1949 Leaf Theory
 

I know this set is talked about a lot on the board, and I am certainly alway looking to chime in, I love the quirkiness of the production value, but also the aesthetics of the cards. Simply put, I love them.

I have been researching the set, trying to figure out what exactly went on with the printing of the cards. There is an established and accepted fact that there was a primary printing and a short printing. The theory I am working on currently is that there was an actual 3rd printing of the primary set, though this printing featured changes to the printing plates, and can be identified by the more pinkish/magenta ink. There are marked changes in many of the key cards, Babe Ruth features "lines" that connect the background field of color to the name plate, Stan Musial's and Joe DiMaggio's hats were masked off, removing the detail and allowing the background color to show through, Jackie Robinson's hat details were removed and there were the additions of lines similar to Ruth's. In my opinion, there is actually a rarity to these variations that fall in line with the "accepted" variations in the set (Aberson, Peterson, Hermanski). While mentioning the Hermanski variation, I actually think that the designation on it is wrong. When you look at the card, the registration of the name in the field of red is the same on both versions, they wouldn't have offset the name, only to correct it later. My thought is that HERMANSK is the error (backed up by the presence of the pink toned magenta), and the correct version came out in the initial run, hence the 2:1 ratio in the PSA population report. This same ration is similar to the Peterson variation in which the Red Cap is part of the second printing.

I'd love to hear other's thoughts on this. I attached a couple of examples, though I know there are more out there. Ted Z among others have alluded to this before, and Ted has posted the uncut sheet image before as well. I think that in an effort to lighten up a second run of the cards, the plates were altered specifically in the hats to allow more color through and mask off the black plate with most of the details. If true, in my mind, it would change the values of some of the key cards in the set, as they would have been essentially short print in comparison to the first roll out of the set.

Nice hypothesis but I am not into Leaf enough to get that down and dirty. Now, get me some esoteric cards, folks have barely heard of, and I am all over it.
.

very interesting theory, good research/thinking and thanks for laying it out. always more to unwravel with this set, it seems - one of the reasons why I love it!

The Hermansk answer
 

The Hermansk is not a true error but an inking problem of some sort with a clog or something like this. No question the NO I version has a deeper darker red . I’m posting some photos of a HALF version I own which is neither the Hermansk or the Hermaski but in between!!! The back also seems somewhat over inked on the top as well. See what you think……

Very interesting. Best set in my humble opinion.

1949 LEAF set
 

The Hermanski card was situated in the lower-most right corner of the 1st Series sheet. And, the "Hermansk"
cards are simply a result of printing flaws.

Here is an old photo of an uncut sheet of 1st series cards. Along with a diagram of the card #'s on their backs.


http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...eries1x50x.jpg
.................................................. .................................................. ...........^ Hermanski ^


http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...ries1x50xN.jpg


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

I agree that there was some printer's error that went into the Hermanski's. It does make me wonder why "they" recognize this as an actual variation. Jury is out on this one for me, if the population didn't fall into the similar proportion as the others, I would say it is a simple printer mistake. I'll keep digging and report back with what I come up with.

1949 LEAF set
 

Brian K

You may find some answers to the questions you have regarding the 1949 LEAF set in the 8-page article
I published in the OLD CARBOARD Magazine (Issue 9). Or in the Net54 thread......
https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...ight=1949+LEAF


https://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan...dnum9cover.jpg


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Any idea where I could track down a copy of that?

Here you go.
https://www.oldcardboard.com/subscriptions.asp

thank you! I ordered up a copy!

Hi Brian, could the possible third printing that you're talking about actually have been an initial printing that was a short print due to the Bowman lawsuit?

I know David has posted a couple of times that Lionel Carter wrote about someone that knew a young collector who had 33 previously unknown cards in the set.

In the January-February 1960 issue of Sport Fan, Carter had another column about 1949 Leaf baseball, announcing the discovery of 33 previously unknown cards

This is a May 4 1949 newspaper report of the court order and in the last paragraph it explicitly states names and pictures of 33 baseball players.

Attachment 544385

I do think the lawsuit had something to do with the distribution of the cards, mainly the short prints. Dr. James Beckett as well have others have said that the cards are found predominately through the Great Lakes, which would fall in line with East coast distribution shut down because of the lawsuit. I think that the 2nd printing of the first 49 happened before the short print run. I think the order of the set distribution was:
_ Leaf Pirates
_ Leaf Baseball -First 49 Print/2nd Print (First 49, this is where the PINK color appears)/Short Print 49 Baseball
_ Leaf Football and Boxing

All the sets used skip numbering, and the color composition of the cards became simpler and simpler as time went on (no more green). With the Short Print baseball into boxing and football, the color went to strictly CMYK, no color mixing.

Still working to crack the code, but learning some very interesting things. Thanks for including this.

