1971 Topps Blue Border Steve Garvey?

[Mark70Z]

Originally Posted by bnorth

The word "proof" is thrown around like the word "error" and means something different to everyone. I know they both have specific meanings but are rarely used correctly.

How bout this, it's an authentic card, with a finished back and an unfinished front. Personally, I just use "proof" when it's an unfinished card; I'm probably using it wrong, but that's just how I see it. I'm unsure if we can really know for sure if Topps used an item as a proof even if they say they did.

[ALR-bishop]

As I recall Bob Lemke reported that the 3 famous 1960 cards of Hadley, Cimoli and Theoneberry on team different from those in the issued set that he saw had regular backs. Would that make them variations rather than proofs ?

Generally agree that the only way to be sure you have a blank back proof is if front differers from regular card like is the case with the well known 77 and 84 catalog proofs

But Topps Vault has issued a bunch of blank back serial or progressive proofs

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Mark70Z

How bout this, it's an authentic card, with a finished back and an unfinished front. Personally, I just use "proof" when it's an unfinished card; I'm probably using it wrong, but that's just how I see it. I'm unsure if we can really know for sure if Topps used an item as a proof even if they say they did.

I usually go with the technical term "really cool" or "awesome" myself. No matter what anyone wants to call them they are the stuff I really like to collect.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by bnorth

I usually go with the technical term "really cool" or "awesome" myself. No matter what anyone wants to call them they are the stuff I really like to collect.

I like that one too!

The shop I worked for did very little proofing, like maybe one photographic mockup for the customer to sign off on. Everything else was production stuff from making press adjustments etc.

Topps......Appears to have done just about every sort of proofing possible.

Depending on how you look at it, even a card that's a production piece can be a "proof" of sorts. What we usually call proofs are done to get the design set, then the particulars of each card before production.
So stuff like this isn't technically a proof. But it was from a sheet printed during the adjustment of the registration. Probably on a two color press since there are multiple impressions of both black and Magenta.

Steve B

[steve B]

Another one, this one from the corner of the last of several make ready sheets. Those are sheets used for press adjustment before the actual production starts. The last one usually gets a corner torn off to mark where the setup pieces end and the product begins.

The blue is printed right into the torn area, showing it was torn before being printed. (I also saw the whole sheet and was there when it was cut. I couldn't afford the sheet, but did buy this card. )



Steve B

[JustinD]

I love to collect this stuff and would have been a player up to 125 on that. ( it really got a strong price imo )

I would think that was an print error of a missing black pass that was more than likely taken out the back door by a worker at the factory. (A common occurence for these items) The creasing and inconsistent sides look like it was likely hand cut from a dumpster sheet.

[Mark70Z]

Originally Posted by steve B

Topps......Appears to have done just about every sort of proofing possible.

Depending on how you look at it, even a card that's a production piece can be a "proof" of sorts.
Steve B

Steve,

I know you have knowledge in the printing industry so what would the Steve Garvey, Glenn Beckert and Brooks Robinson cards pictured be called in the printing industry that have a finished back and just part of the colors that go into a finished card on the front?

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Mark70Z

Steve,

I know you have knowledge in the printing industry so what would the Steve Garvey, Glenn Beckert and Brooks Robinson cards pictured be called in the printing industry that have a finished back and just part of the colors that go into a finished card on the front?

There's not really much for technical terms that can easily be applied without seeing the entire sheet.

They're all unfinished product, the Beckert less finished than the others.

The most likely thing is that they're from make ready sheets, excess sheets used for press adjustment. And for some reason they didn't get used for the black layer - Or for Beckert only the blue layer.
Those sheets might have been sheets spoiled somehow during the printing of the backs. So part of the whole sheet might have had poor inking of either back color, or some other problem.

Other possibilities - They're missing colors because of some mishap in the printing. Maybe two sheets fed at the same time, maybe a prior sheet came apart and a peeled off section blocked the color (Almost impossible for the Beckert) Maybe a piece of foreign matter another piece of paper, or something got into the press and blocked the black. Maybe the sheet misfed and got jammed.
All would lead to some or all of the sheet missing at least one color.

