Should be obvious to all.....:)

33 goudey for prewar, 52 topps post war

Sent from my LS670 using Tapatalk 2

T3 by a wide margin....

Also im surprised that t206 got more votes than T205:confused:

Last poll between just those 2 had T205's as the better looking card.

I don't see the N162 set on this list ? ?
 

Why are the 1955 BOWMAN or 1959 TOPPS sets on this list ? Regarding post-WWII sets....why isn't the 1953 BOWMAN set listed in this Poll ?

Anyhow, when one judges a set by it's looks, it doesn't get any better than this............

1888 GOODWIN CHAMPIONS (N162) set............

http://i529.photobucket.com/albums/d...ansonkelly.jpg


TED Z
__________________________________________________ ________________________________

LOOKING for these T206 guys to complete my AMERICAN BEAUTY 460 sub-set (75 cards)

AMES (hands over head)....CAMNITZ (hands over head)....CRAWFORD (bat)....DOYLE (portrait)
McGRAW (portrait-cap)....McQUILLAN (bat)....TINKER (bat off)....WILTSE (portrait-cap)

Hands down the finest looking 19th century set. Maybe the best overall.

Nice cards Ted!!

Yeah, '59 Topps isn't even the nicest set of 1959 (I give the edge to Bazooka), let alone of all time.

I know it's not perfectly on topic, but here are my favorites, by decade:
10's: T3
20's: 1921 Exhibit
30's: 1933 Goudey
40's: 1941 Play Ball
50's: 1953 Bowman
60's: 1965 Topps
70's: 1975 Topps
80's: 1984 Fleer
After the 80's is where my eyes glaze over.

My Card Design Choices
 

I'm a visual person... so, here you go...

http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/m...ignedSets3.jpg

I voted T3 based on your choices.

The following are also beautiful sets:

N28
N162
T218 - probably the most beautiful sports set of all time. Too bad no baseball players were included.
T205
1914 CJ's
1950 Bowman
1953 Bowman color
1955 Topps
1957 Topps football

Best Looking set of all time
 

T205's.

56 T by a mile IMO

+1. The best example of how simplicity can be beautiful. No typography whatsoever to distract you...just gorgeous color photographs of players from baseball's golden age. Old-time uniforms, stadiums long gone. It doesn't get any better than this.

http://img560.imageshack.us/img560/9627/57d3.png

.....definitely partial to CJ's.....specifically, the 1914's!

http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/m...ignedSets3.jpg

With a nod to the T3s...(which I agree are the most glorious looking set)... the proof is in the pudding: These sets are just awesome... something awesome about all of them (for instance... LOVE the Bowman 50-52... the 50s are like little paintings... the lack of any type on the front enhances the beauty even more... )

Row 1: The 1909-11 T206, 1911 T205, 1910-11 Turkey Red Cabinet Cards, 1912 T207, 1914 Cracker Jack,

Row 2: 1933 Goudey, 1934 Goudey, 1935 Diamond Stars, 1941 Playball,

Row 3: 1950 Bowman, 1951 Bowman, 1952 Bowman,

Row 4: 1952 Topps, 1953 Bowman, 1953 Topps, 1954 Topps, 1956 Topps.

Pre-war- R309-1 Goudey Premiums (I especially like the Ruth- it's just a parger than life image which I think perfectly portrays the babe.

Post war- another vote for 1956 Topps

I'm going to go a little "outside the box" here. I know this is not a pre-war set, but I have a background in photography. There are cards that I collect strictly for the photo regardless of the player. For me, baseball card photography started to turn the corner with the 1973 Topps set. There a many cards in that set where the photographers got creative with the action shots:

Wow, i thought i was the only one who appreciated great action shots on cards no matter who the player is!! Great choice VoodooChild!!!! 1971 also had a lot of action shots, in fact 1971 is really the first set since 1956 that had a lot of action shots in it. For that reason, i consider 1971 a milestone set. My alltime fav is still 1956, what great action and backgrounds on so many of those.

Goodwin's Champs, N162, hands down. Poll is worthless without this set included.

Speaking as a designer, I'm going to go thumbs down on the '73 set action shots. The backgrounds are too cluttered... and the featured player often gets lost.