Another piece of the puzzle is the Newhouser prototype, one of which sold in 2009 for $80k. It seems like a proof or prototype, but I do find it interesting that this is the only spot ORANGE is attempted.

1949 LEAF BB card set......
 

Hi Brian K

Hopefully, you have read my 8-page article in the OLD CARDBOARD Magazine regarding the 1949 LEAF. If you have any questions, feel free to email me.... tedzan11@comcast.net

Also, check-out this 1949 LEAF BB thread (May 2016)......
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...ight=1949+LEAF




TED Z

T206 Reference
.

I just thought it was interesting that the newspaper article from 1949 and Lionel Carters writing from 1960 mention 33 cards and Ted's photo of the uncut sheet has 33 cards with a 1948 copyright date and 16 with a 1949 copyright date. Is it possible that they had a two 33 card sheets set up to print and maybe even printed some and then added 16 of the cards with the 49 copyright date to each sheet.

Interesting, I will have to look into that further, it may explain a couple of things, or it may just be a coincidence. Johnny Mize and Warren Spahn were at the top of the list of players that filed suit, it was settled outside of court, and Leaf agreed to stay out of the market until 1951. The cost to license players likeness in those day was around $5, and Bowman hand contracted many, so the suit makes sense. I will look further into the copyrights, and see if it coincides with the cards that actually changed. That would be a fascinating wrinkle.

Ted-
I bought the issue and read the article. Your first hand memories of purchasing the cards in 1949 is fantastic. I am working on the company history right now and putting together the theory of where the cards were printed and if that accounts for all the variations and "non-professional" printing errors. I think hands down, the Leaf QC department was not all there, and I would attribute it to the fact that I believe the cards were printed in house. During my research of the company, looking for access to an archive, (including talking to the current CEO of Leaf, who is a great nephew once removed from Sol Leaf, or something like that), I found that Leaf Brands, as it appears on the Copyright on the back of the cards was actually formed in 1947. Sol Leaf consolidated his other candy companies into one, including Overland Candy. If that sounds familiar, they produced a candy wrapper baseball card from 1938-42. I also checked copyrights from 1948 and 1949, and Leaf is not documented as having a Copyright that coincides with the one on the back of the cards. (If there are any lawyers reading this, I would love an explanation on how/why this might be).

The Overland connection provides and interesting connection to the cards. I found a box of WHOPPERS from 1947, the stock looks VERY similar to that of the cards. So if the cards weren't printed in house, whoever was printing the packing for Leaf products, I think used the same commercial lithography presses to make the cards.

That's the quick overview of where I am at, the story is getting more and more interesting, the 2nd printing is a real thing, if you look at your cards and the hats are a different color than the rest you see out there, you have a second printing. Now the trick is to see if there was a third printing, or a second printing of the short prints. I'm far from an answer, but planning to chase down some theories this spring in Chicago. Thanks again for all of your help and opinions.

1949 LEAF issues
 

Brian

People get carried too far away with the COPYRIGHT dates. They simply tell us when the player's Biographies were created.

LEAF first produced their PIRATE set in 1948 (Pirate movies were very popular in the 1940's). I clearly remember acquiring many of these colorful cards during
the Summer of 1948.

In early Fall of 1948, LEAF issued their 50 card* set of BOXERS. This set was so popular, that LEAF continued into 1949 printing up more of these BOXER cards
in the beginning of 1949.

In the Fall of 1948, LEAF issued their FOOTBALL set of 98 cards.....in 2 series of 49 cards each.

Then in early Spring of 1949, LEAF issued their 1st series of BB cards. These cards preceded the 1949 BOWMAN cards by a month (or two) in my neighborhood.
Their 2nd series (49 cards) of cards were issued during the Summer of 1949 (in limited regions of the US).

In the Fall of 1949, LEAF issued their FOOTBALL set of 49 cards


* Note....card #50, Rocky Graziano, was removed (he did not like his image).

https://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan...leafboxers.jpg
TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Fantastic, thank you Ted. Thank you for sharing first hand knowledge of when all the series hit. I will update my notes accordingly.

Did you ever get any of the premiums? The pirate ring or the large format cards at the bottom of the baseball boxes?

1949 LEAF cards
 

Brian

I am guessing you are a Yankees fan ?
If so, you will appreciate this...when I was growing up, our home in Hillside, NJ was just 2 short blocks away from Phil Rizzuto's home. Phil was a really
great neighbor. I could devote several pages of stories regarding him. I knew Phil for many years.


Speaking about 1949 LEAF Premiums, here are some of mine......
Check-this-out, here are 2 graded examples which confirm that PSA and SGC do NOT understand the LEAF BB cards with respect to their "issued date".
These PREMIUMS were included in the same wax-pack boxes that the 1949 cards were in. And indeed, they are correctly identified with the 1949 date.
Yet, the individual 98 (and their variations) BB cards that are graded by PSA and SGC are INCORRECTLY identified as 1948, or 1948-1949 issue dates.


