Reprints?

[jchcollins]

I would be curious to know some current opinions anymore on reprints. This is a subject I have visited every now again here and there in the hobby: What do you guys think, is there value in them - do you get some satisfaction out of looking at a reprint when it's a card you otherwise will never be able to afford in a million years? In the world of expensive art, it's not at all uncommon for people to have prints /copies of famous works of art framed and displayed on their walls in cases where the original is in a museum or otherwise unattainable. Sometimes even the ("re-") prints of these artworks become worth tremendous amounts of money themselves. I know that is not a 100% apples-to-apples comparison with the world of collecting vintage sports cards, but are there some parallels?

When I first started collecting cards as a kid - I was temporarily fascinated by the old Dover reprint books - though I realized later the cards were printed on cheap perforated paper stock and were way too glossy in comparison to the originals - but there they were - Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, Jackie Robinson, Mickey Mantle - cards that I as a 10 year old certainly would not be obtaining originals of anytime soon. It's not the same today as I have been collecting a lot longer now and though I go for mostly lower grade - I do have some of those original cards from the 1950's that I never thought I would.

Lately here it seems there are some better quality reprints available - some true sized '54 and '55 Topps (Aaron and Clemente RC's) available on eBay. Tempting to look at a lot like this for me for about a $5 asking price. Certainly not as desirable as the real deal cards in nice shape, but still good for a little nostalgia and display purposes, in my opinion. What do you all say - does anyone out there go for a reprint occasionally?

-John

[steve B]

Rarely.

I've bought a couple really well done ones that I'll probably use in a framed display at some point.

I think some of the old reprint sets have a slight bit of collectability.

But the new stuff on Ebay that's either borderline or outright scams? Just find a good scan online, get it to the right size with whatever software you prefer print it out and past to some cardboard like a cereal box, cut to size. Done.

I'd rather look at the nice scans of the originals.
I do have a decent sized collection of scans of cards.

Steve B

[bnorth]

I don't collect reprints but I like to make some of the old cards into new shiny refractors and super refractors.

[Bestdj777]

I don't currently buy reprints. To me, it's usually either the original or nothing at all. I could see myself buying some though if I could find something artistic to do with them.

[TAVG]

some ignorant person on a facebook yard sale page was trying to sell a 80s reprint of a 33 goudy ruth as the real deal.
said it was their parents investment.

so I pointed out in their photo where it says reprint and linked them an eBay listing of the same card that sold for around 1$ that happened the past week.

they were wanting 3000 for it lmao

[brian1961]

I love reprints, but am just as picky regarding them as I am with the originals.

Quality-wise, reprints are all over the scale. The Dovers looked and were very cheap. Sometimes high gloss is OK, if it was generally well-done.

Historically, it was a hot subject of major debate in the hobby 40 years ago. The "HAVES" did not want the "HAVE NOTS" to even enjoy the pseudo measure of joy in having a nice facsimile of the real deal. I don't know; maybe they felt threatened that their original holdings would lose value, or would not be as valuable when the time finally came for them to cash in their collection of scarce and rare cards. Some of those wealthy collectors, or extremely fortunate collectors who got in on the ground floor of penny or two cent or nickel-a-piece T-206s and early twentieth century candy cards were most vehement about reprints. Their fears regarding the potential devaluing of their collections turned out to be completely false, as we all know.

I was a widow's son. We struggled but got by OK. Luxuries such as vintage baseball cards were rarely attainable, when they were just available.

Back in the early 70s I was absolutely nuts about the 1930s. When TCMA's Mike Aronstein placed an ad in The Sporting News for a reprint set they were offering of the very scarce 1933 DeLong Gum Company issue, I jumped at the chance. For 3-4 bucks with shipping, Mike had lovingly created a simply fabulous reprint set of these gorgeous cards. I had read a beautiful article in The Sports Hobbyist late in 1971 on this very set, written by the esteemed Mr. Lionel Carter. Loved the article, loved the reprints. They gave me so much happiness to get a blast from the past. Sure they were just reprints, but they were of high quality and most accurate.

