COLOR variations......
Also, the aforementioned color variations are simply printing errors or printer's variations and I feel that they should not be part of
a "Master Set".
As is obvious when you compare 1st series (1#-80) Black backs vs Red backs, the front colors are somewhat different. The Black
back cards tend to be pale in contrast to the Red backs that are brighter. A trained eye can discern a Black back from a Red back
without flipping the card over.
I have a bunch of these color variations but, I don't include them as part of my master set.
TED Z[/QUOTE]
Ted--I have the first 80 in red and black and realize some of the front color differences are directly related to those different runs. When I asked about that in a CU thread on the 52 set, someone pointed out that there are also front color differences on some cards even with the same backs. I think Boone is one, and I do have at least 3 different color backgrounds for that card.
I am not a registry person, and although I like to collect variations/errors, I have no personal check list for what constitutes a master set. There has been earlier discussion about what is a variation and what is just a print defect. For my own purposes I view a variation as a card that Topps intentionally changed for some reason. But even that distinction is hard to apply sometimes. I think Campos, which I have, is a print defect, others say not. I also think the Herrer and Bakep ( which I also have) are just print defects ( and numerous other cataloged variations as well), but, they are viewed by most as variations. I collect anything listed as a Topps variation in the SCD catalog and also unlisted variations/errors that I think might or ought to qualify....and often send them to SCD ( some have been included)
I realized I was probably over the edge when I went out and got the 2nd Mantle, Thompson and Robinson, just to have those other stitches