That stuff would usually get used as makeready sheets for whatever was next on that same stock. (The 79s with 78 backs were found either in sheets or strips at a landfill if I recall the story right, as sheets they were probably make ready sheets. )


Of course, at the print shop I was at only the sheets on the press were make ready sheets the others were called by a rather general technical term "trash"

If we'd printed any cards, I'd have some cool stuff, as I'd have made off with as much of that as I could carry. We had to pay to have it hauled away, so I'm sure the boss would have been ok with it. My card box dividers for a few years were cut from the discarded margins of some cardstock cover -maybe a college catalog?

Steve B

[Mark70Z]

Originally Posted by steve B

There's not really much for technical terms that can easily be applied without seeing the entire sheet.

They're all unfinished product, the Beckert less finished than the others.

Of course, at the print shop I was at only the sheets on the press were make ready sheets the others were called by a rather general technical term "trash" Steve B

Steve,

Thanks so much for the response. You add great insight when it comes to the printing process, which I know very little about.

Just one more question to help with my understanding. The "progression proofs" that Eric72 posted of the '76 Wayne Stephenson would be different than the Brooks Robinson's that were posted, is that correct? Those are typically how I see proofs, w/the normal colors used, black, yellow, blue, yellow and blue, etc. and are typically blank backed.

[JollyElm]

Completely OT, but who knew Dick Van Dyke played for the Flyers???

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Mark70Z

Steve,

Thanks so much for the response. You add great insight when it comes to the printing process, which I know very little about.

Just one more question to help with my understanding. The "progression proofs" that Eric72 posted of the '76 Wayne Stephenson would be different than the Brooks Robinson's that were posted, is that correct? Those are typically how I see proofs, w/the normal colors used, black, yellow, blue, yellow and blue, etc. and are typically blank backed.

If the Brooks Robinsons have backs, they probably aren't progressive proofs.

Progressive proofs are used to check that each color layer prints properly, and that the colors are lined up correctly so the registration will be good over the entire sheet. (In Topps case....ummm....sort of...their registration wasn't always great. )
The stuff that should get caught at this stage is things like a player with the team banner the wrong color or wrong name. Or worse stuff like having one card out of place on one color so for instance Ed Jones always gets the blue layer from Dave Jones card.

That sort of thing has been missed fairly recently, one year Black Diamond had a whole bunch of wrong backs because the sheet layout for the front didn't match the layout for the back.
The few 91 Topps that have the pink background from a manager on a players card and the opposite are either mistakes that slipped past proofing, or partial wrong backs where the correct fronts got the wrong pink back layer but the correct Blue info/stats layer.

As you can see from the test sheet piece I showed Topps had a LOT of potential adjustment. The brief time I ran a press the farthest I had to move an entire plate was maybe 1-2mm. Getting the tension uneven on the plate would throw the registration off by a bit so it had to be adjusted evenly. They eliminated a lot of adjusting and proofing by making the plates so they would naturally line up almost exactly. But we were a high quality fairly short run sort of place. Topps printers were mostly trying to get a few million cards out the door as quickly and cheaply as possible.

Steve B

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by Mark70Z

Steve,

Thanks so much for the response. You add great insight when it comes to the printing process, which I know very little about.

Just one more question to help with my understanding. The "progression proofs" that Eric72 posted of the '76 Wayne Stephenson would be different than the Brooks Robinson's that were posted, is that correct? Those are typically how I see proofs, w/the normal colors used, black, yellow, blue, yellow and blue, etc. and are typically blank backed.

I believe Topps used the same CMYK process for the Robinsons and the Stephensons: 4-color printing:

Cyan (fancy name for a shade of blue)
Magenta (fancy name for a shade of red)
Yellow
Black

Additionally, I believe they used a process known as, "half-tone printing."

Long story short, the cards given pre-press treatment should basically exhibit the same characteristics.

Just my two cents. Steve, please weigh in here, as you are the resident expert.

[Mark70Z]

Originally Posted by bnorth

I usually go with the technical term "really cool" or "awesome" myself. No matter what anyone wants to call them they are the stuff I really like to collect.

Wait...I change my mind; I'm with you ^