NOTE ----------------v 1949 v-----------------------------------------------------------------------------v 1949 v
https://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan...BabeRuth25.jpg https://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan...uGehrig25x.jpg

https://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan...Hcaption18.jpg



TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Check out my video on the 49’ Leaf Premiums

https://youtu.be/A_AukMF8vpY

Brian, do you know when they settled outside of court, it must have been quite awhile after Bowman sought the court order.

I don't, but it is fairly short runway, the cards hit in '49 and they settled on not producing cards again until '51, so I would imagine it was a quick proceeding. Honestly, Sol Leaf had run into a copyright infringement suit on the Overland side, so a quick settlement may have been the result of not wanting to get "into it" on the east coast with Bowman and the players that brought the suit.

AMAZING collection, I am BEYOND impressed and jealous. Thank you for sharing!

Ted - the premiums are fantastic, thank you for sharing. I am a Yankee fan and grew up listening to The Scooter on WPIX with Bill White. In many ways, their banter made me as much of a Yankee fan as the players on the field. His Hall of Fame induction speech is amazing, I can't even image the stories you have from living close to him. They don't make them like that anymore!

1949 LEAF set
 

Brian

Perhaps, I will thrill you with some of my Phil Rizzuto stories when I find the time.

Regarding, the BOWMAN lawsuit.....there are two stories to it. One factor deals with the Rights of the players.

The 2nd deals with the labeling on the BOWMAN and LEAF wax-packs wrappers. I will scan my two 1949 LEAF
BB wax-pack wrappers and post them tomorrow to show you the difference.

The BOWMAN lawsuit forced LEAF to modify their wrapper labeling quite fast. The wrappers containing the 2nd
Series cards (short-prints) issued in the Summer of 1949 are different.

I will post pictures tomorrow.


TED Z[/B]

T206 Reference
.

I've been working off and on doing a spreadsheet of 49 Leaf Images.

Hardly complete, and I still find new ones.
As things are now, I'm up to at least 4 different runs, maybe as high as 6.

The obvious Pink ones. these so far always have the sides to the portraits, or the lines across the ends of bats. On some cards it can be tough to spot.

The ones with lines across the bats and portraits, but with red instead of Pink.

With lines, but shaded or dark hats

Without the lines regular hats

Without lines Shaded hats.

That's all sort of preliminary. the hat shading may not be consistent, but I think it is.

Where the background does not make a line across a bat, the yellow extends to the edge, but the black does not. On ones with the lines, the yellow often doesn't extend to the edge, but I have seen at least one where it does.

Most of the easily recognizable color differences are consistent with only one version.

I believe the yellow backgrounds Like the Johnson here are a different printing where no blue was used to mix with yellow.
https://www.net54baseball.com/pictur...ictureid=28086

An amazingly complex set for just 50 cards. (I think of the rare numbers as their own set. )

Great research. I feel like "we" (the collectors) need to come up with a designation for how best to characterize the print runs on these. The color variations are definite flags of different runs, as different inks were used. Then we have the actual plate changes, the recognized Peterson and Aberson variations actually extend to many more. Then there are the outliers.

My thought is that the plate changes represent a definite "variation" as there was a physical change made to the printing plate, though the rest of the card stayed the same. Those variations are measurable and not as subjective as the tints of the inks, though those tints are SUPER important in decoding how many different printing runs were made. The Rizzuto that you have shown has two changes made to it (outside of ink colors), the detail of his hat was removed making it blue, and the background red was extended to the nameplate. The only other player that I have found to get this treatment is Jackie Robinson, though the Babe Ruth card has a variation where the "background connector" is added, but the hat is untouched.

Complex is certainly the best way to characterize it, as I have gotten deeper into the research I have really started to enjoy the quirkiness of the cards, outside of their value in the hobby, but also representing a fascinating time in the game.

What I'm thinking of doing is assigning a number to the identifiable plates for each basic color. So like R1 and R2 to indicate a particular red plate as opposed to another.

But that ends up making the overall "number" for a card something like
card #3 - C1 R2 Y2 K2

Which is fine for a start but awkward, and there's no real idea which should be 1 or 2 - did the ones with the extra lines come first or second?

The pink ones - actual Magenta- would probably be something like R2P...

At least it would help group things.

Most cards with anything close to the border have diferences in that area. The lines next to portraits and across the end of bats. Hats get cut down in multiple colors, and often there are three different is the hat is cut down.
Normal hat
Hat cut down background normal
Hat and background cut down
(And probably ones with the background cut down but the hat normal.

It might be possible to limit how many intermediate types I have to look for, since the typical process is to print light to dark. So YMCK or YCMK. But I suspect Leaf didn't necessarily follow that. (Fleer star stickers in 81 were sometimes printed with the blue over the black, and T206s are known with just yellow and brown, so it's not really a hard rule.

