Net54baseball.com Forums

Net54baseball.com Forums (http://www.net54baseball.com/index.php)
-   Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions (http://www.net54baseball.com/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   something fishy help please (http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=114496)

pitchernut 07-28-2009 07:00 AM

something fishy help please
 
http://cgi.ebay.com/18-Different-191...d=p3286.c0.m14

Don't know how to add a link (maybe someone could help) with the above auction... any how seems fishy, can't be 1915 because the back aren't upside down, possible 1914's? all but one #62 match up for 1914's but... and they (specially the backs) just seem odd. any and all opinions would be appreciated. thanks

wow the link did work..cool

GrayGhost 07-28-2009 07:04 AM

Well, first thing, why so cheap on last day? I would say they may be repros, but can't tell looking at the scans.

e107collector 07-28-2009 07:09 AM

I would say repro's
 
They sure look like reprints, look at the extremely white borders. Also, the borders are to wide to be the real deal. I would stay away.
Also red flags - estate sale, can't verify authenticity.

Just my two cents.

Thanks,
Tony

Matt 07-28-2009 07:10 AM

Agree with Tony. Repros.

Leon 07-28-2009 07:13 AM

yuck
 
I saw those a while back....I barely take 2 glances at poor fakes anymore....These look like poor fakes to me....

terjung 07-28-2009 07:31 AM

Bad '14 reprints in my opinion as well. The borders are too white and too wide. They should more closely match the uniform colors. The font doesn't look right either. Also, have you ever seen such a collection of warn '14 CJs without caramel staining? Not a chance in the world that those are real '14s or '15s.

-Brian

pitchernut 07-28-2009 07:40 AM

memorex for sure
 
Kinda figured as much thanks for the input. I just love this board:D

slantycouch 07-28-2009 07:53 AM

The dimensions of those seem off to me for sure. And the colors aren't quite right. Guess that could be the scan, but as Brian said... no caramel staining?

I'd say bad all around.

FrankWakefield 07-28-2009 10:57 AM

Those don't just look like reprints, they are.


The backs have been tinkered with so that they look like they might be old. The back borders and front borders should look about the same, these don't. The fonts on the front are consistent with those of reprints.

Absolutely, definitely reprints.

Rob D. 07-28-2009 12:10 PM

I think they're reprints.

tbob 07-28-2009 03:52 PM

Absolutely reprints. The forgers just can't quite seem to get the color of the green grass right despite all their efforts. Plus, the backs have that fake stained tea/mildew looking discoloration to make them look old that I have seen on other fakes. Sigh. It was much easier in the old days when the forgers would smear dirt or other material on the backs or even run bicycle tires over them to leave a tread mark to make them look old, to spot the fakes but you can still tell. getting tougher, but these are a no brainer IMHO.

fkw 07-30-2009 06:04 PM

100% Reprints

The easiest way to tell is the uniform and border on many of the cards should blend together where they meet.

These reprints had the original border cropped and then a new white border added (the new border is always too white compared to the white areas of the picture) and also they needed to redesign a new caption (too dark and bold). They do this so when they rescreen the card in the reprint design they dont get a bunch of print dots in the white border.

Jennings is an easy one to see even in a small scan.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:48 AM.