1980-present variations

[TAVG]

figured id post some of the variations ive found...or printing errors. really new to this, even though ive collected cards most of my life (20+yrs)

http://i1366.photobucket.com/albums/r770/stlcardinalsfan09/bb%20errors%20and%20print%20variations/img022_zpsc93f6ebe.jpg (http://s1366.photobucket.com/user/stlcardinalsfan09/media/bb%20errors%20and%20print%20variations/img022_zpsc93f6ebe.jpg.html)

http://i1366.photobucket.com/albums/r770/stlcardinalsfan09/bb%20errors%20and%20print%20variations/img033_zps8ad01284.jpg (http://s1366.photobucket.com/user/stlcardinalsfan09/media/bb%20errors%20and%20print%20variations/img033_zps8ad01284.jpg.html)

http://i1366.photobucket.com/albums/r770/stlcardinalsfan09/bb%20errors%20and%20print%20variations/img023_zps776842a0.jpg (http://s1366.photobucket.com/user/stlcardinalsfan09/media/bb%20errors%20and%20print%20variations/img023_zps776842a0.jpg.html)

http://i1366.photobucket.com/albums/r770/stlcardinalsfan09/bb%20errors%20and%20print%20variations/img024_zps63722bf8.jpg (http://s1366.photobucket.com/user/stlcardinalsfan09/media/bb%20errors%20and%20print%20variations/img024_zps63722bf8.jpg.html)

http://i1366.photobucket.com/albums/r770/stlcardinalsfan09/bb%20errors%20and%20print%20variations/img025_zps29571623.jpg (http://s1366.photobucket.com/user/stlcardinalsfan09/media/bb%20errors%20and%20print%20variations/img025_zps29571623.jpg.html)

http://i1366.photobucket.com/albums/r770/stlcardinalsfan09/bb%20errors%20and%20print%20variations/img026_zps23295d30.jpg (http://s1366.photobucket.com/user/stlcardinalsfan09/media/bb%20errors%20and%20print%20variations/img026_zps23295d30.jpg.html)

http://i1366.photobucket.com/albums/r770/stlcardinalsfan09/bb%20errors%20and%20print%20variations/img028_zpsa0c5ef31.jpg (http://s1366.photobucket.com/user/stlcardinalsfan09/media/bb%20errors%20and%20print%20variations/img028_zpsa0c5ef31.jpg.html)

http://i1366.photobucket.com/albums/r770/stlcardinalsfan09/bb%20errors%20and%20print%20variations/img029_zps32c5404f.jpg (http://s1366.photobucket.com/user/stlcardinalsfan09/media/bb%20errors%20and%20print%20variations/img029_zps32c5404f.jpg.html)

http://i1366.photobucket.com/albums/r770/stlcardinalsfan09/bb%20errors%20and%20print%20variations/img030_zpsd69deca1.jpg (http://s1366.photobucket.com/user/stlcardinalsfan09/media/bb%20errors%20and%20print%20variations/img030_zpsd69deca1.jpg.html)

http://i1366.photobucket.com/albums/r770/stlcardinalsfan09/bb%20errors%20and%20print%20variations/img032_zpsb051eb13.jpg (http://s1366.photobucket.com/user/stlcardinalsfan09/media/bb%20errors%20and%20print%20variations/img032_zpsb051eb13.jpg.html)

[bnorth]

Cool cards. Plus it was about time someone started this type thread over here.
Here is one of my favorites a 1989 Fleer Bill Ripken. This is known as the Bulls Eye version from the yellow and red spot on his arm.

The card cut from the sheet has a nice yellow circle in the 7 on his uniform and the Desert Storm card is just super cool looking.

[mrmopar]

I took a recent interest in these types of cards after seeing a number of true variations that I was never really aware of, such as the Inc and Inc. on the late 80s/early 90s Donruss cards. Of course the trick is to have enough of any one card to find anything different between them. Also, are those flaws unique to a few cards or are they on ALL of the cards?

Aside from Garvey variations to add to the collection, and he missed the bulk of what I have discovered in the late 80s/early 90s, I really didn't necessarily care a whole lot if I had these for other players, then I thought about all the extra Dodger cards I had from years of buying lots. I started going through them and was finding a fair number of both the "real" variations (* or **, Inc or Inc., letter or no letter on back, etc) as well as the print flaws that you are showing here. I found a number of print dots and ink color differences that almost certainly have to show up in a percentage of the print run, but sometimes they seemed like they would have to be unique. With the Dodgers, there was a lot of blue ink and sometimes you could see more reddish or purple tones. I noticed hats and jerseys that were definitely not like the rest of the cards I had even if it was slight.

I found a lot of print dots in the 85-89 Topps, mainly because I had a pretty good sample size of a lot of the cards. Sometimes the differences were tough to spot and sometimes that jumped out. I hope to scan some once I finish sorting them all out. It's been a slow go, as I need really good light and I have been relying on the natural light from outside, but that only allows a limited timeframe in which to work and only if it is not overcast (and I live in WA). I am in the Ws now.

[bnorth]

Some more from the 89 Fleer set. Rafael Belliard has a pink stripe by the S on his jersey. Tommy John has a blue spot on his neck. Guillermo Hernandez has a pink moose head by his shoulder. Tom Henke has a black strip over the A in Jays on his jersey. With a little searching all these are easily found.

[bnorth]

A pair of Randy Johnson rookies with print dots in the stadium.

[bnorth]

Here is 2 more from the 89 Fleer set. This is pretty much the only modern set I collect this stuff from and mainly just Bill Ripken, Randy Johnson, and Ken Griffey Jr.

For a person that collects the weird suff this Ripken has it all. Nice print offset, real factory saw cut, a huge diamond factory miscut and it says F*ck Face twice.

The Griffey has what looks like a womens fertility symbol on the inside of his left wrist.

[4reals]

1980 Topps Jim Bibby #229 - (3) Card Variation Sequence of Blue Overspray at Position Banner getting progressively worse

http://i773.photobucket.com/albums/yy19/joeoneone/cards%20blog/80%20t%20bibby%20lot_zps0zro7isa.jpeg

[bnorth]

Here is one from my all-time favorite player Wade Boggs. This is a very common print error that is easily found. His 1988 Topps All Star Batting Average AL Leaders Teardrop card(on left). Notice the white tear coming out his right eye. Don't know what he was crying about he hit an amazing .363 to lead the league.

[con40]

Ben, I truly admire your zeal to discover as many modern "variations" as possible, but none of these cards are true variations in any sense whatsoever. These cards are the results of print quality issues. Presses in the day ran tens of thousands of sheets an hour. At that speed, any dirt, debris, ink density, registration problem, blanket damage, etc., would yield issues on hundreds, if not thousands of sheets before the pressmen could catch it and clean/fix the press issue. The affected sheets would not be thrown away and would continue on into packs. This would occur constantly throughout the press run.

Printing is far from a precise process and all kinds of issues occur on a press run consisting of millions of sheets.

You will keep discovering these anomalies for the rest of your life.

However, your 1988 Wade Boggs All Star is a true variation! It's actually two different cards. I suspect it was placed on the sheet twice, or was printed in two runs of separate printing plates.

How can I tell?

Look at the space between the bottom of the yellow frame and his name in cyan ink. The space is different on each card. Since yellow and cyan are solid CMYK inks, this is not a registration issue (the photo is crisp and it has yellow and cyan ink in it). The only way this could happen is a change in the yellow and cyan plates... or it was two separately stripped cards on the sheet.

[bn2cardz]

Here is a color variation I found a few years back. I have a few 82 Dale Murphy's and they all look like the one on the left.

These were scanned together at the same time, so no color issues from the scanning:

http://www.net54baseball.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=120597&stc=1&d=1383620186

Here is a link to the thread where I first brought it up.
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=171207


I have been looking through my childhood cards recently looking for variants and miscuts. The most interesting one I recently found was a finger print in the ink. I will have to get those scanned in some time.

[bnorth]

Ben, I truly admire your zeal to discover as many modern "variations" as possible, but none of these cards are true variations in any sense whatsoever. These cards are the results of print quality issues. Presses in the day ran tens of thousands of sheets an hour. At that speed, any dirt, debris, ink density, registration problem, blanket damage, etc., would yield issues on hundreds, if not thousands of sheets before the pressmen could catch it and clean/fix the press issue. The affected sheets would not be thrown away and would continue on into packs. This would occur constantly throughout the press run.

Printing is far from a precise process and all kinds of issues occur on a press run consisting of millions of sheets.

You will keep discovering these anomalies for the rest of your life.

However, your 1988 Wade Boggs All Star is a true variation! It's actually two different cards. I suspect it was placed on the sheet twice, or was printed in two runs of separate printing plates.

How can I tell?

Look at the space between the bottom of the yellow frame and his name in cyan ink. The space is different on each card. Since yellow and cyan are solid CMYK inks, this is not a registration issue (the photo is crisp and it has yellow and cyan ink in it). The only way this could happen is a change in the yellow and cyan plates... or it was two separately stripped cards on the sheet.

I 100% understand they are just print errors and not separate printings(real variations). They keep the hobby cheap and interesting for me.

