Show...me...your print variations!

[ALR-bishop]

Recurring defect/difference on Carlton card over his cap

[ALR-bishop]

I recently updated my 1959 and 1960 Topps sets to include both the gray and white back variants...1958 ( 199-286)....1960 (375-440). In doing that I noticed this print defect. Not sure if it is recurring. This is a white back

[bigfanNY]

I know not pre 1980 but this one perplexed me. 2012 Topps as they had in past years had a number of "Error" or Short Print cards in both series one and Two. But this #328 John Lackey "Rainbow" error has never gotten a listing. I had a nephew born that year so like many relatives before I put together a master set of cards for him to give when he get older. I saw some early posts for the lackey card but held off until about April then I purchased 3 of the cards one from Alabama one from Ohio and one from California. So I know it had wide distribution was only in the very first print run from that year and was told by folks that broke down many cases of Product that they only got one "rainbow lackey card each. They had held them saw no traction and sold them in April for a couple bucks each. I had them Graded last year and despite clear printing error you can see flip is the same for both cards. I did notice that about 20 2012 lackeys were graded so I would think there is a small population of the cards that has been graded and Look forward to your learned opinions.

[ALR-bishop]

Neat item Jonathan. To the best of my knowledge PSA normally only notes variations/variants/differences on their flips after hobby recognition in some way, such as recognition in a catalog like SCD or Becketts. On the other hand, as far as I know PSA recognized the 61 Fairly on their own.

I know some collectors on CU got some variations recognized by PSA through persistent efforts that included sending them hobby articles about the cards they were trying to get recognized. Others worked to get SCD to recognize their variant cards as a first step

[bigfanNY]

Thank you for the input. What I really do not understand is clearly this card is a "variation" but in this day of company produced "variations" real ones need a champion or group of champions to hound a TPG in order to receive recognition. And I know that quality control is much much better now that in the 50's thru 1990's so real factory error cards are much scarcer but it seems to me a TPG would have enough experts especially in modern cards to recognize an error card when it is siting in their hand. I also know if stuff like this is my biggest problem I have NO problems. Great thread love variations.

Jonathan

[Rich Klein]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Neat item Jonathan. To the best of my knowledge PSA normally only notes variations/variants/differences on their flips after hobby recognition in some way, such as recognition in a catalog like SCD or Becketts. On the other hand, as far as I know PSA recognized the 61 Fairly on their own.

I know some collectors on CU got some variations recognized by PSA through persistent efforts that included sending them hobby articles about the cards they were trying to get recognized. Others worked to get SCD to recognize their variant cards as a first step

A Beckett dealer told them about the 61 Fairly and then it was listed in Beckett. PSA did not do that one independently.

[ALR-bishop]

Thanks for that info Rich, I had not realized that. In your view how can it be distinguished from other 61s with the green in the baseball on the back ? Or other front and back print defects that are recurring and even more prominent ? I kind of understood Bob Lemke's SCD criteria before he retired. Does Beckett have some known criteria or is it ad hoc depending on who is recommending it or their persistence ?

By the way I have no interested in trying to get anything recognized myself, this is just curiosity

[savedfrommyspokes]

I found this 58 Korcheck card....I was not able to locate another copy, so this "variation" must be "extremely rare"( LOL).

Notice the yellow line above the black box(does not appear on other copies of this card), and then the word "Catcher" in the black box has a small bit of yellow on the bottom while it looks like a red marker was used to color the upper part of the word "catcher" all while the red appears to overlap (more obviously on this card than on other copies) the black print.

Looks like a case of the sheet shifting during part of the printing process when either the red or yellow were supposed to print, as evidenced by the extra yellow on the top of the "W" in the Sentors logo. But what I do not understand is why the yellow line above the black box exists without any offsetting print errors on the upper edge and why the red overlapping the black print is so obvious(as this is not obvious on other copies). .

[swarmee]

1952 Topps Campanella

Missing the R in "Major" League Batting Record plus some of the line above. Spotted by the guys on blowout.

[richtree]

Comstock yellow and Metzger Black line.

[swarmee]

Recurring blue streak in the grass on the right side.

1950 Bowman - [Base] #117 - Bill Rigney
Courtesy of COMC.com

[swarmee]

1972 Topps #92 AL ERA Leaders with Palmer, Blue, and Wood.

Variation 1: Blue line through yellow border next to Jim Palmer.


Variation 2: Blue line extends into the yellow above Palmer's name.

[swarmee]

Red line extends to card's right border:

1963 Post - [Base] #22 - Bill Stafford
Courtesy of COMC.com

Red line normal:

1963 Post - [Base] #22 - Bill Stafford
Courtesy of COMC.com

Or is this just a red sheet alignment issue that is recurring?

[swarmee]

1963 Topps - [Base] #550 - High # - Duke Snider [BVG 6.5 EX‑MT+]
Courtesy of COMC.com

Recurring yellow streak in the inset photo, probably caused by the blue not getting there.

[swarmee]

1951 Bowman - [Base] #307 - Walt Masterson
Courtesy of COMC.com

1951 Bowman - [Base] #307 - Walt Masterson
Courtesy of COMC.com

Left border is missing near shoulder. Recurring print defect. Both copies also have the same print defect in the line next to his mouth.