Quote:
Originally Posted by steve B
So if a card is a doubleprint on the sheet and you can tell the two apart would that count?
Or if there were two plates and one had a small flaw but the other didn't?
How about if the plate was damaged and then replaced with a new one?
Or if a completely different ink was used?
Or a different type of cardboard?
Yeah, a lot of what those Ebay guys find are printing mistakes. But there's a load of stuff that isn't. Sometimes it's hard to tell if it's a printing error, or just where in production a mistake happened. Was that bit of dust something that got into the press and stayed for maybe only a handful of sheets? Or was it in when the plate was exposed and every card fro that plate has the flaw. Or was it between the art and camera when the negative was taken and every card should have it but it got noticed and fixed?
Just where do you draw the line?
Aside from not knowing in some cases where a small error came from I have examples of all the stuff above. Some of it can't even be scanned.
Like 93 Upper deck has 3 different sorts of back. All over gloss, gloss only on the photo, and gloss over the photo covered with a lighter overall layer.
Obviously it was done as a deliberate change.
I have an 81 fleer where there's a red line across part of the card. Not an ink smear, but from a scratch on the plate.
Obviously not deliberate.
Or this pair? Totally normal, but one is like the 62 green tints. Deliberate? Just a mistake?
Steve B
|
Some of what you say may fit into the category of 'variations,' but 99.999999% of them are simply the result of printing anomalies. Like the Harrah cards you showed. My first impression is the card on the right was printed with an incorrect amount of magenta on the plates. That's it. There are no intentional changes there. Most of the so-called 'newly discovered variations' on ebay follow that model. There's too much color or not enough color in certain areas and they laud it as a rare discovery, when it's nothing but a printing issue.
But then there are legitimate color variations, like the 1969 white letter cards. Since they have yellow in the mix elsewhere (photo of the player, etc.), that means the yellow was purposefully or accidentally eliminated from the part of the plate that included the name, etc. That's significant.
Where it begins to tread into a tough gray area is when you take into account cards such as the 1967 Schaal green bat variation. Normally, I wouldn't consider this anything but a simple print error, because there were no deliberate changes made to the card, but it's been established as a true variation by the collecting community, so what can you do?