Adam,

Not sure if you remember, but a few years ago there was a thread on a 1971 Steve Garvey card that looked like the Cards team picture with the blue color borders and looked a bit unfinished. That Garvey card had the finished back as well. I remember Steve (steve B) stating it's possible they weren't progressive proofs, but were unfinished in some way at the printers (at least that's how I remember it; I may have to look it up).

Some of these have been on ebay for awhile. Regular backs


https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/fKUAA...NUF/s-l500.jpg

Thank you for letting me know about the Bonham, I did not know that was recurring. The Meyer card below has a near equal amount of coverage... I also came across the second Meyer with the hat distortion variation/one-off. The Pablo card is interesting because both copies have the recurring mark on the hat, but only one has the has this recurring anomaly. I wonder if a copy exists with the print anomaly and no mark on the hat? I have two with the anomaly and both have the hat flaw. The Hartzell card has what appears to me to be an unrelated spill, but I am not sure it if is part of this anomaly or not....

I’ve never seen that 77 Dan Meyer with the print defects on the hat before, it freaked me out when I saw it. Every 77 Pablo Torrealba that I have ever seen with the ink washout flaw also has the lightning bolts by his head, I have never seen with the washout without the bolts.

Adding to the mix...https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...1c12ab21.plist


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Comstock yellow and Metzger Black line.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/UO...w2194-h1658-no


https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-f...8=w430-h496-no

Ok, richtree, you get a pass on the Metzger but if you have the Comstock yellow name you have to put up a better scan :)

1955 Topps #2 Ted Williams
 

These newly-discovered variations keep on coming. Some guy listed the no dots version for a ton of money so I searched and found the one on eBay that does NOT have dots in his last name. There are several and possibly some on COMC as well. At least this is not a scarce one.

Good one Tom

I can't help with the Yellow Comstock but here are scans of the 1979 Topps Roger Metzger solid line and partial line variation cards.

Show...me...your print variations!
 

Sorry if this has already been covered. I scrolled through about the first 15 pages of this thread and didn’t see it, though: ‘58 Mantle base card and the print defect / variation next to his left eye. The copy I picked up this week has this, and I began to get a little worried as I looked around and saw that others didn’t. But then I began to find them. Including at least one in a PSA 7 slab, so that made me feel a little bit better.

Normal card without print spot:

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...de1434b9b2.jpg

Copies with it. The ungraded card here is mine:
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...11a167b5da.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...6d27e30ebf.jpg

You can see what I’m talking about, straight up from the word “New” in the team name below. Kind of like a fisheye if it were elsewhere on the card. I’ve seen this anywhere from a light blip up to a dark red dot. It seems to occur in maybe one out of 20 or slightly more cards that I looked at on eBay and online. I guess on the whole, if you could choose it’s undesirable, but I don’t know… This doesn’t jump out at me the way print snow on his cap would, or even a similar sized defect on the orange background field probably would.

Weird stuff, but as we know by now, print defects like this are anything but rare on 1958 Topps cards...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Found this progressive print variation....one copy is partially blackened with excess ink on the "Major....Record" line while on the other copy that entire line is blackened including the area past the left border.

Partial missing Ink

Interesting, I figured that card was probably on a corner of a sheet and sure enough it was. It's recurring, there are a handful on COMC in varying degrees.

Was waiting to share this one in case I got a different copy or it was some sort of weird effect with the scan itself and not actually the card. This is how the card looks. Some sort of black ink bleeding to make it look like Reggie has a very massive birthmark on his face. It almost looks like it could be right if you didn't already know better.

It's recurring, I'm waiting on one from COMC and got another one from a board member a year or two ago. ETA: it looks your copy is a little more extreme than my copies around his mouth and nose.

Already discussed??

A green splotch on Archie Wilson's left eyebrow. Doing a quick search, it seems the majority of his cards have this splotch but there are some that don't.
https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C...ih=578&dpr=1.5

Good one Dale

1954 Topps #34 Jim Rivera: semi-circle at bottom of box on back
https://img.comc.com/i/Baseball/1954...zoom&side=back

Just picked up there two of John Kennedy from the 1965 Topps set.

Top card has blue bleed on left side of stat box and bottom has blue bleed into cartoon faces.

Mike

Cool discovery, best card of the 1960's! This Nolan Ryan rookie isn't the lost issue from the 3-D test series, right?

https://img.auctiva.com/imgdata/1/8/...39362492_o.jpg

Cool, I had heard of the version where the left side of the box was bumpy but didn't know about the version that turned the ball and one of the cartoon faces blue. I have a couple of the first one but they're not as extreme as your example.

I've mentioned these before but I never showed them with the actual cards scanned side by side. The 1967 Nen is on the same sheet as the three consecutive 1967 cards and is just as rare as those three so I would suspect that it was part of the same print flaw. It appears that the card to the right of the 1974 Dusty Baker is also affected but I haven't been able to find an afflicted 1974 Cookie Rojas yet.

That Ryan is BLEEPING awesome!

Thank you for picturing the 3 67s next to each other....is the Monteagudo a new pick up for you?

Here are two of my recent pickups.....not sure which cards border the Flood card and if there is any residual print disruption on those cards.

Yeah, I got it recently from a board member who doesn’t post much. It’s a poor mans 67 Monteagudo error, but you take what you can get as rare as it is :D.

Now I have to move my Alomar that's just like that one out of the "transient printing errors box and into the recurring maybe variations section.

Nice to see another one.

Found this recurring print anomaly on the back of the 61 Topps 151 Donohue card. In hand, at quick glance it looked like a crease, but after a quick check on COMC I noticed at least two others.

I hadn't seen one in forever on eBay but one of the 1963 Topps high number yellow based/blue circle cards with the print flaw of a missing top black border line showed up, a PSA 8 no less. There are eight consecutive cards that were on the top (or bottom) of the original uncut sheet with the printing flaw of missing the top border line that starts on the first card at a little over a quarter inch and then gradually goes down to nothing on the eighth card on the row.

Your eyes for this stuff is amazing Cliff. I thought I had one sometime back as the seller’s scan clearly showed the defect, but it was a stock photo by a familiar ebay seller

Ha! I know exactly which stock photo you are talking about, this one right here. Wasn't it Burbank Cards that used the stock photo?

It goes into Eli Grba, I couldn't find any Fred Hutchinson cards with it so it may not affect it. I spent what seemed like two hours scouring the backs of 1961 Gene Conley cards looking fruitlessly for the flaw until it finally dawned on me that 1961 backs are upside down and that it would be on the Grba instead. ETA: I did it again, I keep forgetting 1961 backs are upside down so it didn't go into Hutchinson but rather it is at the top of the sheet.

Show...me...your print variations!
 

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...cbfcc252.plist
Just got these cards...the version on left seems to have gray tones in the yellow border.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalkhttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...b33c8da5.plist

Great work Cliff, thank you....sorry for your two hour detour into Conley's domain. Did any of the Grba's that you found with the back variation have the lower right border variation found on the front of this card?

I have not seen the grey tones in the border before....here are two Stallard cards I have, one with a print defect on upper portions and the other with excess red ink on the lower portion.

I didn't notice any Grba cards with that front flaw but I wasn't looking for it either. I didn't know it existed, but being on the edge corner of the sheet it's not surprising. Those two bottom cards are pretty extreme. ETA: I found a few nice examples on eBay. It's amazing I didn't notice any of these looking through the Grba cards the first time but my mind was focused on finding the print flaw on the back of the card.

Until you posted the image of the corner of the sheet, I didn't realize the Grba card was on a sheet's corner....the location on the sheet clearly explains these (progressive) border variations and why no other cards exhibit similar missing borders .

Neat cards Larry. This is one of my few non Topps/Bowman/Fleer sets. I have the 4 Hal Smith, 6 counting the other guy, and a couple of other front oddities, but had not seen any back variants

thanks Al these are all high numbered cards "overstruck" with low numbered cards pretty unique all recent pick-ups.
Larry

While searching on Trading Card Database looking for chicanery committed by the member iffie99 I actually ran across a pretty cool variation unknown to me that was listed by him. 1972 #216 Joe Niekro can be found with and without a black bar between the 6' and the 1" in his height, it looks like the version without the bar is the less common one but by no means rare. It reminds me of similar variation cards of Roger Metzger, Richie Zisk, and Dave Roberts in the 1979 set.

I've spent most of my time here the past 5 years in the buy/sell area. Been intending to share this for way too long. Using my time at home to focus on cards, so now is a good time to share.
Noticed this about 2 years ago while working on the set. I've been tracking this card on eBay since that time. The version with the complete black border around the Yankees logo seems to be rarer. But not that much rarer, probably 60% w/o and 40% with.
https://www.net54baseball.com/pictur...ictureid=28225https://www.net54baseball.com/pictur...ictureid=28224

Recurring blue streak in the grass on the right side.
https://img.comc.com/i/Baseball/1950...&size=original
1950 Bowman - [Base] #117 - Bill Rigney
Courtesy of COMC.com

edit: moved to PM instead to not derail topic.

is this a variation
 

Not sure this would be considered a "variation" but i always thought the 1979 fronts with 1978 backs were interesting. i am a Winfield collector so wish i had Dave on the front but oh well. I never found much info about these but there's always a few on Ebay. I have seen wrongbacks before but never different years like this.

Welcome Boo. Most do not consider wrong backs variations, and normally not as sought after. But there are wrong back collectors, usually involving major stars, and wrong year backs are a big plus I would guess. Some have posted wrong backs from non baseball issues. ( baseball on front another sport or non sport issue on back, or other way around)

If you are a Winfield guy here is an odd one

https://oi1267.photobucket.com/album...ps2b74f3b7.jpg

Thanks Al. gotcha. That is an odd one!

That 86 Topps Winfield isn’t in my top ten of screwups where I had a chance to get something on eBay and didn’t pull the trigger, but it might be #11 :D.

Yeah, topps printed some 1989 Football backs with a baseball front as well. But yours is really neat since it's from two different years.

Back in the mid eighties Baseball Card Magazine had a picture of a badly miscut 1968 Topps baseball card with the top 25% of the card being a 1967 Topps football card. That card freaked me out for about 20-25 years until I learned about Milton Bradley Win-A-Card game cards either here on eBay.

Freaked out for 20 + years, wow. That explains a lot Cliff :)

I’ve collected blank backs and wrong backs for a long time and 1979 is the only year I’ve seen the wrong year on the back. Mine are 78 as well. As Al mentioned, you can also find some with non-sports from the same year. I’ve personally seen star wars and mork and mindy on the back on 1979 Topps. People paid about $50 a pop for those about 4 years ago if my memory serves correct.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...16de48126d.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...56a50cdb57.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Was going through my 61 Dodgers team set yesterday. The Fairly gets a lot of notoriety for it green ball variation because it’s recognized in publications, however, there are other cards in the set that aren’t recognized that have the same characteristic. One, is the Lillis. Not only does he have a green ball variation but he also has stray ink at the stat box that comes in a variety of shapes. Same is true for the Koufax/Podres Southpaw card.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...eb552f5626.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...db37d28d3e.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...b4f9fae358.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...414dfeac33.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Those are cool, they came from a find by a dealer in 79.

The story I heard was that they routinely visited the dump near one of the printing plants. One day they found a bunch of strips of these.

I bought a strip, but it wasn't packed well at all, just coiled into a box and it got a bit crushed. Still have it somewhere.
All were vertical strips the full sheet height.

78-79 they were using a lot of leftovers for other stuff.
79's with 78 backs
Some with Mork and Mindy "stickers" on the back (I forget if they are 78 or 79)
Sheets of both 78 Baseball and Black hole backs are used to print Bazooka boxes- grocery store verions, about the size of a mac and cheese box.
Probably one or two others I don't know about.

Finally....
While going through another overgraded ebay lot I received today, I finally found the one variation I have been searching for over the past 15+ years. I was muttering to myself about the condition of the cards being 2-3 grades lower than stated when I see the nicest card in the whole group, the 67 Spiezio missing the "Spie". Many of you probably have multiple copies, but this was my first copy of this card. More than got my money's worth out the lot afterall.

Awesome! What a great surprise! Congrats on the find!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Congrats Larry.

It is interesting to me how some recurring print defects gained general hobby recognition as variations while the vast majority do not.

