly on the back and getting Jesse Jefferson's team correct.

Rich

does anyone know if the negative used on my Father's 1980 Fleer error card #491 is available?(that says Blue Jays on the front with Pirates on the back)

[Cliff Bowman]

It is 1981 Fleer #419 Jesse Jefferson, it looks like it was an uncorrected error that was never fixed so they are all printed that way. That's awesome to have a father who was a Major Leaguer, not many people can say that. ETA, my mistake it was corrected but the Pirates error isn't rare. Both versions are available here https://www.comc.com/Cards,=1981+fleer+jesse+jefferson. Actually it wasn't an error, he played for the Pirates the last month of 1980. I wonder which card is actually the correction?

[7nohitter]

Um...isn't EVERY '81 Fleer an error card?