Topps 1952 Campos..new variation

[Exhibitman]

Not sure what I'm looking at/for with most of those cards shown above. Some are clearly printing errors, not variations, e.g., sloppy inking. Some are legitimately variations. I differentiate between the two as to whether there is evidence of a human intent in it. Like the 1969 Nettles RC with or without the loop. Someone had to go back and get rid of that loop. The same is true of the Campos star variations--someone had to go in there and repair the problem. I am not sure on the partial missing borderline as to whether I'd consider it a variation or a printing flub. The missing ink cards are definitely printing errors--desirable as such to the coterie of collectors who collect them--but are not variations from a master set perspective as I see it. Personally, I like the grotesque printing mistakes most of all.