March Pickups

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by NateMack

Found a nice stash of 67 high numbers at a local show this weekend. Able to knock off a few tougher cards. But this oddity grabbed my attention. It looks totally different than the normal Red Sox team #604. The background is pink in color, the normal background color is red. And the Red Sox letters are lighter pink instead of orange. Kind of cool I thought... Has anyone seen this card before?

NOTE: The border might appear an off white, but it is bright white like the rest of the cards in the set. So it is not faded.

Thanks
Nate Mack
Attachment 136589

In my opinion that card is 100% faded and did not leave the factory like that. Looks to have set out on display for a long time. Notice the darker square in the bottom right side were the price sticker was.

[Harliduck]

Nate...I would agree with bnorth, that clearly looks like a price sticker and faded around it. Not withstanding...a truly TOUGH card, one of the hardest of the 67 Topps highs for sure. Congrats on the pickup! Wish I had your same luck on Saturday...pretty bleak on my end for 67s...your whipping this set out!


Edit to add that fading might not account for the color in the Red Sox letters? Not sure if yellow would fade to pink?

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Harliduck

Nate...I would agree with bnorth, that clearly looks like a price sticker and faded around it. Not withstanding...a truly TOUGH card, one of the hardest of the 67 Topps highs for sure. Congrats on the pickup! Wish I had your same luck on Saturday...pretty bleak on my end for 67s...your whipping this set out!


Edit to add that fading might not account for the color in the Red Sox letters? Not sure if yellow would fade to pink?

The pink in the Red Sox letters is because the letters are not pure yellow. They have an orange to red tint on most cards that fades to a very light pink(magenta).

[Harliduck]

Makes sense to me...

[NateMack]

I thought about that, but why would the card have a complete pink uniformity? I do assume that there was a sticker on the case as well. But why would that not be red where the sticker was. That is one super consistent fading if it was done in a case due to sun... Why would only 1 color fade? I would have to think it was taped up in a window to get all the color to run fade away.

Whatever happened to the card, I was glad to get it for $5 bucks...

I like the pink just fine

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by NateMack

I thought about that, but why would the card have a complete pink uniformity? I do assume that there was a sticker on the case as well. But why would that not be red where the sticker was. That is one super consistent fading if it was done in a case due to sun... Why would only 1 color fade? I would have to think it was taped up in a window to get all the color to run fade away.

Whatever happened to the card, I was glad to get it for $5 bucks...

I like the pink just fine

Very cool card for $5. Actually 2 colors faded a lot. The yellow and Red(magenta). The sticker was only there for part of the fading. Except for the beginning stages of fading a card the fading is uniform. The first stages of fading produces more fading at the edges.

If interested in more details PM me.

[Beatles Guy]

Originally Posted by bnorth

In my opinion that card is 100% faded and did not leave the factory like that. Looks to have set out on display for a long time. Notice the darker square in the bottom right side were the price sticker was.

+1

[ALR-bishop]

I would tend to agree with the others. If some color ink ran low in the printing process you should be able to find other examples like it, like for example the 1982 Blackless misprints. Also, what does the back look like ?

But, it is sometimes hard for me to tell. Is this fading or a missing color ?

[ALR-bishop]

Maybe after a sun tan on one side, it was rolled over

[ALR-bishop]

Picked up this yellow wrapper to go with my 51 sets and other 51 wrappers/packs. Back then, the cards were intended mainly to sell gum, or in the case of the Current and Connie mack All Stars, candy

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

I would tend to agree with the others. If some color ink ran low in the printing process you should be able to find other examples like it, like for example the 1982 Blackless misprints. Also, what does the back look like ?

But, it is sometimes hard for me to tell. Is this fading or a missing color ?

For some reason that is a very popular card to fade. Light color on the back is a bad sign because the fronts and backs are not printed at the same time so the chances that both are missing color a very slim.

With out it in hand I would give that card a 90% chance of being faded because all the colors are lighter on the front not just no yellow. With pictures it is hard to tell but it also looks to have a duller finish front/back, another sign of fading.

Missing color cards are some of my favorite errors so I have done a lot of experimenting to be able to tell the difference.

Here is a picture of a real missing yellow card, top card. Look how bright the other colors are. The bottom Mantle is lightly faded from sitting out.

[ALR-bishop]

I have a set of the 82 Blackless ( and several gray signature transition cards) and a bunch of other color oddities from other years, but I suppose it would be best to pursue that subject in a separate thread

[mintacular]

Picked up this 66 Mantle: