Some pretty cool new(?) 1963 Topps Printing Error/Variations

[ALR-bishop]

Everyone of course is entitled to their own view based on their own expertise and qualifications. But there is not an accepted hobby definition of any of these terms.

It is true the Herrer and Bakep are hobby lore "variations" that would not likely make the cut in today's world of Internet scans.

Errors that are intentionally corrected are clearly variations, and that is my definition from a personal standpoint. But even today, the 61 Fairly posted above, the 52 Campos black star, 52 House and the Thomas No Name may not have been intentional corrections, but they have still achieved hobby recognition. The differences in the 52 Mantle, Thompson and Robinson were not intended per se, but resulted from the decision to double print. There are examples of such differences in almost all sets. The 68 Milton Bradley cards and the 62 greenies are are whole series examples. Some are recognized by the hobby and some are not. The Mantle, Thompson and Robinson are listed in SCD

Anyone can have their own definition of any of these terms, but the hobby decides what has value in the market. Many of us here collect variants, cards that differ in some way from their normal counterpart. The differences may be recurring or not, or intentional or not.

And in some cases it is virtually impossible to tell whether a card was intentionally changed. Collect what you like.

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Everyone of course is entitled to their own view based on their own expertise and qualifications. But there is not an accepted hobby definition of any of these terms.

.....

Anyone can have their own definition of any of these terms, but the hobby decides what has value in the market. Many of us here collect variants, cards that differ in some way from their normal counterpart. The differences may be recurring or not, or intentional or not.

And in some cases it is virtually impossible to tell whether a card was intentionally changed. Collect what you like.

As always, +1


Found this one today, first time I have seen this card(Richard has noted it's existence before though) with the small green box on the left edge.

[ALR-bishop]

good one

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by savedfrommyspokes

As always, +1


Found this one today, first time I have seen this card(Richard has noted it's existence before though) with the small green box on the left edge.

The Zanni was on the outside edge of the original uncut sheet, that's why it has that printers mark. The Rudolph was above it on the sheet and also the little boxes in at least two different colors.

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

The Zanni was on the outside edge of the original uncut sheet, that's why it has that printers mark. The Rudolph was above it on the sheet and also the little boxes in at least two different colors.

I figured with the Zanni card that the box was due to being located along the edge of its sheet. However, I have two copies of this Zanni card, both are OC the same amount but on the other copy there is no box along the other left edge. Do you think this occurring on just one of the two copies is due to not only the alignment of that individual sheet at the time of printing, but also due to the centering of the card?

Based on only seeing just one copy of the 63 Menke card with the box on the right edge, I would find it fairly easy to believe that the sheet that the card came from was simply misaligned at the time of printing.