'48 bowman musial...real?

[chaddurbin]

bought this but have zero experience with post-war cards. just looks funny as the front picture is not as clear as the ones i see in psa/sgc holders.

it does measure to size, f/b scans. thanks!

http://i370.photobucket.com/albums/oo147/quannimir/Collection/muse_zps8bf4b199.jpghttp://i370.photobucket.com/albums/oo147/quannimir/Collection/museb_zpsce14c3cb.jpg

[stlcardsfan]

I was on the search for that card for a couple years and just recently landed one. Can't really vouch for the signature but the card looks good to me. There are a lot of Musial signatures out there you could compare it to.

[chaddurbin]

Thank you I was asking about the card, sorry I was unclear.

[Paul S]

The card is for real. To echo what Stlcardsfan states, I can't vouch for the signature either. You just have some natural wear 'n tear "rub off", as I refer to it, on the front. I can really tell from the back of the card (that you scanned). I have owned a raw 48B Musial for decades. I have it in hand right now. Unfortunately at the moment my scanner doesn't want to "communicate" with my Windows OS, or I would post some pix. Very nice looking card (yours), just the way I love them!

[chaddurbin]

Thx guys appreciate the help! I read you can tell by the back if it's authentic, so what's the tell? The Sig is authentic imo.

[Paul S]

"The Tell" is this, and it's been said by board members far wiser than I. Something to the effect of, If you handle enough cards in your lifetime...you will just know. For me, it's like an instinct for 48 Bowmans. I got mine in the 60s from a collector who got them originally out of packs. In this case I don't even need to see your card in person because your scans are so accurate. I will try to post some later today if I can get my scanner and laptop to stop being so temperamental, shake hands and make up (if they start making out I will grab my camera:cool:).

[Paul S]

These are intentionally chosen for their varied condition. My scanner is cheap but very accurate -- none of the automatic whiten and brighten. I imported into Photoshop but didn't use the gizmos. I have a laptop which the monitor could be better, and wear cheap over-the-counter reading glasses. But these are how they look to me when I have them in hand (and still wearing my cheap optics), although they are just a touch sharper when at their actual size, and the backs would be much more clear, focused and readable, as in Quan's scan.:

[chaddurbin]

thx paul. all of urs look great! what threw me off on my musial was how "white" the front was, i was expecting more toning. the edges had the right amount of dirtiness and the back seems ok.

[Paul S]

Quan, my Kiner totally has that white front you mention about your Musial, yet the Mize is a bit more "toned" but sharp although less bright in general. I think they just aged differently although they were all stored together, on my part, for a very long time. I can't explain why the difference. I don't think Bowman would have changed printers in the middle of a run that is a relatively short set, player wise. Maybe the printing house got their stock from different suppliers, but I wouldn't think so. If you noticed all the backs in my scan look uniform (yes, I have more just like that), regardless of how the fronts look. That's why I mentioned in an earlier post that I know your Musial is real because of the back.