There are a few where I haven't found a difference yet.

I'm thinking the removal of details and addition of lines happened second. A smaller run, they represent about 34-36% of the population using the Peterson and Aberson as a guide. Hermanski is an oddity, I see that more as a inking error, but the population falls in line with the percentages, and I have seen that variation in the Magenta color way, but WHY would they change it to the wrong name, makes no sense.

Still a barrel of nuts to crack on this one.

Is the only known uncut sheet the one in Ted's black and white image?

1949 LEAF cards
 

Hi Brian

This illustrates the above stated 2nd lawsuit (BOWMAN vs LEAF) regarding the use of the wording " BASEBALL BUBBLE GUM "
on the wax-pack wrapper. BOWMAN claimed they owned the Copyright for that term. So, LEAF removed the word " BASEBALL "
from their wax-pack wrapper when they issued their 2nd Series of cards in the Summer of 1949.


1949 BOWMAN ------------------------------------------ 1949 LEAF 1st Series -------------------------- 1949 LEAF 2nd Series
https://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan...MANwrapper.jpghttps://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan...x2nd%20_3_.jpg


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Isn't the last wrapper a football wrapper?

Interesting thread on an interesting set.

When I read the title I originally thought "what a great college course!".

1949 Leaf Theory - 3 Credits - Spring Semester

It’s the only one I’ve come across.

Agreed! I’ve been in full study mode this entire semester!

1949 LEAF cards
 

The wax-pack wrappers of Al Rosen's unopened find of 1949 LEAF Baseball (2nd Series, 596-cards) find, in Tampa (Florida) in 1989 were labelled "ALL
STAR Pictures".

Incidentally....Although these cards were acquired in Florida, the original provenance of this collection was the Detroit area in Michigan.
This fact sounds like another Florida acquisition that has been debated on Net54, whose provenance was originally in the northern U.S.

The Football wrappers were labelled ALL-STAR FOOTBALL in 1948. In 1949, it is my understanding that they may have been labelled " FOOTBALL ",
or " PICTURES ".


In the Fall of 1948, LEAF issued their ALL-STAR FOOTBALL GUM set comprising of 98 cards. Issued in two 49-card series. Jackie Jensen's rookie card
is in the tougher Hi # series. A great FB and BB athlete, Jackie decided in favor of Baseball when he signed with the Oakland Oaks PCL team in 1949.

http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...ieJensen25.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...eJensen25b.jpg



ALL-STAR FOOTBALL GUM issued in 1949 (49 cards).
http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...nyLujack25.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...yLujack25b.jpg


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

We are still eagerly awaiting that evidence from your research that the T206 ‘sheet’ was discovered in New York, not Florida, since you’re bringing it up.

Speaking of the uncut sheet, if it is real, it confirms the wholesale changes that were made to update the cards. The only one that is a little bit of a head scratcher is the population of the Aberson sleeve variations.

In the image, it shows the 3 "accepted" variations:
Aberson - Short Sleeve PSA/SGC Pop: 95/29 - 124 total
Peterson - Dark Cap PSA/SGC Pop: 144/16 - 160 total
Hermanski* - Full Name PSA/SGC Pop: 231/97 - 328 total

The Variation populations on these:
Aberson - Long Sleeve PSA/SGC Pop: 154/24 - 178 total
Peterson - Red Cap PSA/SGC Pop: 86/24 - 110 total
Hermansk* - Missing I PSA/SGC Pop: 97/4 - 101 total

In theory the total number of Aberson short sleeve cards should be higher than the long sleeve, but from the looks of it, older grades did not delineate between the two versions for both grading houses. I put the * on Hermanski as it really falls into the category of "inking error" to me. If the numbers tell the story, there is a slightly smaller population of the second printing, but if you search the bigger cards, the variations seem to be much more rare than 30%. On a quick visual search of Heritage past sales, 156 Jackie Robinson's sold (not accounting for doubles) only 17 are from the second printing (no hat detail, color bar connecting background to name plate). That to me shows rarity in variation.

The research continues.

1949 LEAF set
 

Brian
Excuse me for correcting you.....but the Aberson (Short-Sleeve) version is the variation. The long sleeve-version was printed in the initial press runs.

I recall having several Long-Sleeve versions in my collection when I recovered my 1949 LEAF cards in 1977. No Short-Sleeve Aberson's were in 100's
of 1949 LEAF cards.

Furthermore, no Peterson with the Red Cap in my original 1949 LEAF collection.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

The population would back that up, but the sheet image does not as the short sleeve version is shown with the original run. All part of the puzzle I guess!

1949 LEAF set
 

Brian

I'm assuming you are referring to my photo of the 1st Series sheet I posted in Post #6 (earlier in this thread).