Who is in charge of this stuff anyway ?

61 topps
 

so I took a page from Cliff's playbook and looked up the sheet that Lillis was on (sheet2). Lillis is at the top row and the cards to the left and right on the top row, Walt Moryn #91 (cardinals), Jim Woods #59 (phillies), Joe Amalfitano #87 (giants), and AL HR Leaders #44 (with Mantle/Maris) all have back print defects with stray ink if anyone is so inclined to add them. Not super attractive since it is the back of the card but cool nonetheless. The HR Leaders card is the least obvious. The bottom left corner of green is a sharp square on most of the cards but a select few have a soft rounded corner and wavy bottom. I also found a green in ball (variation) for the Dodgers Southpaws card #207 which is on a completely different sheet. Couldn't find a 61 topps sheet with the Fairly on it to see what other cards are around it.

Thank you Joe and AL....yes AL, in my haste to post about one of the more elusive cards now in my collection, I should have not used the word "variation", but indeed called the card what it is, a recurring print defect.

My point was that it has in fact achieved hobby recognition as a variation, just like the 58 Herrer or 57 Bakep, and now the 61 Fairly. The thing of interest to me is why a few print defects get hobby recognition as variations while most do not

Exactly. That lack of continuity is head scratching. It's almost as if there needs to be an organization started, maybe the Card Collecting Coalition (CCC) that has a panel who decides what is approved and recognized in different categories. Maybe the categories would include Standard/Variation/Reoccuring print defect (RPDs). Hobbyists could submit applications requesting card approval. Then that trickles down to the hobby publications which trickles to the grading companies. Master set collectors could decide which level of set they are going to collect. I know, crazy talk...don't rock the boat, Joe. Sit down.

Nice work! The card on the end of the top row can also be found with the print error of green in the ball, Russ Kemmerer. Personally, I'm not a fan at all of considering these 1961 cards with dashes of green in the ball as variations, even the Fairly that fills up three quarters of the ball. They are just interesting print anomalies. ETA: There are a few of the 61 Moryn on COMC.

There are recurring cards with the same exact print flaw as the 1990 Topps partially blackless from 1958 (back), 1961, 1963, 1967 (front and back), 1974, 1980, 1985, 1986, and 1988 Topps with some of them that are just as rare or rarer than the 1990 Topps cards but are not worth anywhere near or have the demand of what the 1990 cards do. The 1967 Ed Spiezio is the only one that I can think of that has gained hobby acceptance. I know it is because one of the 1990 cards is the Frank Thomas rookie card and the epic thread on the Collectors Universe forum that gradually unveiled all of the cards affected.

IMO, the manner in which some print defects have been promoted by select folks in the hobby (dealers, bloggers, etc) has helped these more well known defects to gain recognition over other print defects.

Also IMO, the greater the scarcity is for a recurring print defect, the more demand there seems to come with it. Obvious exceptions include 57 Bakep and 61 Farily.



This Lemke blog is a good example of how print defects can be promoted and gain added recognition(demand)....also, notice in this blog the proposal of how scarce this print defect may indeed be:

http://boblemke.blogspot.com/2010/10...-error-or.html



FWIW, how many here have a copy of the 61 293 Golden?

I do not have that one, but it is low priority for me. It is extremely rare, no doubt. There was one that was clearly stated as such on eBay a few years ago that went for less than $50, if I remember correctly. ETA: It was January 2018 according to WorthPoint. It was just a perfectly placed piece of debris on the printing plate that made the 8 appear to be a 3. I do have a 1967 Spiezio, though :D.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...ac587b1b.plist
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...582b6ba8.plist

Recent pickup from a fellow member that traded with me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's usually referred to a "wet sheet transfer" since it was adhered to the back of the card from the sheet below it when they were stacked on each other when the ink was still wet. It would get more oohs and aahs in the pre-war section...

These are to me the weirdest things to be accepted as variations.
Most are overinking, and won't really be consistent.
The Amalfitano is a registration problem.