I can't speak about all the 88 Topps All Star Boggs cards but the 2 I pictured are not from separate plates. The card on the right has a slight yellow print offset. In hand it is very easy to see.

[bnorth]

Here is a color variation I found a few years back. I have a few 82 Dale Murphy's and they all look like the one on the left.

These were scanned together at the same time, so no color issues from the scanning:

http://www.net54baseball.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=120597&stc=1&d=1383620186

Here is a link to the thread where I first brought it up.
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=171207


I have been looking through my childhood cards recently looking for variants and miscuts. The most interesting one I recently found was a finger print in the ink. I will have to get those scanned in some time.

Would like to see the fingerprint card. I have 5 different ones in my collection.

[con40]

I 100% understand they are just print errors and not separate printings(real variations). They keep the hobby cheap and interesting for me.

I can't speak about all the 88 Topps All Star Boggs cards but the 2 I pictured are not from separate plates. The card on the right has a slight yellow print offset. In hand it is very easy to see.

Way to go Ben. There's no rules to enjoying this hobby!

I took a close look at those 88 Boggs cards and you are correct. The yellow rides high on the left card creating a larger space at the bottom between his name than on the right. Also looks like the yellow is running in the lettering on All Star.

[bnorth]

Here is a color variation on the 1982 Topps #53 Greg Gross card. Card on the right is the normal card.

[bnorth]

All cards pictured are 1992 Topps blank back proofs.

[bnorth]

Here is another fairly common print error. 1984 All-Star Set Collectors Edition Wade Boggs #8. The bottom 1/3 of his name is missing on some cards.

[bn2cardz]

Would like to see the fingerprint card. I have 5 different ones in my collection.

Took me a while but here is the fingerprint scan as well as two others.

The motivation for my scanning finally, though, came from the 1987 Topps Luis Aquino Blue Name. I came across this card today, I don't know how long I have owned this card, but it jumped out to me when I noticed the name wasn't black or white like the other 87 Topps cards. If anyone has any information about other 1987 Topps Name variations it would be appreciated.

http://i1118.photobucket.com/albums/k607/bn2cardz/bn2cardz/JunkErrors001_zpsoiwfpmnx.jpg

The finger print, 1992 Tyler Houston, isn't as impressive as other finger prints and it would be hard to prove it was factory done, but I pulled the card and it isn't my finger print.

http://i1118.photobucket.com/albums/k607/bn2cardz/bn2cardz/JunkErrors002_zpsmzvjacgx.jpg

The 1992 Rick Honeycutt has a pink blotch in his upper thigh.


Of the three, though, I think the 1987 Topps is the only true error/variation. There are surface blemishes on the card, yet the edges and corners and edges are NRMT so I am sure the card came this way in the pack as the other cards next to it in the box all looked NRMT.
http://i1118.photobucket.com/albums/k607/bn2cardz/bn2cardz/JunkErrors003_zpsqaks6z1h.jpg

[bnorth]

Took me a while but here is the fingerprint scan as well as two others.

The motivation for my scanning finally, though, came from the 1987 Topps Luis Aquino Blue Name. I came across this card today, I don't know how long I have owned this card, but it jumped out to me when I noticed the name wasn't black or white like the other 87 Topps cards. If anyone has any information about other 1987 Topps Name variations it would be appreciated.

http://i1118.photobucket.com/albums/k607/bn2cardz/bn2cardz/JunkErrors001_zpsoiwfpmnx.jpg

The finger print, 1992 Tyler Houston, isn't as impressive as other finger prints and it would be hard to prove it was factory done, but I pulled the card and it isn't my finger print.

http://i1118.photobucket.com/albums/k607/bn2cardz/bn2cardz/JunkErrors002_zpsmzvjacgx.jpg

The 1992 Rick Honeycutt has a pink blotch in his upper thigh.


Of the three, though, I think the 1987 Topps is the only true error/variation. There are surface blemishes on the card, yet the edges and corners and edges are NRMT so I am sure the card came this way in the pack as the other cards next to it in the box all looked NRMT.
http://i1118.photobucket.com/albums/k607/bn2cardz/bn2cardz/JunkErrors003_zpsqaks6z1h.jpg

The Aquino card looks like that because of light black ink in that area. The card looks like it got wet in the area where the name is also. Could be the black ink was running low also as the black is very spotty over the entire card.

The Tyler Green card looks to have a little extra black ink to the left of his foot in the border also, cool card.

[bn2cardz]

The Aquino card looks like that because of light black ink in that area. The card looks like it got wet in the area where the name is also. Could be the black ink was running low also as the black is very spotty over the entire card.

The Tyler Green card looks to have a little extra black ink to the left of his foot in the border also, cool card.

I have just learned my lesson about posting outside of net54. After getting sarcastic answers my thread was blocked when I asked about the Aquino card on Blowoutcards. :eek:

I think the Aquino is a light black that was printed on the light blue that caused the dark blue hue. Same time I is this a known variant, or just a one off printing flaw?

The Tyler Green also has some ink on the right border as well. Though I didn't get that in the close up.

[bnorth]

In my opinion the Aquino is a printing flaw. Like with all printing flaws there could be 1 or several 100 copies.

Blowout is fun to read because of all the little kid drama but little help unless it is a new highly overpriced card.

EDIT: LOL went and checked out the BO thread and it was exactly as expected.

[steve B]

I also think the Aquino is a printing flaw caused by the black being printed lightly. Topps did that a lot, more in the early 80's and 70's. And they especially did that on the card backs.

The other possibility that's harder to figure out is if the black was printed under the blue for some reason. The 1981 Fleer star stickers come with dark and light blue, and the light blue has the colors in the wrong order.

With black you'd look for the black being solid everywhere but looking like blue or another color showing through. Or blocking it entirely which would be a lot cooler, and something I've never seen. The black is weak on a lot of places on the Aquino which is why I think it's just weak black.

Steve B

[bn2cardz]

I am not a huge junk era collector, I was just sorting through cards (mainly retrieving plastic entombing junk cards) and I came across this. I originally just kept going until I realized all the names were in black or white and I thought I had seen a blue one and went back.

When I pulled it out I originally was thinking the blue was printed on top of the black. Yet the horrible surface abrasions led me to think that what ever caused that caused the hue shift. The card getting wet and possibly diluting the black at the factory may be a good theory. I did a close up and it is noticed that the Topps logo is see through as well.

http://i1118.photobucket.com/albums/k607/bn2cardz/bn2cardz/Untitled_zps4igpwscg.png


I just didn't know if this was a known variant of the set or just a stand alone flaw. I find it intersting that most flaws from the time were basically just printing flaws, some of them got recognized and categorized (Comstock Yellow and Thomas NNOF) while hundreds never did. I just didn't know for sure where this landed on that spectrum.

[steve B]

The printing process at the time was mostly manual and very hands -on. Lots of mistakes could make for different appearances, even the ones nearly everyone would call variations. Like the 79 Bump Wills , someone had to manually make the mask the plates were made from. And I'd bet the team banners were made in bulk and taped into place on the right mask. A bit of confusion, or a bit of a hurry at the end of the day and the wrong one gets put on. Most of the mistakes weren't that bad, stuff like names in white or yellow is just a matter of someone blocking out the name area on the yellow plate when they shouldn't.

Thomas NNOF is a special case, Until I read the thread about the matching cards I'd thought it was an isolated piece of stuff blocking a card, or a jam damaging the plate. But it's a plate made wrong and used when it really should have seen the scrap pile instead of the press.

Sometimes telling a print flaw apart from a difference on the plate isn't easy.

Add in some sloppiness with the inks - and for some reason they were very light on black often enough that it's fairly common - and you've got a lot of interesting cards.

The light black can be
-underinking, the layer is thinner and when it gets thin enough it isn't solid anymore.
- Disengaging the inking for black and the sheets after that get used. Not unusual on multi color presses. The offset blanket carries enough ink for a light pass or two. And if you shut down by shutting off the ink and letting a few sheets run through which makes cleaning the blanket easier or simply leaves it in a state where it's not covered in dried ink for the guy on the next shift. ....There you go.
- Actual lighter ink. The ink is sort of like grease only stickier. It's a base with color added, usually some form of carbon for a good solid black. If they used a cheap ink that had less pigment, or added a bunch of base to save a few bucks that would do it too.

Steve B

[ALR-bishop]

Keith and I have had this discussion before. There is no accepted hobby definition of a variation that I know of, and some of the most expensive "variations" in the hobby are no more than the minor print defects of which he speaks.

I view a variant as any card that differs in any respect from it's common counterpart. I agree with Keith that if you look long enough you might find some print deviation in every card out there

I tend to view true variations as cards intentionally changed by the manufacturer for some reason. The 59 trade/option variations are an example. But I think I agree with Keith that DPs or cards printed on two different sheets that have cropping or other differences can be true variations , for although not specifically intended, the difference in the printing process was intended. The 52 Mantle or 62 greenies are examples.

But in terms of future value it does not matter what Keith or I think if the hobby as a whole decides that the 58 Herrer or 57 Bakep....or more recently the 61 Fairly...print defects are true variations.