If so, that 49-card sheet is a 2nd printing version. It was on display in the 1988 National Show in Atlantic City.
If I recall correctly, the Kent Peterson card on this sheet has a Red Cap.
And the Hermanski card is spelled correctly.


http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...eries1x50x.jpg
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------^ Hermanski ^


http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...ries1x50xN.jpg


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

The mystery deepens. If only it was in color, it would answer a lot of questions. Maybe the Aberson was corrected in the 2nd printings, and the hats were all changed in the 3rd printing. to my eye the Peterson looks black, but for certain, all the rest of the cap colors that would change in the final printing, are all still black in that image.

There are several facts that show that the third wrapper is a Leaf football Wrapper and not a baseball wrapper.

1. I don't think the wording on the Leaf Wrapper was an issue with bowman it wasn't even mentioned in the article I posted about the court hearing.

2. Even if it was an issue I don't think they could have done anything about it based on the court information from when Bowman sued Topps.
But the term "baseball" is not subject to monopolistic appropriation by the plaintiff. The term is generic and descriptive; nor is there any proof that as used by the plaintiff it acquired secondary significance as indicating the source or origin of the gum sold. Nor is there any secondary significance arising from the designation of the product in connection with the name of any famous player. The case might be different if the plaintiffs were selling a product under the designation of some one name. Such use might readily build up good will, and an invasion on the part of one not privileged to use the name would be subject to restraint. In the circumstances of this case though, we have no such situation. On the contrary, the facts and applicable law fall readily within such authorities as Kellogg Co. v. National Biscuit Co., 305 U.S. 111, 59 S. Ct. 109, 113, 83 L. Ed. 73, in which it was held that *948 "Shredded Wheat" was a generic term, not subject to exclusive appropriation by the original maker of the product. The court said:

3. The wrappers in the 2nd series Rosen find say "All Star Baseball Bubble Gum"
[IMG]https://photos.imageevent.com/patric...e/large/0a.jpg[/IMG]
https://bid.robertedwardauctions.com...e?itemid=44356


and an August 18 1949 ad about packages of Leaf Baseball cards that they were giving out specifically states "a package of Baseball Bubble Gum".

Attachment 544820


This older thread that no longer has the images has a discussion on the 1949 football packs https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...highlight=Leaf

1949 LEAF set
 

Brian

There ain't no "mystery"......these 1949 LEAF cards were available in our neighborhood in NJ as early as March 1949. Us kids went from collecting the LEAF Boxing cards
right into the LEAF Baseball cards. And I was fortunate, my Mom and Aunt stored my entire Sportscard collection in our attic, while I was in the Air Force for 4 years. So,
when I started collecting again in '77, my huge collection provided me a certain provenance to determine what was issued (and when). Furthermore, over the years I've
compared notes with other old-timers (like me), and we agree.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

I found a scrapbook at a tag sale earlier this year with some 49 Leaf premiums inside of it. Soaked them out easy peasy. 5 minute bath and they floated right off the page.

Ted, not questioning your experience, provenance or otherwise, I think it is vital to composing the "full story", I am just trying to crack the code of why and when the changes were made to the cards. The pictures, population reports and anecdotes are all we have to go off of, so there is still some mystery to the 1949 Leaf set.

I'm heading to Chicago this spring to check out items from the Leaf estate, hopefully this will help to round out the story starting where they were produced in Chicago. I hope that I will be able to connect what I find there with your reporting and somewhere in between we can get a clearer picture of how they rolled off the presses and if it was the lackluster sales or a new art director that lead to the changes that were made.

No mystery in your stories, those are solid, but there are still some things left to figure out about this set/brand.

Thanks again for all the replies!

What a find!! They are fantastic! Through looking at other Leaf products, these resemble the Spearmint gum ads that ran at that time as well. Thanks for sharing.

To me the why is the puzzle.
Boxing and Football don't have as many differences in the printing, and If I'm not messing up the timeline came out before Baseball.

My general feeling was that it wasn't poor sales, but much better than expected sales.
The shop I worked for saved the masks used to make the plates for a long time. Some for years. At least until the Hunts drove silver up... Anyway, we could have easily reprinted many jobs exactly the same as earlier.

But if Leaf printed to their expected sales, and threw out the masks, those would have to be redone.
The other possibility would be responding to complaints, like "who wants a PINK baseball card!"
Or having another place do more cards when needed.
Or... if the ones with the lines came first, eliminating the lines would make the job cheaper as it uses less ink. That little difference may not seem like a lot, but over a lot of sheets it adds up.

Ted, did you get many of the pink ones, and do you recall if they were early or came later?

1949 LEAF set....tidbits
 

Hi Steve

I am one of the few guys (or probably the only guy) left on Net54 that collected the 1948 thru 1949 LEAF cards (Pirates, Boxers, BB, and FB).
I kept the Baseball and Boxing cards. But, sold most of my Pirates and Football cards.

