52t for yellow geeks only

[Republicaninmass]

In light of the recent thread for gray geeks only, I thought I would ask peoples opinion on the Frank House Yellow Tiger card. While it has certainly caught on as a variation, it is certainly puzzling to me how the printing anomaly occurred. I will be following up with a few pics, and comments

[Republicaninmass]

This isn't the great example of the missing yellow with green throat.

In fact I only held onto it because it seems to be one of the LEAST examples missing red around his throat area. On close inspection, you can see the red pixels are missing from areas around his neck and tiger.


HOWEVER, the other House card has NO red missing and a yellow tiger

were there two different versions early on?

[ALR-bishop]

Ted--I have only 3 versions of this card, none are grey backs. One is bright orange, one is all yellow like the one you posted and one has a reddish tongue and the overall color is between orange and yellow ( a transition version ?)

I have never been sure if they are recurring print defects or there was some intentional change to the card. I was surprised when the "variation" showed up on gray backs as well as white, and I think someone indicated it appears on both types of the grey back fronts. I think someone also indicated that if the different fronts and backs are considered you would need a small boat full to have all the possible variants.

Also, I wonder if some of the versions that show up these days result from sun or light fading, either in general or selectively applied. Maybe the print experts can weigh in on that

[Zach Wheat]

I believe there are a lot more variations in the '52 set than most collectors realize.

Let me look through my Houses....I think I have 2 yellow variations but no gray backs.

Z

[Republicaninmass]

The missing red, amd partial red with the greenish throat is 100% missing the red layer. Under 10x loupe it is evident over the tiger and in his throat.

[Zach Wheat]

Ted,

Here is one my yellow House variations. I think - and have seen other examples - where there are missing colors on only part of the card. Unsure how this happens but the yellow House is one of the more well known examples.

Z

[Republicaninmass]

Yes many have color missing in that part of the card, however the above I had posted in the left doesn't not have any other missing ink.

[flkersn]

Getting back to the original question; does anyone have a theory as to how these color " variations" could have happened?

The two gray backs that I have seen with yellow logo have almost pure yellow with a full-color neck. The redish-orangish "transition" cards and the green-neck cards seem to be limited to the cream back. However the gray/yellow is a VERY small sample.

So, does that mean that the gray stock was used at a time when the ink situation was stable? And how could the red be depleted in the logo, but not the neck?

I really don't understand the actual printing works.

Bill

[Zach Wheat]

Given Ted's example above it almost looks like the green throat version has a thumb print size area where the red ink did not stick.

[ALR-bishop]

Can you imagine what the Topps employees who produced this set and other early sets would think about threads like this and the never ending variants thread.

[irv]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Can you imagine what the Topps employees who produced this set and other early sets would think about threads like this and the never ending variants thread.

I'm not sure if this has been noted before but in my search for a Larry Jansen card, I have noticed this print line on some of his cards. (Bottom left, in the border, just below his wrist)
This one also has a dot/spot/print mark above it but most that I have seen with this line don't have that spot.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1952-Topps-L...25.m3641.l6368
http://www.ebay.ca/itm/1952-Topps-5-...pf5Tx19OF4Wy1g
http://www.ebay.ca/itm/1952-Topps-5-...AAAOSwax5Y0HWT

[Zach Wheat]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Can you imagine what the Topps employees who produced this set and other early sets would think about threads like this and the never ending variants thread.

It's funny, I was thinking much the same thing....with only Sy Berger sitting around his kitchen table constructing the layout wondering how he can cause unending speculation on how variations were created.

I think there is something to the previous threads as well as this one in terms of the initial production and how at least some of the variations came about.

Z

[JollyElm]

Can you imagine if they had today's technology back then?? With such simple layouts, it would have been a snap to make everything 'perfect.' Case in point, once they laid out the logo for a particular team, all they would have to do to assure absolute consistency is copy and paste it to every other card that showed a player from said team. (And, yes, contrarians, I know it's not quite that simple, but I am just making a general point. )

[steve B]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

Can you imagine if they had today's technology back then?? With such simple layouts, it would have been a snap to make everything 'perfect.' Case in point, once they laid out the logo for a particular team, all they would have to do to assure absolute consistency is copy and paste it to every other card that showed a player from said team. (And, yes, contrarians, I know it's not quite that simple, but I am just making a general point. )

Even back then it was almost that simple. But .....Topps.....

[Zach Wheat]

Originally Posted by steve B

Even back then it was almost that simple. But .....Topps.....

Well Darren actually has a good point as the majority of miscuts occurred in the 2nd & 3rd series of Topps attempt to go big time with the '52 set. I believe this was due to the hurried nature of creating these series which resulted in misaligned cards and consequently miscutting them. Coincidentally - the 3rd series is where many of the variations occur.

Z