I think the thread here and in the pre 80 forum are great at pointing out all the cool "variants" out there :-)

PS-- hello from St Bart's

[mrmopar]

Bought some cheap boxes to rip today and pulled this. i was lucky to even notice it, but the grey box caught my eye when i opened the pack. Sure enough, it was not right and the correct version has the black box. The rest of the back has a washed out look too, as there is a lack of black ink all around. No other cards in the box looked like this. For those of you with organized cards, see if you have this or others like it.


http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a81/mrmopar/My%20Collection/94%20Donruss%20Sanders%20Variation_zpsdnleh3l4.jpg (http://s9.photobucket.com/user/mrmopar/media/My%20Collection/94%20Donruss%20Sanders%20Variation_zpsdnleh3l4.jpg .html)

[rgpete]

Portion of a 6 six card sheet. I noticed differences of the bottom gold foil line were it comes close to Griffey Jr

[bnorth]

Got these 2 in the mail today. Johnson has a print error above Expos logo on his shirt. Bill ripken has yellow circle in logo on his hat.

[4reals]

Wow, check out this print variation! Stray ink?

[Tripredacus]

Looks like I won't have to make a new thread, we can just use this one. Here is the rest of the Yankees errors that I took pictures of.

1987 Topps Willie Randolph printing error (back is ok)
http://i.imgur.com/fPpjrEUl.jpg (https://imgur.com/fPpjrEU)

1992 Babe Ruth Collection miscut
http://i.imgur.com/2Cj7fvHl.jpg (https://imgur.com/2Cj7fvH)
http://i.imgur.com/B6xI4kXl.jpg (https://imgur.com/B6xI4kX)

1993 Leaf Spike Owen / Eric Young severe miscut
http://i.imgur.com/llnJ6Cel.jpg (https://imgur.com/llnJ6Ce)
http://i.imgur.com/Dp4xTvMl.jpg (https://imgur.com/Dp4xTvM)

2000 Topps Bernie Williams miscut (back is ok)
http://i.imgur.com/cfGuJ2bl.jpg (https://imgur.com/cfGuJ2b)

[steve B]

I can't speak about all the 88 Topps All Star Boggs cards but the 2 I pictured are not from separate plates. The card on the right has a slight yellow print offset. In hand it is very easy to see.

That's what I thought at first. There is a registration issue, but using my incredibly scientific (Ok sort of half assed) method*, I compared the distance between the yellow and blue, and the difference is substantial. Enough that I think it's an actual difference.

*I compare the gap using the cursor on screen. In this case, the gap on the left card is just the size of the arrowhead part of the cursor. The same gap on the right is much larger.

[steve B]

That's what I thought at first. There is a registration issue, but using my incredibly scientific (Ok sort of half assed) method*, I compared the distance between the yellow and blue, and the difference is substantial. Enough that I think it's an actual difference.

*I compare the gap using the cursor on screen. In this case, the gap on the left card is just the size of the arrowhead part of the cursor. The same gap on the right is much larger.

Flip that, the LEFT gap is larger. And still bigger than it should be.

Also, I'm way late, and probably already commented.....

Daughter #2 is demanding the computer, maybe she should get it.... :o

[bigfanNY]

This is I think a real error card from the 2012 Topps set. When the set was issued someone found one of these and tried to get a hundred bucks for it. No one bought it and then a few more turned up and I bought 3 or 4 for $3-$5. They came from all over the US Ca, Al, CT so it was not like it was a regional thing. I kept them all because I know hor rare it is to have a real modern error card.

[ALR-bishop]

I think this one has been posted in here somewhere before, maybe in the long pre 80 thread. Neat card

[Deadman31]

Ive asked about this on various areas of internet for a long time. It appears to be a silver variation.


https://i.ibb.co/LpR2LY1/5474-D1-B8-2-B2-B-4-D34-9622-4297-BFE0522-D.jpg (https://ibb.co/0J2dgmr)

[Tripredacus]

Maybe that is just a silver version... but I wonder if it is also possible for there to have been bad batches of whatever they used to print that foil on there. Such as with 1993 Topps Gold parallels and the variations in shades of foil.

[Deadman31]

I’ve only ever seen one other silver it was a common. I’m not sure, I’ve had this Griffey for as long as I can remember.

[Bigdaddy]

Ive asked about this on various areas of internet for a long time. It appears to be a silver variation.


The error on that card belongs to whoever gave Jr. the bunt sign.

[tschock]

I love these 1997 Leaf cards. The cards were stamped as you can see the indentation, but the foil was not applied.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1600x1200q90/921/6tqSHI.jpg

[rgpete]

Ken Griffey Jr a print spot on his pants leg

[insidethewrapper]

1981 Topps # 453 Rob Wilfong ( No black line on top).

[Cliff Bowman]

1981 Topps # 453 Rob Wilfong ( No black line on top).

That’s one of the 1981 Topps double print missing border cards, there are about 25 that I know of. Some are completely missing the top border line and others have varying degrees of partially missing top border lines. Why it only affected cards in the double print horizontal rows I have no clue. There are also quite a few 1979 Topps double print cards with the same flaw, no clue why it only affects the double printed rows. I will post some scans when I get a chance.

[ALR-bishop]

I think I have 20 of them, or thereabouts. Several as a result of Cliff's generosity

[Cliff Bowman]

I happened across my stack of 1981 Topps double print missing top border cards yesterday, half of my stuff I have no clue where it is. Some of the cards are completely missing the top border line, others are in varying degrees of partially missing the top black border line.

[Cliff Bowman]

The rest of them.

[Exhibitman]

I picked up a large lot of 1996 Pinnacle Summit Above and Beyond inserts. Two of them are missing the gold embossed name plate and team logo. Anyone seen one of these before?

[Tripredacus]

I picked up a large lot of 1996 Pinnacle Summit Above and Beyond inserts. Two of them are missing the gold embossed name plate and team logo. Anyone seen one of these before?

No, but those are some of my favorite kinds of errors.

Is the embossing present but just missing the foil?

[Exhibitman]

Nope. No embossing at all. Looks like that entire process was missed. I have Boggs and a common both from the same lot with the same error.

[bnorth]

Nope. No embossing at all. Looks like that entire process was missed. I have Boggs and a common both from the same lot with the same error.

If you want to trade the Boggs I am your huckleberry.:)

[Cliff Bowman]

This is one of my favorite types of print flaw error cards, and what is cool about this one is the final black ink run wasn't affected by whatever blocked the rest of the printing process, it adhered with no problem.

[ALR-bishop]

Neat one Cliff. Spilled milk

[Deadman31]

I’ve had this silver variation for almost 30 years. I’ve never found an explanation and only other one I ever saw was just a common.

https://i.ibb.co/Q6XQR58/31-CBBC53-6-F6-A-4387-8-DE8-A2-D8-DEE6-F692.jpg (https://ibb.co/30kdqJf)

[Tripredacus]

It would be the same for any foil stamping that is the wrong color. The prevalent theory is that the foil was put on backwards, that it is only gold on one side of the foil and is silver on the other.

Similar situation in 1993 Topps Gold but in addition to gold and silver (silver seems quite rare) there are bronze or dark gold foil stampings on those.

[rgpete]

Ken Griffey Jr blood stain? about the side of the shin My card is the only one so far with a spot that I have seen

[jacksoncoupage]

Ken Griffey Jr blood stain? about the side of the shin My card is the only one so far with a spot that I have seen

Looks like a stray print blemish. Doubt it was on the plate and fixed.

[rgpete]

Here is a close up without the spot sorry for the bad scan

[steve B]

It would be the same for any foil stamping that is the wrong color. The prevalent theory is that the foil was put on backwards, that it is only gold on one side of the foil and is silver on the other.

Similar situation in 1993 Topps Gold but in addition to gold and silver (silver seems quite rare) there are bronze or dark gold foil stampings on those.

The raw foil has a backing to make it more durable, and to pull away the center areas. So running it upside down isn't a thing.

It's most likely that the color of the foil wasn't consistent.

[Deadman31]

So would this variation I have been considered rare or more of just a mistake?

[ALR-bishop]

Since there is no official hobby definition of what constitutes a "true" variation, I think you might get differing views. I would tend to view it as a print defect. But many people collect them , me included, if they are recurring. Some would say a true variation must involve an intentional change in the card by the manufacturer. But many long recognized hobby variations are clearly unintended recurring print defects. And in many cases I think it is virtually impossible to know for sure if a defect found on a card was "discovered" and corrected or just popped up accidentally on some sheets

But even a recurring print defect on a super star's card might be of interest to people who collect that player

[toppcat]

Thought I'd post these, just happened to notice them going through my sets. 1978 Blue Chili Pepper Gomez and 1979 Redfern Red Neatline Extensions.

[Cliff Bowman]

Thought I'd post these, just happened to notice them going through my sets. 1978 Blue Chili Pepper Gomez and 1979 Redfern Red Neatline Extensions.
Glenn Adams was above Redfern on the E* sheet. You have these in the wrong forum :D.

