Collecting Reprints?

[Snapolit1]

Not trying to be judgmental, and everyone on this board is into what they are into, but I just don't get collecting reprints. For example, there was a post last week about someone collecting the 1980 Exhibits reprints. Personally speaking, I would rather have one genuine Ruth Exhibit from 1928 than 500 Exhibit reprint cards from 1980. Again, not saying one view is better than the other. That's what makes the world go round as they say. Guess each of us collects things for different reasons. I love the idea of not knowing where my card has been for the last 90 years, bouncing around, and imagining who the first collector was. And understand people who are attracted to an era, team, or player that meant a lot to them at one point. But a whole set of cards just mimicing something rare? I just don't "get it".

[ullmandds]

i agree...but as you say to each their own. Everyone has different means...and desires...but I am of the same philosophy as you.

[bnorth]

I think reprints are great. It lets me own a card that I would never be able to afford if real. The same goes for entire vintage sets for me. I recently had a deal made to get several Bowman reprint sets and when the owner backed out of the completed deal I was as depressed that I did not get them as any real card I have missed out on.

I collect beater real cards so I guess reprints are not the big step down for me that it would for the people that hate them.

[ksabet]

Originally Posted by bnorth

I think reprints are great. It lets me own a card that I would never be able to afford if real.

The only problem I see with the above statement is that your not really owning THE card.

I can buy a print of a Van Gogh but it will never be a Van Gogh. I am of the opinion I would rather admire from afar than have something fake in my possession.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by ksabet

The only problem I see with the above statement is that your not really owning THE card.

I can buy a print of a Van Gogh but it will never be a Van Gogh. I am of the opinion I would rather admire from afar than have something fake in my possession.

LOL, I even own Van Gough art print. For me it is just a hobby and would not pay more than a few hundred for any card.

[sandmountainslim]

What I don't get is having reprints GRADED! All over ebay are tons of reprint cards slabbed. WHY??? The slab is worth more than the card

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by sandmountainslim

What I don't get is having reprints GRADED! All over ebay are tons of reprint cards slabbed. WHY??? The slab is worth more than the card

I have seen very few real cards that the slab was not worth more than the card in it.

[Luke]

This brings up another interesting question. Why do we need to OWN any of these cards? We can go online and see high quality scans of pretty much any card we'd like to look at. Why the need to be the owner of the item? I'm not as familiar with the art world, but I would imagine that an art connoisseur is content in looking at works of art and doesn't feel the need to own them (obviously some very wealthy people are able to do both).

I don't really know the answer to the question. My girlfriend and I have tried to pin it down without much success. She just chalks it up to me being a "weirdy"

[ullmandds]

If I were going to "buy" reprints"...I'd sooner make xerox copies of scans from the internet...or just collect scans. I'd rather collect scans than buy repro sh$t!

just my humble opine.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

If I were going to "buy" reprints"...I'd sooner make xerox copies of scans from the internet...or just collect scans. I'd rather collect scans than buy repro sh$t!

just my humble opine.

there are works of art that are essentially re-prints of the initial print that people pay big money on....plus there are second edition books worth money even though they are not first edition..

as for collecting reprint cards......I think there are several collectors out there are collecting reprint 1952 mantles, though they think they are original..but that still makes them a reprint collector..

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

there are works of art that are essentially re-prints of the initial print that people pay big money on....plus there are second edition books worth money even though they are not first edition..

as for collecting reprint cards......I think there are several collectors out there are collecting reprint 1952 mantles, though they think they are original..but that still makes them a reprint collector..

Theres more to life than fake mantle rookies man! Its ok...let it go.

[1952boyntoncollector]

man brought up a few points collecting reprint mantles (or can fill in Ruth or any waterside property if that makes you feel better) just making a point...

so substitute Ruth instead of Mantle....several of us are 'reprint' collectors....unfortunately..

[ullmandds]

there is a big difference between intentionally collecting/purchasing reprints and being duped into buying what you thinks is authentic that turns out to be fake.

like tens of thousands of dollars of difference.

do your homework peoples!

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

there are works of art that are essentially re-prints of the initial print that people pay big money on....plus there are second edition books worth money even though they are not first edition..

as for collecting reprint cards......I think there are several collectors out there are collecting reprint 1952 mantles, though they think they are original..but that still makes them a reprint collector..

I would agree that there are a lot of collectors out there with high end counterfeits of many different players in their collection that have no idea the cards are fake. They are after all just a mass produced picture on a piece of paper that with the right equipment are very easy to make.

Originally Posted by ullmandds

there is a big difference between intentionally collecting/purchasing reprints and being duped into buying what you thinks is authentic that turns out to be fake.

like tens of thousands of dollars of difference.

do your homework peoples!

