Topps 1952 Campos..new variation

[Zach Wheat]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

You are forgiven Zach

Thank you Grand Master Al.

Originally Posted by flkersn

Thanks for responding. As a master set collector, I am just trying to figure out how many variations of "regular/black star/partial black star/top frame break" there really are. I don't have many Campos cards, so I need help. So far I count five, not including variations of "blackness" on the black star and partial black star variations.

Bill

Bill,

It is interesting to note the H & S auction for the '52 Super Set included only 1 variation of the partial border break Campos card. However, we knew the Super Set listing wasn't complete.....just more complete than the standard listing. However, the collector did spend a significant amount of time and $$ collecting most of the known variations.

Z Wheat

[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.

[ALR-bishop]

Adam---while I collect variants of any kind my personal definition of a true variations is similar to yours, a card intentionally changed by the manufacturer. I think Bob Lemke had moved to that sort of definition as well and as a result removed some previously listed variations from the Standard Catalog, for example several of the border break listings.

But the Campos card and some of the other scans above show that no one definition fits all. I think the border break Campos is a print defect, but I think the black star may be as well. I say that because I have now seen several partial black stars. But the hobby certainly has given it the status of a true variation, as well as the Herrer and Bakep.


I posted the multiple scans above after the post above by Michael Wentz, who has the two Campos missing border cards up on ebay now, saying that he viewed both Campos cards as true variations along with any card in which there is a noticeable change in the structural elements of the card. Although my definition is more narrow, there is no recognized hobby wide definition that I am aware of. To each his own.

I was attempting to show in the above scans that no matter what definition one adopts, there will be grey areas, it is not black and white.

But I simply collect any variant, cards that differs for whatever reason, if it is interesting to me . Like your Zolio

[Exhibitman]

Al, I realize my word on it isn't worth a bucket of warm piss, but border breaks, missing inks, and misplaced blobs IMO are mechanical defects. Fun to collect but not 'variations' and that includes the partial border Campos. I mean who would intentionally omit a chunk of the outside border on the Campos card? Unlike say the Mantle with the variation on the Yankees logo box--that one looks like they made one of the DP versions slightly different than the others. I have a sneaking suspicion that the Campos multicolored star is probably another printing error where there was still some of the wrong ink on the plate for a part of the changed print run.

[ALR-bishop]

Some folks believe the differences in double print cards are variations because even if not intentional, they result from changes in the printing process and not a defect in it. The 52 Mantle is listed in SCD as a variation, along with the Thompson and Robinson DPs, because the stitching runs right or left on the back. But in addition to the logo box on the front which you mention, the e in the auto is either full or truncated and the top star line above his name is straight or wavy. These front differences in all cases correlate to the stitching difference on the back

[steve B]

The Campos black star is very unlikely to be a simple error that happened on the press. Different plates are used for each color, even in a multiple color press the colors are done with different plates and the ink comes from entirely different parts of the press.

Picture two presses welded together and you'll be really close.

Getting black ink into the exact spot to only ink the star is nearly impossible.

But the plates were made from negatives taped to an opaque mask. So mistakes in making that can cause odd stuff. Damage can happen as well.

The easiest examples are 81 fleer. Many cards show the tape used to attach the picture negative to the mask. (Or maybe the picture to the original art - Either way it's a mistake in production.) The box at the lower left corner of the Sullivan shown above is probably also tape.

So the Campos with the star must have had the star on the black plate. Possibly from a combination of a shortcut plus damage or error. sometimes it's simpler to photo the entire master at once, then mask off the bits that aren't wanted in whichever color. If the mask got torn, which isn't all that hard to do the star could have been exposed on the black negative. When the plate was made it got on like all the proper black print.

The partial star is a bit more complex, there's a special pencil made to repair plate damage or to erase something unwanted. So either the partial is from the mask being repaired but maybe showing a bit through a tear, or from a partial erasure of the entire star from the black plate. If it was a partial reassure the operator could simply stop the press and finish the erasure once it was noticed to be incomplete.


Border breaks are a bit more problematic for me. They can be from plates with flaws, like the Clemens/Seaver and the Thomas no name and the big strip of related cards. Or they can be from a random bit of debris getting into the press. Random debris usually makes one card without whatever color, then some with a patch of that color.(the debris is usually paper, and holds ink but doesn't transfer it as readily as the plate. ) The number of ones with the dark patch could be none, or hundreds, depending on how quickly the debris fell out, and if it didn't how quickly it was spotted.

If there's more than one of the identical frame break, it's most likely a flaw on the plate.

There are even varieties or variations that come from foolishness. 82 fleer again has a few cards from a late run that have a little pointing hand on them. Either there was an odd bit of wire or something in the platemaking process, or the press operator drew them in. Anything that will scratch the plate will do, just get through the water retaining layer and whatever you've drawn will print. I've suspected a press operator playing around since I first saw one.

Steve B

[steve B]

I should note that the comments above apply to offset lithography. And generally to most other commercial printing.

However, the BEP did/does have an intaglio (engraving) press capable of multiple colors from the same plate. It was used a lot in the late 60's for stamps. An impressive technical achievement, even if it seldom worked perfectly.

Steve B