[swarmee]

https://scontent-dfw5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/118198209_10163942167410243_808611956460989152_n.j pg?_nc_cat=102&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=rCYiwTf9LcYAX9QB5ln&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-2.xx&oh=702f4273812c3a9b02b918f5dbf885bf&oe=5F623647
1992 Topps 301 Kirk McCaskill with recurring corona near right ear.

I bought the two lots of 1992 Jumbo packs (60 total) from the Saco River auction last week and opened a few. The rest are going in my antique mall booth in Destin. But noticed that all three of the McCaskill cards I got had this print defect. Some of the other cards had errant vertical magenta or cyan lines, but not significant enough to report.

Did notice something interesting about the set info from baseballcardpedia (http://baseballcardpedia.com/index.php/1992_Topps):
There were a number of uncorrected errors in the Gold set. Mark Davidson's name was accidently foil-stamped onto Steve Finley's card (#86). Andujar Cedeno (#288) is listed as a member of the New York Yankees. Mike Huff (#532) is listed as a member of the Boston Red Sox. Barry Larkin (#465) is listed as a member of the Houston Astros but is correctly listed as a member of the Cincinnati Reds on his Gold Winners cards. (See below)

The six checklist cards were replaced with six players who do not appear in the base set.

131 Terry Mathews
264 Rod Beck
366 Tony Perezchica
527 Terry McDaniel
658 John Ramos
787 Brian Williams
Checked the cards on COMC and the Larkin Winners can be found with either Reds or Astros on the gold foil. So there must have been multiple Winners runs.

But based on the bonus (replacement for checklist) cards in the ToppsGold set, you'd probably want to include them in your 1992 Topps set for completeness.

[jacksoncoupage]

[IMG]
Checked the cards on COMC and the Larkin Winners can be found with either Reds or Astros on the gold foil. So there must have been multiple Winners runs.

There were at least two separate runs. I no longer have my master list available but before losing that computer, I had sold two complete master sets of 1992 Topps Gold Winners and they check in well over 1000 cards.

Since that time I have casually purchased lots and attempted another build.

There are sheet code variations (C* vs. F* for example), ToppsGold watermark placement variations, ToppsGold watermark size variations, plus several various ERR/COR variation subjects.

And while I do not count them among the master set, there are silver foil variations (sold my Nolan Ryan way too cheap several years ago).

[ALR-bishop]

https://baseballcardvariationsguidebookvol2.wordpress.com/2019/12/13/1992-topps-1992-topps-dome-1992-topp/

[savedfrommyspokes]

Going through some 80's stuff and found these....the 84 Fleer Beard card and the 85 Fleer Stewart are recurring, however, I was not able to locate another copy of the 86 T Thon, anyone else have one?

[Tripredacus]

1981 Topps Astros Future Stars with some weird marking on Danny Heep's name.
http://i.imgur.com/sHlpAyZl.jpg (https://imgur.com/sHlpAyZ)

While it looks like it is something written on, it is printed and there is no indent.
http://i.imgur.com/BYJUsoZl.jpg (https://imgur.com/BYJUsoZ)

1981 Fleer Tim Flannery with reverse and corrected photo
http://i.imgur.com/v8Xy0YNl.jpg (https://imgur.com/v8Xy0YN)

And more modern, 2000 Opening Day Cal Ripken Jr with a foil printing error. A type of printing error I have only seen on this card.
https://i.imgur.com/XElseOBl.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/3ngeOOIl.jpg (https://imgur.com/3ngeOOI)

[4reals]

1981 Topps Astros Future Stars with some weird marking on Danny Heep's name.
http://i.imgur.com/sHlpAyZl.jpg (https://imgur.com/sHlpAyZ)

While it looks like it is something written on, it is printed and there is no indent.
http://i.imgur.com/BYJUsoZl.jpg (https://imgur.com/BYJUsoZ)

1981 Fleer Tim Flannery with reverse and corrected photo
http://i.imgur.com/v8Xy0YNl.jpg (https://imgur.com/v8Xy0YN)

And more modern, 2000 Opening Day Cal Ripken Jr with a foil printing error. A type of printing error I have only seen on this card.
https://i.imgur.com/XElseOBl.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/3ngeOOIl.jpg (https://imgur.com/3ngeOOI)


Ton of 81s can be found with partial black border missing including Astros Future Stars.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[insidethewrapper]

I don't know if this is old news but as I was sorting thru some 1984 Donruss cards I noticed this card came in 5 variations. They are all "Steel" backs.
1) No marks at top, 2) "L" shaped lines at top right corner, 3) Line at both top corners, 4) line at right top corner only , 5) Line at left top corner only. Various sizes of the lines are visable, based on the sheet cut at the factory.

[jacksoncoupage]

I don't know if this is old news but as I was sorting thru some 1984 Donruss cards I noticed this card came in 5 variations. They are all "Steel" backs.
1) No marks at top, 2) "L" shaped lines at top right corner, 3) Line at both top corners, 4) line at right top corner only , 5) Line at left top corner only. Various sizes of the lines are visable, based on the sheet cut at the factory.

These aren’t variations, they are guides for cutting the cards from sheets. This is why you only see them on severe top to bottom miscuts.

[ALR-bishop]

But do make some cards more interesting :)

[steve B]

I'd still count them. They're intentional marks put on the plate, and are different on different plates or different positions on the same plate.

And now I have to go look for them....sort of.

[jacksoncoupage]

I'd still count them. They're intentional marks put on the plate, and are different on different plates or different positions on the same plate.

And now I have to go look for them....sort of.

I really wanted this to be true but I’m not seeing what you are.

The lines are only visible due to a top to bottom miscut weighed heavily to the top. There aren’t any examples with the lines visible on a normally cut card with 50/50 centering.

Am I missing something?

[ALR-bishop]

Kaline and Banks in the 1960 set can be found with such marks, and the Banks can be found with varying degrees of a printers notation of Section I in the bottom border. Scans can be found in the never ever ending variations thread .

Different people have different concepts or definitions of what should or should not be deemed a variation,but there is no hobby standard or official definition. To each their own.

[swarmee]

https://img.comc.com/i/Baseball/1992/Topps---Base---Missing-Foil/621/Dan-Gakeler.jpg?id=3c4bb09c-9886-45b7-8ba7-a7659c188d70&size=original (https://www.comc.com/Cards/Baseball/1992/Topps_-_Base_-_Missing_Foil/621/Dan_Gakeler/16329090/Ungraded/COMC/Misprint)
1992 Topps - [Base] - Missing Foil #621 - Dan Gakeler [Misprint]
Courtesy of COMC.com (https://www.comc.com)

This one is pretty cool. Topps Gold 1992 card with no foil on front. What's interesting about it, is that since it's Topps Gold and not the regular set, there is no player/team box on the front. I just assumed that the gold foil was covering the player name/team boxes on the front. But they actually designed them without any.

[Hellwig]

https://i.ibb.co/m99rNyM/08-AD6-CF7-616-B-4905-9861-E1-CC21-E6-FC49.jpg (https://ibb.co/m99rNyM)

Found this the other day looking thru a stack kinda neat.

[4reals]

I really wanted this to be true but I’m not seeing what you are.

The lines are only visible due to a top to bottom miscut weighed heavily to the top. There aren’t any examples with the lines visible on a normally cut card with 50/50 centering.

Am I missing something?


I think what he is saying is that depending on the sheet that the card is printed on you could have the same type of miscuts and completely different cut guide markers. For instance, in 1970 topps many of the cards can be found with cut lines at the top of the card and even though they are technically miscut, you can find the same card with a white cut line or a black cut line depending on the sheet it was printed on.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201120/25f1ea0b7adb3d8b723b236712564815.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bnorth]

https://i.ibb.co/m99rNyM/08-AD6-CF7-616-B-4905-9861-E1-CC21-E6-FC49.jpg (https://ibb.co/m99rNyM)

Found this the other day looking thru a stack kinda neat.

Cool printing error.

[4reals]

1981 common box “finds”

Poquette reoccurring red diagonal line

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220402/99704c33012c73b1d8fbe905a8656cb2.jpg

Jeff Cox single and double border break

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220402/0a0169d0439a40dc342f5bb5e1552637.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220402/7b69e5c84d9a0a032c90ef11ccfe5462.jpg

Sakata reoccurring extra vertical border line

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220402/00ed17261f21efee49b95fd7c5a499df.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220402/9e61d3e9367cc8dd3bf784548f70152e.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220402/12e6b9baf242b980f492d2fe9048fa9f.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220402/4b6fde0235fa6fba869a31017c5b24a1.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220402/9c6aec98955b3e9b5f0394fd95c246b1.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220402/94d3b8b467c07f24ebe41fa8a5b85375.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Deertick]

I love these 1997 Leaf cards. The cards were stamped as you can see the indentation, but the foil was not applied.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1600x1200q90/921/6tqSHI.jpg

I have at least 69 without the foil stamping of the name. You can see where the die came down on some, but not on others. So some were attempted but they must have run out of the foil, an others not attempted at all. All are different players, and the only one I was able to find referenced on the interweb is unique also. All cards are from Series 1. Not sure if it matters, but cards run from #13 to #214.

