N172 Old Judge - Thin Paper Stock (help needed)
 

So I recently bought this Old Judge Mike Dorgan on ebay. When I received it, I was floored to find that it was on THIN paper stock, almost as if the card had been removed from the usual hard carboard backing that you find on most Old Judge cards, but the back damage isn't horrible. Note that you can literally bend the card as if it is paper-thin.

Can anyone help me figure out what I have here? Are there any Old Judges on thin paper stock, or do I have some crazy reprint? Everything on the front suggests that this is original. Perhaps it was completely skinned?

Any help would be much appreciated.

Thanks, Derek

It's not a reprint, it's just skinned. If you see a raw OJ with a front scan only you can tell if it's skinned by looking at the edges. The edges will tend to appear brittle. Also skinned cards rest differently on the scanner bed. After looking at a ton of scans you can just tell when the thickness isn't there, although its hard to explain how.

thanks for the help
 

sorry for my ignorance. I always see "skinned" in people's descriptions, but never really knew that the cards were truly skinned down that much...I thought some of the cardboard thickness would still be there, but there's none at all.

Thanks for the quick response. I'll try to pay attention to the edges going forward to see if I can spot the difference easily on ebay.

Derek

If you are going to keep the card you can reback it. I'm not the one to ask how as I've never done it, but I do keep a small stash of beat up actress cards to use as donor backs in case I need them.

The photographic print was pealed from the cardboard back. You see skinned Old Judges like this every once in a while.

Good info from Matt and David. The card may have been originally glued into a scrapbook and this happened when it was haphazardly removed?

thanks all for everyone's opinions / help
 

re-backing seems like a logical choice, but perhaps unethical?

How many OJ rebacked cards do you think exist out there? Is it easy to tell when an OJ has been rebacked?

I forgot to add that it would be cards like T206s and Allen & Ginters that are thinner cardboard when skinned, as you imagined skinned meant. Those cards were printed directly onto the cardboard.

If you want, you can keep the OJ in it's current state. Depends on how you think it looks.

Rebacking is not unethical IMO. Yes, it's easy to tell. I would use a period back but that's just me. I have a maroons card with modern card board on the back and it bothers me a little bit. But not too much

I'll add that some people wear down the edges of rebacked cards to hide the fact so be on the look out for that too

You mean like the actress cards I have currently on the auction board of the BST section which will be closing tomorrow night? Oh, was that self-serving?

I had a pealed 1880s Sweet Caporal actress card once. I had a couple of photos pealed from cabinet cards too.

What type of value do the skinned Old Judges have? I have 6 or 7 that have outstanding photo quality on the front, but ..... no backs.

A bit less then half of a poor example... To me. Maybe 40%? And only because of the photo quality. I would pay more if you rebacked them as it saves trouble. Some collectors avoid these cards... I try to keep the number I have to a minimum, and will consider them more if there aren't many of a certain player out there.

I take skinned versions if they are priced right and/or they are a rare card. It's better than nothing and some do have outstanding photo quality. Some cards are just too rare to be picky

The albumen photos are very thin and fragile, so a skinned OJ is high risk of being damaged and therefore I recommend finding it a back. I have owned skinned OJs but have managed to upgrade them over the years to whole examples. If a skinned card of a pose I need surfaced, I wouldn't hesitate purchasing it.