1955 Topps Coloring--Killebrew

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Guys, I've bought many, many 50s Topps cards over my collecting life, but I just noticed this today about '55 Topps, specifically the Killebrew. What accounts for the difference in the color between these two cards?? These almost don't even look like the same player. The hat, background, etc. look totally different. Did the one on the right miss some color passes? I apologize for the pic not being the best, it's a little blurry, but the differences are apparent.

[JollyElm]

The yellow balance on the card on the left is much 'stronger' (especially in the flesh tones) than the one on the right. Not sure which card is the 'correct' version, but that seems to be the issue. Perhaps the left card was printed when the yellow ink was full, and the one on the right was printed as it began to run low?

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

It seems like for most cards in '55 Topps, the Killer on the left is more typical. I have seen cards from this set over the years that seemed a bit more pale. It was striking to see the difference side by side. Your explanation is more than likely correct, and I suppose that would also explain the much darker hat on the card on the right. It would be interesting (and expensive) to see if most cards in this set have the bright and pale versions.

[swarmee]

Since yellow fades under sunlight fastest, it could just be damage over time due to UV light exposure.

The pressman running the press had the yellow too saturated on the run causing the yellow to be brighter not only in the yellow but in all the colors which all have yellow in them to a certain degree. Notice the hat intensity and the more orange red shade of the bottom bar. His flesh tone is also has more of a yellow tone. During the run the pages are compared to a prepress proof that has been signed by the client to manage color accuracy. The pressman's job is too match that on press by adjusting the four colors on press of cyan, yellow, magenta and black. The slightest move on press of any one color can throw the entire page out of whack and it happens all the time. The pressmen pull sheets randomly along the print run to make sure the colors are consistent. If it's not they adjust that color on the press controls. It always varies though. I've done hundreds of press checks over the last thirty years. It's really interesting to watch the process and how complicated it really is. Very different now with so many digital printing processes.

Originally Posted by swarmee

Since yellow fades under sunlight fastest, it could just be damage over time due to UV light exposure.

Actually red fades the fastest. Red has the longest wavelength of visible colors which causes it to fade quicker than others. Generally the higher wavelength the absorbed light, the more likely it is to cause a pigment breakdown. This is because the energy of each photon in light is proportional to the wavelength (Energy of a photon = Planck's constant times wavelength). Blue dyes reflect higher visible wavelengths (not absorb) so are therefore likely to have a minor fade resistance advantage over other colors. The science of it is even more complicated than that and way over my head but this is the cliff note version.

[jchcollins]

Interesting thread, Robert.

Topps color variation gets even more all over the place when you start looking at late 60's and early 70's cards. '73 is particularly inconsistent. I've had several cards in my collection that I've thought looked fine before, until I see them side by side with a copy of the same card that got a more favorable factory coloring, and it can be eye opening.

To my knowledge, none of the major TPG's downgrade for coloring unless there is a huge problem. I've seen "dull versions" of some cards still grade PSA 9.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Wimberleycardcollector

Actually red fades the fastest. Red has the longest wavelength of visible colors which causes it to fade quicker than others. Generally the higher wavelength the absorbed light, the more likely it is to cause a pigment breakdown. This is because the energy of each photon in light is proportional to the wavelength (Energy of a photon = Planck's constant times wavelength). Blue dyes reflect higher visible wavelengths (not absorb) so are therefore likely to have a minor fade resistance advantage over other colors. The science of it is even more complicated than that and way over my head but this is the cliff note version.

That is weird. I have seen a lot of faded baseball cards and never once have I seen magenta fade before yellow.

Originally Posted by bnorth

That is weird. I have seen a lot of faded baseball cards and never once have I seen magenta fade before yellow.

Follow the science. LOL!

I am sure there are many exceptions. This is just the science of it. Lots of factors beyond UV light alone affect faded baseball cards and any collectibles for that fact.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Wimberleycardcollector

Follow the science. LOL!

I am sure there are many exceptions. This is just the science of it. Lots of factors beyond UV light alone affect faded baseball cards and any collectibles for that fact.

Could you please provide even one single example.

I have made threads about the subject with pictures to help fellow collectors not buy faded cards as rare errors. I have done many many science experiments and posted the results on this forum. I have never seen magenta fade before yellow in real life experiments on baseball cards.

[LincolnVT]

Could also just be the exposure / lighting that the pictures of the card were taken under.

[G1911]

Red fades to orange on my T cards, not magenta.

Not a true variation, but the different results from sheet to sheet vary greatly in the Topps vintage years. I keep a lot of different ones like this in my sets, even though they are really dupes. Can really change the aesthetic for better or worse. Cool example Robert!