[Jcfowler6]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220524/fb6f657f6d61c5dff4be2bbb22e1647e.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220524/b1191e236ac10350251586f116ab73c3.jpg
Was plowing thru a bunch of junk wax and found this guy. Missing “Twins” and “Topps”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ALR-bishop]

Good one Jon

[Cliff Bowman]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220524/fb6f657f6d61c5dff4be2bbb22e1647e.jpg
Was plowing thru a bunch of junk wax and found this guy. Missing “Twins” and “Topps”.

Fantastic find. Harper was on the right edge of the 1990 Topps B sheet of the 6th row, the Brantley above him and the Cochrane to his left should have also been affected to some degree.

[West]

Sweet error!

[richtree]

Fantastic find. Harper was on the right edge of the 1990 Topps B sheet of the 6th row, the Brantley above him and the Cochrane to his left should have also been affected to some degree.

Interested if u wanna move this one...

Rt

[4reals]

1982 Topps Stolen Base Leaders #164, ink bleed on back

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220627/3bff68155fd8ddcb6bd90f338cc0be17.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220627/cd981a39126da5f865f20bc77cc44a45.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[saucywombat]

I have discovered a "gold" streak variation for 4 different gold refractors from Series 2 of 1996 Finest.

Gold bar goes top to bottom in the same spot and with same width on all 4 cards.

[Bigdaddy]

You guys are nuts. I'm serious.

Do your wife/girlfriends know about this sickness?

;)

[wpeters]

I have had these since 1986 when I was opening packs. Two of them a=have a very noticeable gray cast to them. The backs are the same as regular 1986s. Has anyone ever seen this before?

[ALR-bishop]

You guys are nuts. I'm serious.

Do your wife/girlfriends know about this sickness?

;)

Tom— fortunately it has not gone airborne and so far seems not to be transferred by contact

[mrmopar]

Pretty sure I have seen that in the past as well. I thought the cards looked like they has oil spilled on them, if I recall my thoughts at the time.

I have had these since 1986 when I was opening packs. Two of them a=have a very noticeable gray cast to them. The backs are the same as regular 1986s. Has anyone ever seen this before?

[G1911]

You guys are nuts. I'm serious.

Do your wife/girlfriends know about this sickness?

;)

Variation hunting is a don’t ask, don’t tell thing. Girlfriends know I’m a dork but I don’t tell them about it. If I did tell them, I probably wouldn’t ever have a girlfriend :D

[philliesfan]

Not sure if this was posted before but I just found this James Silas name in Black and name in Purple....spelled JAMS not James at my friends card shop.
536389

[Republicaninmass]

Lobster bib!

[Republicaninmass]

This is one of my favorite types of print flaw error cards, and what is cool about this one is the final black ink run wasn't affected by whatever blocked the rest of the printing process, it adhered with no problem.

Lobster bib variation

[philliesfan]

Don't know if this would qualify in terms as a variation but check out my Nolan Ryan miscut.
Bob
541471541472

[bnorth]

Don't know if this would qualify in terms as a variation but check out my Nolan Ryan miscut.
Bob
541471541472

Nice card for many reasons, I like oddball cards like that.:)

[jacksoncoupage]

Don't know if this would qualify in terms as a variation but check out my Nolan Ryan miscut.
Bob
541471541472

As stated above, very nice card and for several reasons!

[ALR-bishop]

I bet that it being a Nolan Ryan card is one of the reasons :)

Maybe that weird stuff on the back might be another ?

Cool card

[philliesfan]

Thanks. For the most part centered on the front and way off on the reverse makes it interesting. Got it in a pack in 1985. No others in the box though.

[jacksoncoupage]

I have never seen an individually dated sheet like that. Maybe it is due to never seeing that piece of the sheet's edge and they all come that way but it certainly sticks out as special to me!

[philliesfan]

Gee. With several people thinking highly of the Ryan card, maybe I should list it on auction..........maybe it could pay for my son's next semester at Temple University. haha I wish!
Bob

[ALR-bishop]

Maybe University of Phoenix 😊

[bnorth]

Gee. With several people thinking highly of the Ryan card, maybe I should list it on auction..........maybe it could pay for my son's next semester at Temple University. haha I wish!
Bob

I doubt it would do that but I would be a bidder and it has nothing to do with being a Nolan Ryan card.:)

[G1911]

I don't know 1976-mid 80's well, have recently picked up some of the sets to extend my Topps run. Apologies if I've noticed something in my stacks that isn't actually new.

1981 #76 Mario Mendoza (the legend himself!) comes with or without a gap in the bottom of the black frame. Gap seems to be tougher

[G1911]

Card #9 Pete LaCock comes with or without the "s" in "Royals" in the write-up below his stats cut off, or printed correctly. Both appear to be common and easy.

[G1911]

#58 Joel Youngblood with black smearing over his name. This isn't a random ink smear, a look at COMC suggests a fairly high percentage of Youngblood's cards have this exact smear pattern defect and it is commonly recurring.

[G1911]

Like Youngblood, Mike Phillips #113 has frequent recurring black smearing, although the pattern of it changes heavily. Seems like half or so of Phillips cards have some version of it.

[G1911]

243 Sal Butera, with light green slash in his cheek. This version doesn't appear to be difficult.

[G1911]

311 Freddie Patek, 5'4 wonder, with yellow spotting by Topps logo, name, and lower right of the image. Appears to be tough.

[G1911]

333 Lee Lacy, with red all over the lower half of his jersey. Most copies do not have any red here at all.

[G1911]

412 Britt Burns, with pink spotting over the sky. The exact pattern of the pink varies card by card, but is recurring. Most copies don't have the stray pink at all.

[ALR-bishop]

Lacy and a bunch of other 81s have a no top border version. I have 27 of them. I think Cliff may have more than that They are recurring but scarce

[G1911]

Lacy and a bunch of other 81s have a no top border version. I have 27 of them. I think Cliff may have more than that They are recurring but scarce

Thank you Al, good to know. I don’t know anything about this set, I collected junk wax as a kid because it was so cheap, and I have always been into vintage, but 1976-1984 has been a blank spot. I bought 1980-1984 sets the last three months and am just starting to go through them, pulling any print defects I find that I can find as recurring.

Apologies if any of these recurring defects are already known to you gentlemen who know these sets better.

Are the two back stocks known? There is clearly a light and dark grey stock here. There is more of the dark grey in this particular set I bought for $50.

So far John Pacella with his hat falling off is the coolest card, no offense to the stud rookies.

[G1911]

Back to cataloguing my set, I've found 437 Mike Heath with this defect running through the blue border and up to above his helmet. I see another on COMC, but it seems most copies of the card do not have this defect

[G1911]

443 Jim Beattie, with the thin white frame between the yellow and the image being yellow, not white, at bottom above his name. Note that the yellow ink layer is not misaligned, causing it to go higher than normal, there is more yellow than there should be. Most copies have this area white, correctly.

[G1911]

452 Renie Martin. The team logo cap has an orange strip between the bill and the main body of the cap (I don't know if there is a word for that part of the cap...) and another one on the end of the bill. Note that this puts orange where it would not be even if the ink layers were misaligned. A check of COMC shows this is recurring.

What a happy guy!

[G1911]

476 Jerry Koosman, with the brim of the cap logo having a red layer following it's out edge. No red should be there at all, I think. Recurring confirmed.

[G1911]

Just like Beattie, Gary Thomasson comes this way or correct as well.

[G1911]

And Lee Mazzilli appears to come more often than not with black smearing in the name box. Took me a second to find a card that doesn't have it.

[G1911]

599 Kinney can come with a white line running through the logo cap and through the name box.

[G1911]

The majority of 600 Bench's come with some kind of black smearing in the name box. Seems like a number of cards had recurring problems here

[G1911]

601 Don Aase comes with this yellowish/greenish mark below the team name in the logo cap. Doesn't seem to be too hard.

[Pat R]

A couple of weeks ago on a rainy day I dug out a box of 90 Topps to look for some variations I found a few but nothing great just normal print defects.

Frank Robinson with a blotch over the trademark
542359


Phil Stephenson with a yellow "slash" in the corner that looks like it could have carried over on the card next to it
542360

Bert Blyleven with what looks like a hair or fiber
542361

[G1911]

This might be the earliest hair relic card!

[steve B]

I'm not positive about the cause, but most if not all of the 81 set comes with "regular" or "low contrast" backs.

https://www.net54baseball.com/picture.php?albumid=123&pictureid=4447

[ALR-bishop]

The 81 Bench 600 can be found with a missing top front border

[ALR-bishop]

Another Aase

[ALR-bishop]

Another 90

[G1911]

1984 Topps 126 Braves Leaders comes with or without this bluish smudge in Murphy's name box. Seems common.

[ALR-bishop]

I think the Murphy may involve 2 true variations, the one you posted being a transition card. The top one is scarce

[G1911]

Thank you Al, sorry that one is not new. I don’t know the 80’s too well so highlighting the ones I find in my sets that I can ID as recurring and haven’t seen before.

[G1911]

#233 checklist comes with or without this slash mark in the lower right.

It can also have a blue spot below 192 Essasky.

More importantly, while sorting this 1984 set, I have learned the "complete set" is missing a card, which just happens to be the Darryl Strawberry Rookie Card. I'm forming a posse to go get the bastard who sold it to me.