I would just gaze at them and recreate in my mind the scene Mr. Carter recounted of not buying his usual five-cent chocolate bar to enjoy with the movie at his local theater, opting instead to purchase five one-cent packs of these baseball cards he had never heard of before. The pack wrapper intrigued him, looking so beautifully colored and interesting. He was not to be disappointed, and thus started a life of collecting baseball cards. He was around 15 at the time.

In the late 1980s when Card Collectors Company put out a high quality reprint set of the 1951 and 1952 Bowman baseball series, I purchased them for their reasonable price and was thrilled. Sure, originals would please me more, but that would never happen...

The last example I wish to relate was when the same aforementioned firm came out with a very high quality reprint set (actually near set; they did not bother to do a card of the host, Mark Scott) of the 1960 Home Run Derby cards. Talk about a rare set, and I actually got to view a complete set of the originals in late 88, and I'm telling you the reprints perfectly match the originals, with the proper but innocuous "CCC88" printed on the lower right side border. Yes, I'd be honored and very thrilled to have originals. The Mickey Mantle is a peach of a Mantle card, and is easily one of the great ones rendered of The Commerce Comet. In this case, the reprint set, along with the gorgeous factory DVDs of the TV show, are a genuine delight at a cost I could afford.

Don't get me wrong. Again, I love the real thing. I have a few original Mantle cards that would make Donald Spence flush scarlet with envy and mad with desire. Be that as it may, our hobby has more than a few cards that have come to be worth "a tad more" than the old penny, nickel, and dime-a-piece.

As the old saying goes, you can't have everything. I am just very thankful for the good things that I've got. And some of those good things just happen to be reprints. If that makes you choke, .... hold your hand up and take a few deep breaths.

Right now I'd love a nice quality reprint of the devastatingly beautiful 1910 Washington Times Ty Cobb. I have a scan, and I might just make one---and write on the back of it "printed by Brian Powell in the year 2015!!!

Gotta go and eat supper. Take care, ya'll. ---Brian Powell

[frankhardy]

I realize that different people have different tastes.....having said that....I absolutely hate reprints.

The main reason that I hate them is because it clutters up Ebay search results. When you have reprints of 1987 Topps cards (archives, refractors, etc), that means that it is getting out of hand.

Give me the originals. My Cardinals Topps autograph collection is ONLY original Topps cards. No reprints or archives.

Having said that, I do have a few reprint team sets for my Cardinals team set collection (ie 1983 reprints of the 1952 Topps set). The only reason I have them is because it is in the SCD catalog and my Cardinals team set collection would be incomplete without it. I only have the set for that reason....it is not because I like them.

[GasHouseGang]

I also remember the furor reprints created around forty years ago. The general consensus that seemed to emerge was that reprints were OK but that they should be printed in such a way as to make it obvious they were not originals (different size card, type font, color, etc.), or have REPRINT stamped in big enough letters that any attempt to remove said letters will be obvious to anyone who might otherwise be fooled.

[tonyo]

I like a well done reprint to occupy spots of very expensive cards (or cards I just don't want to spend the market value on) in collections, but the condition has to be very very similar to the other authentic cards in my set.
I've tried a few times, but so far I only have two that I really like that fit in well with the rest of my set. One is a t206 Honus Wagner with a Broadleaf back, of course I don't have a Honus, nor do I have a Broadleaf back. This reprint takes care of two holes in my t206 set. I also have a 67 Seaver that looks very very similar to my other 67's.

I'd love to find a 33 Goudey Lajoie that fits my 33 Goudey Set.

I've bought a 48/49 Leaf Satchel Paige and an e90 Cobb before thinking they would look fine amongst my others, but they don't.

I also have that 52 topps reprint set from the 80's, but they don't do it for me now that I own several real ones.

Also have a monster reprint that I bought from BST Auctions (vintagetoppsguy I think) back when I was trying get the monster to let me quit.


I'll probably sell both of those sets one day when I take a notion.


Along with a 40 playball Paul Waner that I bought thinking it was real, I believe that is it for me on reprints (as far as I know anyway)