Vertical or Horizontal ???

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>So, here's perhaps a rather pedestrian question for the group, but I was wondering just the same...without considering the design itself<br /><br />Do you prefer cards with vertical presentation (such as 1957)?<br />or<br />card sets with horizontal orientation (such as 1955 Bowman or 1960 Topps)?<br /><br />I find the horizontal orientation annoying, because whether or not you like graded cards, cards are usually displayed vertically (sheets, slabs, whatever). <br /><br /><br />...Now THERE'S a GREAT IDEA!!! New grading slabs with flips on top of horizontal cards!!!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Mike</b><p>I love the 1955 Topps set. Probably my favorite set from that era because of the horizontal layout and vibrant colors.<br /><br />But I like it when sets mix it up as well (some vertical, some horizontal) like the 1952 Topps set. it would have been nice to see more star cards in the horizontal format from that set, like the Johnny Mize. You almost forget there are horizontal cards in there.<br /><br />I think if the play pose calls for a horizontal layout, then its nice to it. <br />So I guess I'm saying I like horizontal better.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Mike,<br /><br />I agree with you that the horizontal format works well with certain plays, for instance Jackie Robinson sliding into 2nd to break up a double-play. Unfortunately, a card like that was never made.<br /><br />A great card using the horizontal format is in the '53 Bowman where Pee Wee Reese is making a throw from near second in an effort to make a double-play.<br /><br />However, in general vertical format is better. Also, our hobby supplies and the grading cos. seem to favor this format as well.<br /><br />Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Mike</b><p>I agree, player poses do favor a vertical format cards. It is a nice surprise though when a set that is primarily vertical format throws a horizontal pose or two in there. <br /><br />I think in the case of the 1953 Bowman set the Reese is the only one correct?<br /><br />I remember as a kid a 1991-92 Score or Fleer Sammy Sosa card, when he was on the White Sox, that had a horizontal format. I think for that reason only, it was the best looking card in a awful set.<br /><br />Also, lets not forget the 1971 Topps Thurman Munson. One of my all time favorites<br /><br />I guess if a card company notices early on that an image would look good horizontally, it usual works out with impressive results.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Paul S</b><p>Like the rest of you, if it's a good design and fits the image, do it!<br /><br />However, here's this lefthander's dilemma with horizontal format: Sometimes I "thumb" through a group of cards -- you know, taking a stack in one hand and using your thumb to push them into the other hand. (yes, they're in baggies or toploaders...usually <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> ) However, if the card numbers on the back have been lined up correctly, then horizontal cards usually end up turned around 180* and facing away from me, i.e., the picture/text is upside down (us southpaws thumb opposite handed from you righties.) On sets with mostly horiztonal formats this is somewhat easily remedied, but for sets that mix it up it is a big annoyance. If I change the offending cards around to face me then I can't search by card number easily, as the number is on the bottom! Especially annoying when they are in card boxes. Anybody else experience this? Trite, I know, but I needed to get this off my chest.