[G1911]

738 Bill Schroeder comes with or without this line to the right of the secondary portrait photo.

[G1911]

The same dual lines, next to the secondary photo and in it, recurs on 746 Mickey Hatcher as a variant.

[G1911]

1983 #130 Dave Stieb, this slash through his torso is recurring.

[ALR-bishop]

The Schroeder/Hatcher defect can also be found on Henderson and Bair....plus some other 84 oddities

[ALR-bishop]

Closer up

[ALR-bishop]

And the 84 Encased or Head Outside the box cards

[ALR-bishop]

Another 84 oddity

[G1911]

1982 Simmons comes with or without a dash below his 1972 stats. No dash is easier but COMC has 3 examples under a dollar right now (not mine) so the dash can't be tough.

[ALR-bishop]

Lucky for you.....and Shane.... he was no longer a Cardinal in 82

[G1911]

Lucky for you.....and Shane.... he was no longer a Cardinal in 82

However, the recurring defect occurs on a Cardinals stat line. I may have accidentally and inadvertently violated our Cardinal rule. What have I done?! :(

[Rich Klein]

1982 Simmons comes with or without a dash below his 1972 stats. No dash is easier but COMC has 3 examples under a dollar right now (not mine) so the dash can't be tough.

Sorted these out in the COMC Data Base this afternoon. For sure a variation and enough in the DB to say both varieties have their own listing.

Rich

[G1911]

Sorted these out in the COMC Data Base this afternoon. For sure a variation and enough in the DB to say both varieties have their own listing.

Rich

Be careful, or we freaks are going to keep you busy logging our printing freaks :D

[G1911]

Marty Castillo, #303 in the 1984 Topps set, comes with or without this red slash line running from next to the "I" in Tigers down to Castillo's leg. I believe it is fairly difficult.

[G1911]

Was gifted this one today by a generous gentleman. 1986 Topps #567 Jeff Barkley, with peachy splotch to right. I think these are fairly uncommon.

[G1911]

#108 Jim Gantner has this black mark in the left border, recurring fairly frequently.

[G1911]

109 R.J. Reynolds, with a slash in the bottom of his last name.

[ALR-bishop]

Apparently the Ganter in also an UER

[Cliff Bowman]

Apparently the Ganter in also an UER

The uncorrected error is the reverse photo with the Brewers emblem on his hat backwards, there are a few 87 Topps Gantner cards with the errant ink mark on eBay.

[ALR-bishop]

I had to look for one without out it:)

[G1911]

I noticed the little black mark, but completely missed that the photo is obviously a reverse negative because his hat logo is totally backwards. Being a variation collector is weird.

[G1911]

I don't know the sheet layouts, but related to Gantner, perhaps? I see others online with this same black mark.

card #577

[Pat R]

Alright Greg you got me to dig out my box of 87 Topps with your last few posts.
So far I've found quite a few variations but I haven't checked to see if they are recurring. Here are a couple of the better ones and a Guidry with a black mark. There is a wide strip of red from the top to the bottom of the Wilkerson including the top and bottom border, it actually shows up much better in hand than it does in the scan.

548286

548287

548288

[Cliff Bowman]

I don't know the sheet layouts, but related to Gantner, perhaps? I see others online with this same black mark.

card #577

Yep, Bilardello is to the left of Gantner.

[Pat R]

A pair of Mike Marshall's with a break in the T in Topps and two more Bilardello's.

548328

548329

[G1911]

Yep, Bilardello is to the left of Gantner.

You always have the answer to a Topps sheet question!

[G1911]

Alright Greg you got me to dig out my box of 87 Topps with your last few posts.
So far I've found quite a few variations but I haven't checked to see if they are recurring. Here are a couple of the better ones and a Guidry with a black mark. There is a wide strip of red from the top to the bottom of the Wilkerson including the top and bottom border, it actually shows up much better in hand than it does in the scan.



It's always good to have an excuse to dig into 1987 Topps. Might be worthless, but I love this design. Couldn't find any of these three here on other copies on eBay.

I went to COMC and picked up a Mike Marshall with broken "T". I also picked up this copy with a slash through the "O"; not quite sure if it's a recurring defect yet.

[Pat R]

This Juan Bonilla has what looks similar to a laser line through the card and on each side of the line the colors are a different shade.

548363

[frankhardy]

Well...so far in this modern thread the Cardinals variations are not breaking me. I'm heading to the garage to look for 1981 Topps Mike Phillips.

Does anyone know if the 1981 Vuckovich is reoccurring?

[frankhardy]

After nearly 2 hours of scouring the internetwebs, I have come to the conclusion that a 100% totally clean 1981 Topps Mike Phillips is very, very scarce. Nearly all have some level of smudging of varying degrees. Some look clean until you inspect them closely.

I found a PSA 9 that looks clean in the scan, but I suspect imperfections could be found in the same area if looked at closely. Seller wanted $200, so I passed without hesitation. I also found one raw on Ebay that looks clean and I bought it.

I also bought several others of varying degrees.

For my Cardinals team set, I have notated 7 different distinct variations plus a clean one (hopefully). I'm sure there are more, but those will suffice for me.

I am dizzy! :eek:

[G1911]

In my defense, I posted the Phillips card before we set the no Cardinals rule!

I've kept myself to only the one smear copy, this seems like one of a number of such defects that have essentially unlimited manifestations of the basic printing problem.

[frankhardy]

In my defense, I posted the Phillips card before we set the no Cardinals rule!

I've kept myself to only the one smear copy, this seems like one of a number of such defects that have essentially unlimited manifestations of the basic printing problem.

:D

I agree with Phillips. You could go on forever with different variations. I only expanded it because they are inexpensive and easily gotten, with the exception of a clean one. That was quite a chore to find a clean one.

[G1911]

:D

I agree with Phillips. You could go on forever with different variations. I only expanded it because they are inexpensive and easily gotten, with the exception of a clean one. That was quite a chore to find a clean one.

It's nice when they are cheap, I hate when some schmuck posts a superstar variant :D

Some of these I just settle for one copy, others I obsessively hoard all the different manifestations I can find. I've got to be up to 20+ different copies of the 1959 Hank Sauer yellow smearing now.

I looked for a clean Phillips and thought I found some, but after getting 2 of them they have turned out not to really be actually clean. I think I'm calling it a day lol

[frankhardy]

It's nice when they are cheap, I hate when some schmuck posts a superstar variant :D

Some of these I just settle for one copy, others I obsessively hoard all the different manifestations I can find. I've got to be up to 20+ different copies of the 1959 Hank Sauer yellow smearing now.

I looked for a clean Phillips and thought I found some, but after getting 2 of them they have turned out not to really be actually clean. I think I'm calling it a day lol

I am sure that my "clean" one will actually not be clean when I get it. It should be the cleanest of the bunch so it will be ok.

[butchie_t]

I received this sweet little specimen in the mail today.

[ALR-bishop]

That one used to go for a fair amount of money at one time

[butchie_t]

That one used to go for a fair amount of money at one time

I paid more to have it shipped than I did for the card. I’ll chalk it up to luck.

[bnorth]

That one used to go for a fair amount of money at one time

Depending on the seller is still does.:rolleyes::D

[G1911]

These two cards have a different team name in black over the silver application of the team name. Many cards have issues with missing silver or smearing, but this is different. I got these out of a factory set. 2006.

187 Ryan Klesko (not sure what the word is)
234 Luis Rivas ("Royals" over the silver Twins)

[frankhardy]

Are those reoccurring? With my Cardinals collection that is always the key for me.

[G1911]

Are those reoccurring? With my Cardinals collection that is always the key for me.

I don't know, I was hoping someone here might know. Unlike a 50's or 60's common, there are not many 2006 Luis Rivas cards online to look at to ID others. It's somehow harder to match defects with high print run more recent cards...

[strike-in]

1986 Topps Cal Ripken Blank back and Tom Foley Finger Print.
Thought they were cool.
Both came from rack packs.

[bnorth]

1986 Topps Cal Ripken Blank back and Tom Foley Finger Print.
Thought they were cool.
Both came from rack packs.

That Foley is awesome. I have a few fingerprint cards.

[strike-in]

ya i think it's kinda neat.
now that i'm getting into cards again,
i kinda like the weird misprint cards more than the non.
i can see how you could get whole sections of finger print, double print, less ink etc. in a collection.

[strike-in]

I do think that Cal Ripken is pretty unique. Too bad no back, it is pretty well centered.

[ALR-bishop]

There are some Cardinals players with clear finger prints on the front posted in the long post war pre 1980s variations thread. But no doubt Shane has all of those ;)

[frankhardy]

There are some Cardinals players with clear finger prints on the front posted in the long post war pre 1980s variations thread. But no doubt Shane has all of those ;)

1972 Topps Jerry McNertney? Yep! I got 'em. I don't have the "big yeller blob" version, though.

[butchie_t]

1972 Topps Jerry McNertney? Yep! I got 'em. I don't have the "big yeller blob" version, though.

That yellow blob has proven to be real elusive too.

