Can You Show Me 2 Diff 1948 Leaf Layers?

[lampertb]

Hi, all.

I just bought some raw '48/'49 Leafs, and I am wondering about the authenticity of some. I read elsewhere that the Leafs were composed of two separate layers of cardboard pasted together, so that if you turn a card on its side you can distinctly see two shades of cardboard. My eyes are getting older, and I want to be sure that I'm looking at the right thing. Can someone post a zoomed-in image of this?

I am primarily a Goudey guy, too, and with Goudeys gloss is a dead giveaway of fakes. Not sure about Leafs, though... any advice on "over-gloss" vs. authentic?

Thanks for any help,

Richard

[steve B]

They are layered, the back gray cardboard, and the lighter front cardboard. The layers are about the same thickness, so even worn ones often won't show layers clearly. Some cards that have gotten a bit dusty retain enough "stuff" on the edge to make the layers hard to see.


I checked about 10 of mine, and all were layered. Leaf had at least 3 press runs, likely more, so one that isn't layered or layered differently wouldn't be some thing I'd automatically reject.

The only thing I have that would take a good picture would be a USB microscope, which I'll get out later.

None of mine are glossy overall, and I don't think I've ever seen one that is.
But they used a lot of different inks, and there are differences in the front layer of cardboard, so the glossiness of the individual inks is variable. None should be modern glossy, but similar to other cards, if seen at an angle the inks may look a bit shiny. On Leaf, they're generally not shiny.

[lampertb]

This is helpful info, Steve. It would be great to see that USB micro image too. Thank you,
Richard

[lampertb]

Bump... hoping someone out there has a decent close-up pic of the 2 different Leaf baseball card layers as visible on the edge because I'm kind of stumped. My old magnifying glass just ain't cutting it with this one.

[buymycards]

I can clearly see the two layers when I have a card under a magnifying lamp. The back layer is the same color of gray as the back of the card and the front layer is a whitish color.

[lampertb]

Extremely helpful images - thank you!
Richard

[steve B]

Very nice pics. I need a bit of practice to get that good.

[tedzan]

I can clearly see the two layers when I have a card under a magnifying lamp. The back layer is the same color of gray as the back of the card and the front layer is a whitish color.


Hi Rick

Excellent photo....thanks for posting it.

Here are two cards in my 1949 LEAF collection, which suggest to us that the fronts and backs were most likely printed on separate sheets. Then the two sheets
were pasted together. My Feller and Sid Gordon Wrong-backs are not that rare. Multiple cards of all 49 subjects in the 2nd series (SP) can be found with Wrong
backs


Hey guys
Please refer to these cards as 1949 LEAF's.

PSA is all screwed-up....this set of 98 cards was NEVER issued in 1948. And, the term "1948/1949" is also INCORRECT.


http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan77/images/large/1949LEAFFellerSidGordonWB.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan77/images/large/1949LEAFFellerSidGordonWBk.jpg



TED Z

T206 Reference (http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=237816)
.

[buymycards]

I love the way Sid Gordon's bat goes all the through the border.

[tedzan]

I love the way Sid Gordon's bat goes all the through the border.

Hey Rick

Check-out the Reiser card with his bat looking as if it's going to pop out of the picture.



http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan77/images/large/1949LeafRuthReiser50x.jpg



TED Z

T206 Reference (http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=237816)
.

[RedsFan1941]

as has been covered and documented before on this board, this set was referred to as being issued in 1948 long before a company called PSA was even in existence.

[tedzan]

as has been covered and documented before on this board, this set was referred to as being issued in 1948 long before a company called PSA was even in existence.

Hey Smart-@SS

Then explain to every one on this forum why both PSA and SGC correctly identify these 1949 LEAF Premiums, but cannot correctly label the 1949 LEAF cards on their flips ? ?

These Premiums were in the same Vendors boxes that contained the 1949 LEAF BB wax-packs. I know this for a fact (and so do many veteran BB card collectors) since we
collected these cards (and Premiums) back in 1949.

I will reiterate what I said above...."PSA is all screwed-up" regarding the 1949 LEAF BB set. And, the same goes for SGC.



http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan77/images/large/1949LeafPremiumBabeRuth25.jpg . http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan77/images/large/1949LeafPremiumLouGehrig25.jpg




Sorry Folks for my "out-burst" here....but, this character has a habit of questioning everything I post on this forum. And, 100 % of the time he is totally uninformed
on the subject matter. Never adds anything meaningful to the discussion. I've had enough of his crap, it has become tiresome.


TED Z

T206 Reference (http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=237816)
.

[RedsFan1941]

we have had this discussion before so you know my issue is not the date these cards were or were not issued. It is you continually making it seem that PSA is the one who started referring to this set being from 1948. They didn’t. Back in the 1970s when I collected collectors thought this set was issued in 1948. Price guides in the 1980s said this. You know this but always want to imply that PSA is the author of this mistake. I know you don’t like grading companies and I am no fan either. But there is plenty of fault to find with them without creating stuff. No hard feelings.