You are correct....LEAF did not expect how popular these cards would be (especially their Sportscards). For example, the 1948 Boxers were so popular, Leaf continued printing
them into 1949 (check out the Tony Zale examples).

http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...ZaleZale25.jpg
1948 issue .................................................. ....... 1949 issue
http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...1949Zale18.jpg





This BB set has one of the highest ratios of HOFers/Subjects (20/98) than most BB sets. Of the 20 - HOFers in the 1949 LEAF set, the Indians lead with these 5 - HOFers:
Spring series cards

http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...udreau25xb.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...oudreau25x.jpg.http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...eGordon25x.jpg



Summer series cards (short-prints)

http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...afPaige25x.jpg..http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...eafDoby25x.jpg..http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...AFFeller25.jpg



LEAF's Quality Control left a lot to be desired..... as you and I know from having traded and compared our numerous color variations. For example......

And then, there is BLUE or no BLUE.
http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...izellplatt.jpg
I had a near mint Jackie Jensen with a white background (like the above Mizell Platt.card). I regret selling it years ago.

http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...ieJensen25.jpg


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Doesn't this make the Leaf cards a regional issue like the Bond and Swell sets that predated the leaf cards? No southern or Western distribution. Barely an east coast distribution.

The Leaf premiums I found were in a scrapbook put together in Minneapolis.

Hi Dan

Thanks for posting the Minneapolis venue.

My conversations with many old-time 1949 LEAF collectors (like me) over the years verifies that these cards
were distributed throughout the U.S. east of the Mississippi River including Northern and Southern states.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

I wish I knew where I put the scrapbook, I'd go back and see if I can find dates on the articles in the pages closest to the premiums, it might narrow down when this kid got the premiums. When I do find it I'll be sure to add that info to this thread.

I love all this research. My avatar depicts the 2nd series sheet. I was able to place cards primarily through the use of wrong back cards which are typically miscut on the back. Many board members have helped me acquire wrong backs & I have only six left to complete my personal grail. I'm not sure if they even survived or still exist but please keep me in mind if you find one. If anyone needs any info off them just shoot me a message

That's the MO when presented with opposing facts to the theories like the Rosen find pack in the REA auction that says Baseball Bubble Gum on it or the Dahlen Brooklyn with the factory sheet number that shows he was printed with the 150/350 subjects not the 350 only subjects just to name a couple.

One would think that, when caught not having what one claims to have (in this case evidence from alleged ‘research’ disproving the Sevchuk claim and Florida origin of the find), that one would drop the issue instead of bringing it up, for no reason or gain, again in unrelated threads. It’s a shame some folks just make up non-existent “research” to support an idea they like without any regard to the truth.

Here's two images for reference

The first is a complete uncut sheet. (I've seen this around but not sure who the first to post was, I think I first saw it on toppsaholic blog). It depicts a complete sheet as four identical 7x7 panels. Given the short run of Leaf cards I assume that all sets were done the same way. Among my errors I have a few that would question this but certainly that seems the way it was done for production.

The second image is my depiction of an uncut panel of Rare Leafs. These cards were placed by very fun research and collecting of error and miscut cards (which may be most leafs tbh)

That's pretty neat and I bet a lot of fun to reconstruct Steve.

I'm not very versed on the Leaf set but I do do a lot of research on variations in different sets so I picked the Jensen (Jansen) card to do some research on and I came up
with as many as 4 possible variations with 2 color variations for for each one of them for a total of 8 possible variations for each subject on the first series sheet.

On the background color variations I think it has more to do with a difference in cardstock than it does the the actual ink color used. On the pink or
pinkish variations the fronts seem to be a whiter stock and it also feels thicker to me.

I researched 386 Jensen cards and here's what I found

This is the first variation and by far the most common with 236 or 61.13% of the Jensen's I checked.

This variation has no white above the hat and they all have a round black dot in the J

The one on the right has a pinkish hue in hand but for some reason it looks more orange in my scan

[IMG]https://photos.imageevent.com/patric...rge/img290.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]https://photos.imageevent.com/patric...rge/img291.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]https://photos.imageevent.com/patric...ale/img292.jpg[/IMG]


The next variation has a big white area above his hat and this is the variation that has all of the pink variations in it. There were 62 of the 386 or 16.06% of this variation
and 25-30% were pink or around 5% of the 386. I also think this is the variation on the sheet Ted posted.

[IMG]https://photos.imageevent.com/patric...rge/img293.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]https://photos.imageevent.com/patric...rge/img294.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]https://photos.imageevent.com/patric...ale/img296.jpg[/IMG]

The next variation has a smaller white area above his hat and is the least common with 28 or 6.99% of the 386.

The one on the right is also pinker in hand than it is in the scan
[IMG]https://photos.imageevent.com/patric...rge/img299.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]https://photos.imageevent.com/patric...rge/img300.jpg[/IMG]

the Last variation has no white above his hat and no black dot in the J there were 60 or 15.54% of the 386 of this variation.