[ALR-bishop]

It might not be recurring. Probably not a candidate for the top 100 thread ;):)

[strike-in]

Here are a few 1990's I got a mess of theses I'll post a few more wally joyner randy johnson etc later.
I like the blue splotch ones.
Not sure if they are double print or what but they are interesting.
Thanks

[frankhardy]

It might not be recurring. Probably not a candidate for the top 100 thread ;):)

Oh, really!?!? I understood it from the other thread to be reoccurring. If it is not reoccurring, then it doesn't exist to me!

:p :D

[steve B]

These two cards have a different team name in black over the silver application of the team name. Many cards have issues with missing silver or smearing, but this is different. I got these out of a factory set. 2006.

187 Ryan Klesko (not sure what the word is)
234 Luis Rivas ("Royals" over the silver Twins)

Those are a real puzzle.

Usually that sort of thing is from the foil roll not advancing and the foiling equipment trying to apply foil that isn't there anymore.

You can sort of see where the foil panels on the sides are incomplete too.

The question though is what card the foil was put on. I'm not familiar enough with 2006 Topps to know, but the font is different, and it doesn't affetct the bottom half of the card.

[G1911]

Those are a real puzzle.

Usually that sort of thing is from the foil roll not advancing and the foiling equipment trying to apply foil that isn't there anymore.

You can sort of see where the foil panels on the sides are incomplete too.

The question though is what card the foil was put on. I'm not familiar enough with 2006 Topps to know, but the font is different, and it doesn't affetct the bottom half of the card.

Foil problems are pretty common in 2006, where the foil is a little incomplete in a small spot, or slightly goes outside the lines. This is pretty unusual, but so few common cards are online, unlike vintage base, that it might be recurring and even fairly common. I did expect to find two more cards from this sheet misprinted wherever this stray text came from, but everything else on the sheet was printed right (since it came from a factory set, all the cards on that sheet is in this box). Odd.

[wpeters]

I found this in a box of 1980 Topps. I haven't seen anything like it on any other cards from the set.

[butchie_t]

There are a number of different versions of the name color variants in the 80 set.

Nice find.

Cheers,

Butch

[jacksoncoupage]

I found this in a box of 1980 Topps. I haven't seen anything like it on any other cards from the set.

You just aren't looking hard enough then. Many cards in 1980 Topps can be found with this exact type of printing error in their names. Poquette, Braun, Wathan, McEnany, etc.

Several others who only have blue printed names can be found with all or part of their name missing.

[ALR-bishop]

The Stanley was first up in SCD over 10 years ago but there are several similarly affected. Braun, Whathan, Poquette and Washington among them. Mr Bowman ( Cliff) I think has mapped them and the Pryor no name progeny in here in one thread or another

Good find

[butchie_t]

Got these two delivered in the mail today. The only one that counts for this thread is the 93 Russ Swan with the double print Major League Record line. Another variation checked off.

Jr. will adorn my binder edge for the 94 Stadium Club Members Only set.

Cheers,

Butch

[Pat R]

I went through my 92 Topps recently looking for variations and I found dozens of the typical stray print mark and color shift type of variation but I also found one variation that was a catalog type variation.

The 92 Topps don't have the registration symbol above the Topps logo but I have a Carlos Quintana card that has one.

https://photos.imageevent.com/patrickr/bstforsale/img359.jpg


I also found different degrees of the variation in the cards that I have ranging from a clear symbol to where you can barely see a faint outline of the symbol
to no sign of it at all.

All of these except the bottom example came from packs that I opened 30 years ago.

https://photos.imageevent.com/patrickr/bstforsale/Black%20Background%20-%20Copy%20_3_%20-%20Copy.jpg

[Pat R]

A few of the more interesting 92 variations I found. There a lot of name shifts like the Palacios but most aren't as severe and the black letters aren't broken up like the Palacios.

552494

552495

552496

552497

[saucywombat]

I went through my 92 Topps recently looking for variations and I found dozens of the typical stray print mark and color shift type of variation but I also found one variation that was a catalog type variation.

The 92 Topps don't have the registration symbol above the Topps logo but I have a Carlos Quintana card that has one.

https://photos.imageevent.com/patrickr/bstforsale/img359.jpg


I also found different degrees of the variation in the cards that I have ranging from a clear symbol to where you can barely see a faint outline of the symbol
to no sign of it at all.

All of these except the bottom example came from packs that I opened 30 years ago.

https://photos.imageevent.com/patrickr/bstforsale/Black%20Background%20-%20Copy%20_3_%20-%20Copy.jpg

Nice find. Definitely a legit variation.

[G1911]

I picked up a factory set a couple weeks ago at a local show. The Quintana in it is the one without a trace of the registration logo.

Pretty cool to see a new, true variation found

[saucywombat]

I picked up a factory set a couple weeks ago at a local show. The Quintana in it is the one without a trace of the registration logo.

Pretty cool to see a new, true variation found

The best I could find with 1992 Topps is Geronimo Pena #116 which has a perfectly straight top border and one where there is a section of the line that is off kilter. Both are super plentiful however.

[Pat R]

Found and purchased another variation of the Quintana registration mark. With this one the R is partially covered making it look more like an N.

553085

553086

[ALR-bishop]

The best I could find with 1992 Topps is Geronimo Pena #116 which has a perfectly straight top border and one where there is a section of the line that is off kilter. Both are super plentiful however.

I sure do not have much for 1992.Can not recall if Bachman is recurring. On card 126 at one time I thought print size varied, but maybe not.

Had not been aware of the Pena or Quintana

[butchie_t]

I'm just going through the cards I received today and have the 92 Backman that has a smidge missing at the top border of the card. The 92 Murphy #706 I got from a pack.

The 94 Watkins is missing the copyright information and the 94 DeShields is the Red team and position variation. Babe is the 95 with Topps variation.

[ALR-bishop]

The Watkins, DeShields and Ruth used to be listed in the SCD Standard Catalog when it still did post 1980 listings. There are at least 4 versions of the Ruth, logo, no logo, date of birth and a co brand Topps/Conlon

[Rich Klein]

The Watkins, DeShields and Ruth used to be listed in the SCD Standard Catalog when it still did post 1980 listings. There are at least 4 versions of the Ruth, logo, no logo, date of birth and a co brand Topps/Conlon

Watkins is a 1994 Topps card BTW

[butchie_t]

Watkins is a 1994 Topps card BTW

Fixed, thanks.

[jacksoncoupage]

The Watkins, DeShields and Ruth used to be listed in the SCD Standard Catalog when it still did post 1980 listings. There are at least 4 versions of the Ruth, logo, no logo, date of birth and a co brand Topps/Conlon

Al,

are you saying there is a version without his birthdate on front?

I know of:

Topps w/ logo
Topps w/o logo
Topps / Conlon

All have the birthdate on front. Which one can be found without it?

[butchie_t]

Dylan,

My guess is Al means this one for the birthdate.

[ALR-bishop]

Sorry Dylan, I was not very precise. This is what I have

[jacksoncoupage]

Sorry Dylan, I was not very precise. This is what I have

Gotcha, relieved to hear it!

[richtree]

I received this sweet little specimen in the mail today.

I have an extra of this one if anyone wants to buy...

thakns

[philliesfan]

Jim Gantner - Spider Webb
553283

[Pat R]

A different version of the Quintana registration mark is also found on some of the micro's. I have yet to see any on the gold or gold winners.

553374

553375

[bocca001]

Is this yellow in Pitcher on the 1980 Don Stanhouse card a known variation? Just noticed this today looking through my set.

[Cliff Bowman]

I don't know if it's well known or not but I bought one years ago on eBay that had the yellow in the listing description. I also have Putman and Wockenfuss which I believe are known. ETA, mine is a little different than yours.

[bocca001]

Who was in charge of the yellow paint in 1980?

[Cliff Bowman]

Who was in charge of the yellow paint in 1980?

In my opinion 1980 Topps is the most screwed up Topps set print error wise, it has everything.

[bocca001]

Looks like someone wiped mustard across the top half of your Stanhouse card :)

[ALR-bishop]

!980 is chuck full of oddities. 1991 may beat it out if backs are considered

[Pat R]

I've had people tell me that there are more of these partial wrong back 2002 Fleer Traditions but I've never seen any.

554760
554761


554762
554763

[G1911]

Those are cool, odd kind of wrong back. I had a blast with those Fleer Traditions when they came out, Goudey’s at Target was perfect.

[strike-in]

Found one card.
Then found another and saw that it fit.
Then found the 3rd
and recalled the Deion Sanders and it fit.
Kinda cool to find all four, like a puzzle or error cards.

[bnorth]

Found one card.
Then found another and saw that it fit.
Then found the 3rd
and recalled the Deion Sanders and it fit.
Kinda cool to find all four, like a puzzle or error cards.

That is awesome that you found all 4 cards that fit together.

[ALR-bishop]

That is awesome that you found all 4 cards that fit together.

+ 1

[butchie_t]

I just picked up Bump Wills 79 Rangers variation (other one got lost in the move) and new for me, 84 Jim Palmer, missing losses on back (circled). Bump does not really fit this thread but one post verses two is good enough. There were more 84s than 79 so that won out. The McGee and Robertson were upgrades not variations.

