1961 Topps Stu Miller New variation? Opinions?

[ALR-bishop]

Great post Patrick. Agree with you for the most part. Your paragraph on the gray area is the key. Any print not a registration error could be a variation if it was an early defect that was noticed and corrected. Most are likely just a temporary recurring print defects. But in most cases we will never know.

Another gray area for me is double prints and second print runs. In many double prints there are cropping or other front or back differences that were not intended specifically but did result from decisions about layout or the printing process. The 52 double print differences or the 63 double print differences highlighted by George Vrechek are examples. The 62 greenies ( non pose variants ) and 68 Milton Bradley's are other gray areas. So also stock differences in the same series of several Topps sets

I collect any variation listed by SCD, Beckett or the Registry. I also collect recurring print defects or odd print defects that appeal to me. I just refer to them as variants.

My definition would be somewhat broader. A variation is a card that differs from it's common counterpart either because the manufacturer decided to make specific changes to the card for some reason, or intentionally made changes to the sheet layout or printing process that resulted in such differences, intended or not.

I wonder about the Campos black star because of the partials.

But no matter what we think, if PSA slabs a 61 Fairly noting an errant green smudge on the back, or fails to note the House difference or the front Campos defect, it has to be recognized there is no real hobby standard

And keeping up with all the possibilities across a full run of Topps, Bowman and Fleer sets is a chore. Fun though