I do get (I think) your main point... that this (and the '71 & '72 set) tried to do something different... but it just doesn't work for me...

To each his own...

Hey John, I hear you on the '73's, but I think there might have been some limitations with lenses and film speed back then. I don't think there were large aperture 800mm lenses and 3200 speed film back then to make focused stopped action and "blurred" backgrounds possible. I'm just giving props for the effort for actually thinking about camera angles, composition, capturing different game situations, and playing with depth-of-field (slightly out of focus foreground/in focus background). It's the fist time I saw that with baseball card photography was the point I was trying to make.

poll has some weird options..55 bowman...REALLY?

Ya, I know. C46 is not even on the list! An obvious oversight. :D:rolleyes::D

The correct answer is, of course, N162.

By country:

United States: N162
Cuba: 1923-24 Billiken
Mexico: 1945 issue (unnamed for now)
Nicaragua: 1957 Cocibolca
Puerto Rico: 1951-52 Denia
Venezuela: 1931 Diana

That's how my eyes see it, anyway.

-Ryan

Stache...
 

drooling over your PSA 8 53Bowman Campy and Mathews cards! awesome stuff.

I love the 73's for the same reason. The Luis Alvarado is my favorite card in the set.

I love it when an interesting background or colorful background is in focus and really part of the picture. It makes the card way more attractive to me.

Jason C, you forgot the best looking card of the set. :D

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Y-K6rtlHIC...400/img108.jpg

Jason L.,

Unfortunately those are not mine. I found those on the web. I have the Kiner, but it's a PSA 6. I'll upgrade that and add the rest in time. This is one set I plan on finishing.

Here's my Ralph:

http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/9205/kqrj.png

It has nice eye appeal, but I'd like a 7 that's a little more centered.

Bill.....The best part about the '73 Clemente is the back - Showing exactly 3,000 hits!

That makes sense to me... I'm probably spoiled by the Conlon photography (the Cobb sliding shot comes to mind) of dynamic photography...

Maybe I'll take a look at the '73 set again...

Cheers!

Although not even in the Top 20 of Best Looking Sets Of All Time... I do like the '72 set (people either love it or hate it)... but I think it's excellent design for its time... There's some cool things in there... including this beautiful idea... Billy Cowan with a halo provided by the Big A in the background. This is what happens when you get a photographer that's going a bit extra and not just lazy shooting in traditional ways...

I also love how the Alex Johnson is perfect framed by the card design... Nice touches, both.

http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/m...gels_Cowan.jpg http://i295.photobucket.com/albums/m...ns_Johnson.jpg

Jason, ya, you're right. Thank you, Jon Matlack!

Roberto's 3,000th hit came 1 year and 7 days after I was born. On that day, he tied Honus Wagner's team record for games played, and broke it on October 3rd when he came out for the 9th inning.

I really like the '58 Topps set, too, and this might be my favorite Roberto card:

http://img855.imageshack.us/img855/5912/a2yu.png

I'm going to add the '58 to my collection next, I think.

John....yeah the Conlon Cobb Sliding is an awesome shot, but was really cropped. Here's the original. I bet it was taken a few feet away from the 3rd base line. You could probably get a similar shot today with a cheap digital camera from good seats in the stands. Those guys really had skills back then. He had one shot at it with a manual focus large format camera. Not like today where cameras auto focus multiple frames per second.

Wow, quite a variety of choices and some strange choices in the poll? Not to go along with the crowd but it has to be T3 closely followed by N162. If you had a large showcase of every card choice in this thread in the same condition I believe my 2 choices would stand out. While I agree the 53B is a beauty of a set , I don't see how any set with actual photo's could even compete with actual artwork.

Well... I guess that's my argument in a nutshell for good design. I know that shot was pretty wide... but if it was placed in the context of a card design, you MUST know how to crop a photo that results in the best possible design. It doesn't matter if it's an illustration or a photo... the design of the image is a key to create a beautiful result... I've seen a lot of amazing design ruined by bad crops (among other reasons...). Cropping is a pretty important element that figures in the final outcome.

my favorite sets have to be the t206, t3 and 1934-36 diamond stars