Yes Pete a huge difference and the reason I like my reprints to look as close to real as possible but also have the word REPRINT easily noticeable on the card.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Originally Posted by LukeLyon

This brings up another interesting question. Why do we need to OWN any of these cards? We can go online and see high quality scans of pretty much any card we'd like to look at. Why the need to be the owner of the item? I'm not as familiar with the art world, but I would imagine that an art connoisseur is content in looking at works of art and doesn't feel the need to own them (obviously some very wealthy people are able to do both).

I don't really know the answer to the question. My girlfriend and I have tried to pin it down without much success. She just chalks it up to me being a "weirdy"

For me, the answer is the smell and feel. I know that sounds like I am a weirdy, too (tell your girlfriend you are not alone). I collect 1950s and 1960s, and I love the smell of the old cardboard, and I love the feel of flipping through a stack of 1956 Topps or 1965 Topps for example. That is an experience you can't get from a scan. Also, that is why most of my cards tend to be ungraded. While I do own them now, I am not forever. Someday another weirdy will enjoy them. Cards also allow people of multiple income brackets to collect and own what they like and what allows them to revisit their childhood or an era of history they especially enjoy. The historical aspect also fits my description.

[Jewish-collector]

I'm sorry, but I have to collect reprints since I really can't afford many baseball cards in even poor grade.

[brian1961]

Originally Posted by Jewish-collector

I'm sorry, but I have to collect reprints since I really can't afford many baseball cards in even poor grade.

Friend, you don't need to apologize to anyone for collecting reprints because you cannot afford the real thing--even in lousy condition. I am in precisely the same boat, brother.

I was introduced to reprints by seeing a teenzie weenzie advertisement in THE SPORTING NEWS back in late 1971 or spring 1972 for a complete set of the 1933 DeLong Gum cards. Mike Aronstein put them out and the little 24-card set was a mighty mite addition to my small collection. They opened a large window on the world of early 1930s MLB and what a kid could have collected back then, if his town happened to be one that got those beautiful small cards.

Not long prior to the purchase of the reprint set, I had read a glorious article on those cards by none other than esteemed hobby pioneer, Lionel Carter. He was a young teenager in Colfax, Illinois and about to go see a movie. He had gone into some shop to buy a nickel candy bar to enjoy while watching a movie at the theater. However, he spied a box of some baseball picture cards. One card and a stick of gum for a penny. The wrappers were very colorful and enticing. Lionel changed his mind about the chocolate bar, and invested his nickel in five packs of the cards---the DeLong Gum cards! They were Lionel's first baseball cards, and the beginning of a beautiful friendship!

Lionel always loved his DeLongs, and so when Mike Aronstein reprinted these in the early 1970s through his company, TCMA, and took out an ad, I was all ready and eager to buy them. What a treat, re-reading his beautifully expressed memories in that October 1971 issue of SPORT HOBBYIST, and looking at the reprints of the cards Mr. Carter wrote so lovingly about. The reprints were of the highest quality, too.

Thus, those reprints brought me a ton of joy and happiness for the small price I paid. Being a widow's son by then, I had to be very careful.

There's always gonna be some collectors who will chide other hobbyists for "wasting their money" on reprints, or on modern cards of long-retired and deceased players. Sure, I do have some originals remaining to my once pretty nice collection, and I have some modern "commemorative" cards of Mantle, Maris, Ruth, Cobb, Koufax, et al. I also enjoy the reprints I have. I'm selective, however. I want a nice reprint. The 51-52 Bowmans done by Richard Gelman's Card Collectors Company are terrific. Ditto their 1960 Home Run Derby. The latter would have been virtually impossible for me, were it not for Richard.

Originals are much better than reprints. I shan't argue the point. They do, however, offer 90% or more of the eye candy, and almost all of the imagination you would think of while looking at originals you owned. If destroyed, no big deal. If you die suddenly, no big deal, where the cards are concerned. No worries about whether they'll appreciate in value.

It's all about getting a taste of what the real thing was like, without any of the burdens of buying and owning the real thing.

Keep enjoying your reprints, bro. Have a good weekend.

---Brian Powell

[frankbmd]

I believe that '88 Donruss reprints are scarcer than the real deal.

[sandmountainslim]

I bought the Fritsch Old Judge Reprint Set. They are clearly reprints with no tomfoolery and have player info on the back as well as being numbered. If I could afford 80 original OJ's instead of just 1 I would have that instead
Things like T206 though I would rather pick up low grade originals which can be had reasonably.

[drcy]

Collect what you want if you know what you are collecting.

[Joshchisox08]

Agreed with the notion of not understanding why one would collect reprints. Only under the circumstance of having a t206 Wagner etc. To go with the rest of the real t206s.

[ALR-bishop]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

I believe that '88 Donruss reprints are scarcer than the real deal.

You need to be carful Frank, there are a lot of counterfeit 88 reprints