Cheers,

B.T.

[ALR-bishop]

There are several different versions of the missing stats on the Palmer

[butchie_t]

There are several different versions of the missing stats on the Palmer

Thanks Al,

I'll be on the lookout.

Cheers,

B.T.

[strike-in]

I found a 5th card which I think is the final one.
Most fun I've had with error cards.

I have an offer, all five cards for $100.
The person really want's them, nice enough guy from what I can tell, but the push for the cards makes me think this print error might be more desirable than I thought.

I can't think of anything special except looks neat and the puzzle is put together.

I don't understand the values on printing errors, from big bucks to a few pennies.

[G1911]

I have no idea about value, but that’s really cool to piece together. Thanks for sharing the project.

[ALR-bishop]

They remind me of the Topps 1986 Seaver, Clemons and Puhl related variants. The Seaver and Clemens have star power but even the Puhl brings a good premium. Now that you have unveiled them maybe they will catch on too in terms of value. Hard to predict, as Greg noted

[Cliff Bowman]

I could be wrong but I don't believe that is a recurring print defect, from what I understand that's from water drops being on the sheets as they are being printed and rolled and are randomly anywhere on any sheet. It seems like the late 80's-early 90's Topps sheets were the main culprits. I'm sure an expert will explain it better :D.

[jacksoncoupage]

I could be wrong but I don't believe that is a recurring print defect, from what I understand that's from water drops being on the sheets as they are being printed and rolled and are randomly anywhere on any sheet. It seems like the late 80's-early 90's Topps sheets were the main culprits. I'm sure an expert will explain it better :D.

I think you've nailed it.

[strike-in]

I got two of the Rijos cards no other repeats.

[Cliff Bowman]

I got two of the Rijos cards no other repeats.

That means I was a little off on my theory then, apparently the water moisture is on the print roller and will probably cause the same flaw on a few sheets similarly until the water is gone from the roller at that spot.

[G1911]

Isn't that still a printing variation and recurring defect (assuming all do recur), as it happened during printing? Water on the roller being the cause, but all printing variants and defects have a cause. Or am I crazy for still thinking of that as a printing variant?

[bnorth]

I found a 5th card which I think is the final one.
Most fun I've had with error cards.

I have an offer, all five cards for $100.
The person really want's them, nice enough guy from what I can tell, but the push for the cards makes me think this print error might be more desirable than I thought.

I can't think of anything special except looks neat and the puzzle is put together.

I don't understand the values on printing errors, from big bucks to a few pennies.

If I was offered $100 for those they would have been instantly sold. I consider myself crazy and think I highly overpay for print defects and I wouldn't pay more than $20 delivered. Just my novice opinion.

[strike-in]

If I was offered $100 for those they would have been instantly sold. I consider myself crazy and think I highly overpay for print defects and I wouldn't pay more than $20 delivered. Just my novice opinion.

thank you.
I see sold crazy prices on the epay.
I don't get it why you would pay a grand or so for a dot missing?

[Cliff Bowman]

Isn't that still a printing variation and recurring defect (assuming all do recur), as it happened during printing? Water on the roller being the cause, but all printing variants and defects have a cause. Or am I crazy for still thinking of that as a printing variant?

Yes, I stand corrected, if he has two Rijo cards that are nearly identical then that is recurring, but there can't be more than a few of them.

[bnorth]

thank you.
I see sold crazy prices on the epay.
I don't get it why you would pay a grand or so for a dot missing?

The error card world is crazy and nothing in it makes sense and I have been collecting them for 35 years easily.

[jacksoncoupage]

thank you.
I see sold crazy prices on the epay.
I don't get it why you would pay a grand or so for a dot missing?

All of those completed sales are fake. Not a single "dot missing" type of "error" listing is a real sale.

[ALR-bishop]

What are examples of missing dot errors ?

[Cliff Bowman]

What are examples of missing dot errors ?

I think he means the majority of these.

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=topps+error&LH_Sold=1&_sop=16

[jacksoncoupage]

I think he means the majority of these.

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=topps+error&LH_Sold=1&_sop=16

Those too, but referring to these, I believe:

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2334524.m570.l1313&_nkw=donruss+dot+error&_sacat=0&LH_TitleDesc=0&_odkw=topps+error&_sop=16&LH_Sold=1

All 1989-1992 Donruss cards have a INC. or INC version. Same with 1991-1992 Leaf. Similarly, 1990-1992 Fleer products all have U.S.A. or U.S.A versions. Neither version is in shorter supply. Since 2020, there have been very large sales showing for these cards. None of which have been substantiated and usually are from a zero feedback seller with a single starting bid win.

[butchie_t]

Cal Ripken Jr. - 238 Streak Ends

Got this one today, it is missing foil mentioning his ROY award. Gotta be more out there somewhere. Regardless, this one is a keeper!

[G1911]

1988 Fleer Baseball MVP; one of their innumerable late 80's 44 card sets, this one for Toys R Us distribution. Mike Dunne comes with or without this blue line to the left of his name. Correct copy is the common one.

[G1911]

Jim Palmer's 1983 Fleer card comes with or without this white blotch over his birthplace. Both seem to be easy.

[G1911]

Cataloguing my 83 Fleers and noticed Nolan Ryan comes with a similar splotch, over his Height and Born lines. With or without the splotch are both easy.

[4reals]

1982 Topps #703 “leaf cap”. Half the fun is naming them.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230325/a63bde29087935d2e9922a9eac5a97db.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[4reals]

1981 Topps Barry Evans #72 (blob on hat)

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230403/14751eab86209143d1cc4b92f074e37a.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[saucywombat]

I have discovered a "gold" streak variation for 4 different gold refractors from Series 2 of 1996 Finest.

Gold bar goes top to bottom in the same spot and with same width on all 4 cards.

And now also Tim Salmon...

[wpeters]

I noticed this one today. There is a patch of white in the pink area of the small photo. There is also a white splotch on his arm above the elbow. The blue dot above the elbow is on all the cards I have, but the white splotch is only on the cards with the white in the pink area. There is also a small discoloration between the Y and A in Royals. The two print defect cards are on the right. None of the defects are on the cards on the left, which seem more plentiful.

[richtree]

Jeff King Yellow error and two 87 topps with same error/variation

[ALR-bishop]

I know the King is pretty tough to find, how about the 87s ?

[richtree]

I know the King is pretty tough to find, how about the 87s ?

They are some of the hardest I ever found....

[butchie_t]

delete

[butchie_t]

The 86 Topps Blue Streak Clemens. I have the 86 Topps Seaver on its way and the search is on for the Puhl version as well. This will be busted out of its tomb and placed into my 86 binder.

The 89 Donruss Bobby Bonilla #2 has what looks like a hand made circle top right of the card. I have seen more of these but this was around the time this card came out. I did a search today and did not find any on eBay or COMC. And I do not see this one documented anywhere either.

The 1989 Donruss checklist #600 I got today. This version is only available in the factory sealed sets that has the black bar on the top left of the back of the card (The card numbering stops at #660 and does not list the BC's that were in the wax packs on the back of the card).

Interesting thing with this card is the Front and Back are printed like a coin. Flip it top to bottom, the back is upright. Flip it left to right, the back is upside down. Note the card holder position front and back. None of the other factory checklists are printed this way, just #600.

There is one other #600 factory set only variation with a black bar on the right top and bottom of the card, I'm still looking for that one and have no idea yet if the same print anomaly is carried over to that one as well. I will find one eventually and post it when I do.

The 1990 Donruss cards show their respective variations. Yeah I know, crap set with a boat load of variations. (NOTE: I do not consider the 'Inc dot' and no 'Inc dot' to be of any significance at all to consider them worthy to collect.) YMMV.

The Grand Slam cards are missing the black line on the right side reverse of the card. Julio Franco has the "All-Star Game Performance Header" on the reverse of the card instead of the "Recent Major League Performance' Header.

The Jeff Innis has a 'scratch' in the circle. And the Dale Murphy has a black bar covering the top of his 'D' in his first name.

When I bought the case of the 90's Donruss way back when they first came out, it turned out to be a very early printing case and had danged near all the variations that are documented. So, I busted a factory set when they came out and put together almost a master set. I am too close now to not go ahead and get the final few cards to make this master set happen. 89 and 90 will be the only two Donruss sets that I mess with. I have sold or gotten rid of the rest.

But I did keep the remaining 90 Donruss Wax Boxes, and they are unopened....
(insert foot stomp here).

Enjoy,

Butch

[butchie_t]

Now that I am in the right forum, again:

The 86 Topps Tom Seaver Blue Streak brings me down to Mr. Puhl to complete that group.

The 90 Donruss Harold Baines has the line through the yellow star on front and the All-Star Game Performance on the back header.

The 90 Donruss Grand Slammers Todd Benzinger with the red star verses yellow star on front was a nice find for me. One of the harder variations in this set of copious variations to find.

I thought I had the second 89 Donruss #600 checklist variations knocked off. But the cards and the description of the cards were two different things. Not worth it enough to file a claim or return them.

Search continues for 89 checklists.