I couldn’t agree more, in my opinion the 61 Fairly green in ball is the worst vintage postwar variation that PSA recognized, with the 57 Bakep being the next. They recognized the 73 Earl Williams border gaps for a short time but then wisely stopped it. Hopefully they stopped recognizing the 73 Bahnsen and 73 Bell single border gaps as well.

For a time, Lemke was listing border gap defects in the Standard Catalog. He stopped doing that and I think removed some or all when he tightened up his definition of a variation...intentional change in card by manufacturer ( an often hard to apply definition).

The expanded use of scans on ebay and elsewhere made it clear there were minor and even major recurring print defects everywhere, and recognizing them was a lost cause. But the Fairly recognition was surprising. Did it not first get recognized in Beckett ? Maybe it is Rich's fault :)

I have one-Tom Billing

Showoff :D.

1955 #144 Amalfitano
 

Notice the vertical blue line at the left. One of the three does NOT have the blue line and I believe most do NOT. They are out there if that is your cup of tea.

I think some of them were recognized early on by the handful of people that were into variations. The Bakep and herrer were both in Ralph Nozakis book in 1975. And they're uncommon enough that I hadn't seen one until sometime after I joined here (Didn't look all that hard after a while)

When something is that uncommon, and it's listed during a time when there isn't ready access to images, I think most people take it on faith - Like I did, because hey, the guy wrote a book listing loads of variations, he must really be an expert!


The Fairly is just weird, because it got recognized at a time when images are readily available and sharable. I haven't yet seen a 61 with green in the ball that I'd think of as being anything but over inking or registration. (I do think they're possible, I've found a couple differences where the color under the back print is actually different. )

I'm more comfortable with the missing black cards, and the border gaps, as in most cases it's at least somewhat clear that the plate was either made differently or had a defect.
If the definition is intentionally changed, that works for me for variations, and maybe use varieties for plate differences that weren't intentional.
That's also a bit fuzzy, as an example, 88 Score has three different die cuts used to separate the sheet. And the changes were intentional as it was done in response to customer complaints. BUT they are also screened differently for one press run than another. Intentional? they probably happened when the errors were fixed, so to some extent intentional. But I don't think the person doing the new halftones was like "It will look better if I put the red at 30 degrees instead of 45" Likely the camera was set up that way that day, and they just didn't consider it to be important.
Lots of sets from that era have similar things going on.

Speaking of recurring border gaps:
https://img.comc.com/i/Baseball/1959...inal&side=back
1959 Topps - [Base] #260.2 - Early Wynn (white back)
Courtesy of COMC.com

Good analysis Steve. The intentional change definition sounds simple but can be complicated in practice. It Topps adds a option or traded line that is easy, but it is often impossible to tell if a defect was discovered and intentionally changed or not

Another good example are DPs. In the last printed Standard Catalog Lemke listed variations for the 52 Mantle, Thompson and Robinson. PSA does not recognize them. The differences can be found on the front and back. The differences were likely not intended but did result from an intentional decision to DP those 3 cards

George Vrecheck has written articles on DP differences in the 63 and 55 (56?) sets. Green tint non pose differences from 62 are another example. Probably not intended but did result from an intentional change in the printing process. Variations ?

Bet a lot of 52 Master collectors are praying PSA does not adopt the 52 Mantle as a variation ;)

It would be tough to come up with a hobby definition that all would buy into or that would cover all past and future official variations

Variations on eBay
 

Folks,
Things being as they are, with time on my hands, I have been listing on eBay lots of cards from my many boxes piled in my closet. Some are print errors, variations, blank backs, color shifts and other oddities that some of you may have interest in. I have titled all of these "Variation" somewhere in the listing titles, my eBay seller's name is brightair. If you do a search you can find these. Many more will be listed over the coming weeks and months as I get to various boxes and binders. Furthermore, my zeal for compiling lists of variations has waned and I haven't been keeping them up-to-date, as I'm sure some of you have noticed. Others have been taking over this labor of love and will continue it into the future with even more thoroughness and depth than I was able. I am grateful to them for what they are doing and will accomplish, and look forward to their achievements. Meantime, may everyone be safe and well until we meet again in the flesh.
All the best!
Richard Dingman

I love your description of the 1971 Topps Frank Reberger ink blob card, a sky
donut :D.

Greatly appreciate all your work Richard