I don't have the two variations of this one yet.

[IMG]https://photos.imageevent.com/patric...e/large/05.jpg[/IMG]

I think the stock differences do affect the color of the red a bit.

I hadn't started doing the stock differences, as I've concentrated on the large variety of differences on the fronts.

Of the ones Pat has posted, the last one is the only one I didn't have an image of.

Up close, do any of them show yellow anywhere? Having or not having the yellow could affect how the red seems too.


One thing I like is the images of the edges. You can see the diagonal lines where the cutting blade had tiny nicks.

Great work as always Pat, your patience is amazing. A question for you or maybe better for SteveB. If a complete sheet has four panels & four Jensens, how are those panels created? ie; would we expect a variation in one panel or a change in the entire sheet as a print run goes on. And a similar question, if the hat variations are blue registration issues, how consistent would we expect those to be? That is, are registration issues gradual in nature or stepped? Jensens ear on the right below shows a separated red & blue layer for instance and caught my eye. Just curious on the nuts & bolts of actual print process.

This one leans into the research that I have been doing on the process and the printing of the cards themselves. Throw the Jensen on the list of the variations, one that I had never really picked up. Registration issues would be consistent across a a printing run, but would depend on the kind of press that they used (Single color or 4 color lithography). I spoke in depth about the printing process with my Great Uncle (just turned 99, still sharp as a tack). We covered all aspects of his opinions on this set, he worked at a commercial printing company in NYC in the 40's after the war. He said that elements could be taken out of the images on press, so if there was some element that didn't look right, it could be scrubbed from the plate. That said, the plate and the stock never came into direct contact, so in theory, if something was off registration, it would be carried across all the prints in that run. To my eye, it looks like plate variations more than registration issues. The WHY is the big question I am wrestling with now. Why change the blue plate, why remove the details on the hats on tother players, why change the sleeves on the Aberson's. Odd stuff, but fun to check out.

One thing that my Uncle also said, there was no adding elements to the plate, unless you etched a new plate. He said the only time that you would change a plate would be when a plate would wear down, or if they we moved to a different factory, different printer. So this makes cards like Aberson, Ruth, Rizzuto, and Robinson and potentially Jensen interesting variations. I do think the PINK versions were late in the game, and from the conversations I had with my Great Uncle, he thinks that the pink may have more about the ink that was available or what was cheapest to buy at the time.

I have a running theory that the cards were printed at the factory in Chicago where the candy packaging was printed. The stock looks similar to the packaging of WHOPPERS that was produced by Overland Confectionary, a brand that was consolidated and under the Leaf Brands family name in 1947. I have seen images of that stock, and it looks similar. My Uncle did say whoever printed these, were "Not the guys you would want to print a copy of a Van Gogh." I asked him what would lead to this many errors and variations, he laughed and said "they may have been drunk." Which caught me off guard! He said "these guys printing would be the equivalent of "bringing the space shuttle to be serviced at the corner mechanic."

I don't see evidence of yellow on any of them Steve.

This is purely speculation but I wonder if this was just packaging or if there were any cards involved in this fire.

July 1949
Attachment 548800

Here are 2 favorites of mine. Adams and Wyrostek with uniform detail not seen
on examples. The face of Wyrostek is actually focused.

Here's another Adams Mike (not my card).

Attachment 548847

Super interesting! I wonder if this is a factor that prompted another printing?!

Leaf Boxing and BaseBall issues.....
 

A 2nd printing of the 1st Series of 1949 LEAF BB cards was most likely due to the popularity of these cards.

This is exactly what happened with the 1948 -1949 Boxing cards. First issued in the Fall of 1948. Then LEAF
continued printing them till early Spring of 1949. I can personally vouch for this fact, since I acquired these
Boxing cards from Sept 1948 till Feb 1949 (as a young 10-year old kid).


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

The boxing cards must have come out early in your area Ted, they didn't come out until mid December in Brooklyn.

Attachment 548921

Pat

In our neighbor (Hillside, NJ), the Boxing cards were available in late Oct. This I remember very well. During school breaks we were trading these cards.
I was a Tony Zale fan.

Check-out the bio of the Tony Zale card. He lost the Middleweight Fight to Marcel Cerdan on September 21, 1948. This is signifcant because we kids were
really into the Boxing scene. A mile away from our neighborhood (Newark) was an outdoor Boxing arena which featured semi-professional Fights.


http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...ZaleZale25.jpg
1948 issue ................................................. 1949 issue
http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan7...1949Zale18.jpg



TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Brian, in your research you might also want to consider that some of the variations might have been regional and the cards might have been printed in more than one place. I don't know how many factories Leaf actually had but here's one candy company that they purchased in 1943 that was in operation until they closed that location in 1950.