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by G1911

Red fades to orange on my T cards, not magenta.

Not a true variation, but the different results from sheet to sheet vary greatly in the Topps vintage years. I keep a lot of different ones like this in my sets, even though they are really dupes. Can really change the aesthetic for better or worse. Cool example Robert!

My experiments happened with cards from the 50s to the 90s.

I have heard the red to orange fading on T206s. I also heard many of the orange Cobbs got faded on purpose.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by bnorth

My experiments happened with cards from the 50s to the 90s.

I have heard the red to orange fading on T206s. I also heard many of the orange Cobbs got faded on purpose.

It's easy to do on the T cards, just some time in the sunlight will often do it. That's about the extent of my experimenting these days . It astounds me when people pay huge premiums for orange-from-red T cards, they are just damaged and faded. It's so easy and profitable to make an Orange Cobb, I'm surprised it's not even more prevalent. I'm skeptical of most "missing color" cards that just so happen to be the color that missing color would fade too these days

First of all I never said red fades to magenta. I said red fades faster than yellow. Look you can google it if you want to read the science I'm sure. My experience is from the 30 year printing industry knowledge I have and not with baseball cards specifically. I also didn't state it was just pertaining to baseball cards. I was responding to the general comment that yellow fades first in printed pieces when exposed to light. I am not a scientist and have not conducted my own experiments. I've read it and it's been discussed in printing industry publications. I don't care if I'm right and am not going to get into a whole big deal over it. I simply shared a bit of knowledge I have on the subject from experience. Test all the cards and write as much as you'd like about it but I have much bigger things to attend to than this topic. I'm starting to understand why a lot of people don't post and just lurk on this board. LOL.

I will say this. The card shown would be faded in most places if it was exposed to light and had faded from light. The contrast is way too great on both cards to be faded. If only the yellow faded you'd see it in the face but the card on the right (supposedly faded) actually has more color in the face than the one on the left. I explained how printing large runs of anything has differences in color and why. Presses had to be adjusted by pressman manually to keep the color consistent through large runs on large 4, 5 and 6 color presses. Pages are randomly selected to check color to make sure it's consistent and adjustments are made. With that comes some variance in color. I used to check these random pages for my ad agency. Look up four color process printing if you want to learn more. I stood in pressrooms all night sometimes checking menus for Bennigan's and Steak and Ale for differences in the food photography being printed over the huge runs. Just saying it does happen all the time and that's more than likely the case with this card run. A few oversaturated cards probably exist for many of the players if the sheets weren't caught and culled.

Originally Posted by G1911

It's easy to do on the T cards, just some time in the sunlight will often do it. That's about the extent of my experimenting these days . It astounds me when people pay huge premiums for orange-from-red T cards, they are just damaged and faded. It's so easy and profitable to make an Orange Cobb, I'm surprised it's not even more prevalent. I'm skeptical of most "missing color" cards that just so happen to be the color that missing color would fade too these days

Colors missing happens in printing but it's not common. If a color runs out on press the run can be missing one color or more. Generally these are culled out after the press is stopped to refill the ink. I'm sure though pages get missed or someone takes a sheet home and then you have some variations that exist albeit small in quantity. Good printers always make sure those sheets are culled and thrown out. Now also keep in mind my comments have been made regarding the Killebrew card which is a different printing process than some of the pre-war cards. Different printing process with different inks and more than likely different press procedures and QC. I'm not old enough to have press checked anything pre-war. LOL.

Originally Posted by bnorth

My experiments happened with cards from the 50s to the 90s.

I have heard the red to orange fading on T206s. I also heard many of the orange Cobbs got faded on purpose.

The red fading to orange on Cobbs is a perfect example of the yellow not fading first. Less red, more yellow equals orange.

[G1911]

I'm saying that my shorter-term tests of sun-induced fading have produced red fading to orange, not magentas fading. So I'm not even really disagreeing with you, just reporting what I've found as the two colors had been brought up and I'd done some tests on t cards. If that's offensive enough a reason to lurk, okay.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by G1911

I'm saying that my shorter-term tests of sun-induced fading have produced red fading to orange, not magentas fading. So I'm not even really disagreeing with you, just reporting what I've found as the two colors had been brought up and I'd done some tests on t cards. If that's offensive enough a reason to lurk, okay.

The fading is different in the old T206 cards because of how they are printed.

In cards printed during the time frame this section of the forum are printed differently. In them the red turns to magenta because the red is made by printing magenta and yellow together. So the red fades to magenta at exactly the same rate as yellow fades.

For anyone interested here is a series of pics showing the fading of yellow ink on a baseball card. Ignore the Logo, I left original during the process.