Washington Ohio 1943

[IMG]https://photos.imageevent.com/patric...ale/img305.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]https://photos.imageevent.com/patric...ale/img307.jpg[/IMG]




1950
[IMG]https://photos.imageevent.com/patric...ale/img303.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]https://photos.imageevent.com/patric...ale/img304.jpg[/IMG]

Pat- these are all great, can I ask where you are getting all of these great clips from?

Old newspapers, I find that they can be helpful in eliminating some of the card versions of the "Mandela effect".

I've seen several opinions why Graziano was short printed by Leaf but I think it would be a heck of a coincidence if it wasn't because he was banned by the NBA right around the time Leaf started printing his boxing cards. He was banned in the end of November 1948.



[IMG]https://photos.imageevent.com/patric...ale/img310.jpg[/IMG]

Mandela Effect indeed. That is why I’m going to the Chicago history museum this spring to look through donations from the Leaf family. I am certain there will not be a silver bullet moment in there, but I hope to fill in some info about the company, that in turn could help fill in the story of Leaf cards and there production.

Brian - did you make it to chicago to review the Leaf family items? Any updates on your findings?

Such a fascinating thread

I did, and further down the rabbit hole I went. I actually spoke with Beckett last week, and a lot of what I found we review on an episode of his podcast. I'll boil it down to the cliff notes version.

**First off, Ted Z is the ultimate resource for all things from this era, his anecdotal information is second to none, a true gentleman of the hobby. Kudos to Steve Birmingham as well, we have a great email thread going spitballing ideas on everything from printing to plate variations. One more, George Vrechek from Sports Collectors Digest, his wrote an article in 2009 which proved to be a "Rosetta Stone" for a couple of things about the set.

The Chicago History Museum had donations from the Marshall Leaf estate, (Marshall) was the son of Sol Leaf, the founder of the company. In the boxes and printed materials, one thing became obvious; Leaf was a candy company, cards were made to get kids to buy candy. Leaf owned several businesses, not just Overland, but also Dietz Gum who both produced cards in the 30's, but they also did non-sport cards with the likes of Disney and Playboy which continued on into the 70's. Within the boxes, there were examples of the Boxing and Football cards, no baseball, but what I learned from all the materials and meeting minutes was that in '47 to '49, Leaf was growing. They were building a new factory on N. Cicero in Chicago and erecting neon billboards on Michigan Ave. I think the cards were a cannonball attempt in the candy market to make a big statement.

When you start digging into the stories from Ted, and put that against the Leaf marketing materials that I saw, along with the injunctions that Bowman brought against Leaf in March and May of '49, the latter aimed at East Coast distributors of the cards, it becomes 99% viable to say that the cards hit the market in '49. The ONLY way that this could be disputed would be to find someone like Ted in the Chicago area that bought the cards in 1948, and to this date I have not been able to find that. When you sprinkle in the info on the backs and the fact that the first run of cards have '49 copyrights sprinkled in with '48's, sales in 1948 would have cards that carry a '49 copyright, which doesn't make sense. As Ted has said, the copyright means that the text was written in '48, and when work resumed on the set in '49, the copyright changed. I also have a theory that there are cards from the sets that could have been produced as "salesman samples". I think the Graziano, alternate Newhouser and perhaps football card that did not change, could have actually been the cards sent out with the salesmen to show off the cards that would be following in 1949. Both of those cards carry the '48 copyright, though the front image of the short print Newhouser is different than the one or two that surface from time to time. This could also explain the blue back Joe Louis.

My short summation is going long, but one thing that I think is an important point to make, and it follows up what I started the thread with, there was a plate change made to this set yielding versions of the cards that are different than the earlier printings. of the variations that are recognized by the industry, Kent Peterson is the exact variation that I am talking about. MOST, not all, but MOST of the changes that were made can be found in the details of the hats. By removing the detail of the black plate, done with a solvent, the hats become brighter. I am working off of the uncut sheet that Ted provided earlier in the thread to illustrate how the cards changed. Another element that myself and Steve have noticed is the addition of color bars to the backgrounds to "close off" the cards in spots, so that the "white" of uniforms don't bleed into the borders. I will attach two images that I worked up that illustrate this, but take a look at your Leafs. you may have a variation and not realize it. The last part which of course will be added to an already hard sell is the "pink" prints, which in my theory were the last of the 'Late Prints" as they carry the missing hat details from the "Late Printing."

The images below show Stan Musial's card that I took into photoshop and left only the Cyan and Black channels on to illustrate how the cap details were removed and what the card looks like. The second image is the top row of the uncut sheet, top line is the first printing, second line is the late printing, third is the pink print.

**PHEW** for those that stayed with me, thank you, this has been an amazing research project and there is so much more to go into, but this brings it up to date...for now. Thanks for the continued interest and collaboration in cracking the code on this set!!