Re-Backed OJ??

[h2oya311]

Originally Posted by trdcrdkid

I've seen (and I own) apparently genuine OJs with similar wear, including slabbed ones. The only reprint OJs I've seen that weren't totally obvious fakes were derived from the photographic proofs at the Library of Congress, but those are all 1887 cards of major leaguers, and there were not aged like this. This still looks genuine to me. I'd be interested to hear what Jay Miller, Joe G., or other real OJ experts say.

100% agree. This is legit, and I don't believe it is rebacked either. Rebacked OJ's typically have different wear and tear than the front (if at all).

[chlankf]

I appreciate all the info. I have 60+ OJs some with some separation but none so uniform at 3 sides.

I do believe it is genuine, just concerned with rebacking.

Jay & Joe do either of you care to chime in?

[oldjudge]

I can't tell unless I have the card in my hand. While I seriously doubt that it is a reprint, the fact that the photo does not reach the edges of the mount makes me suspicious that it may have been rebacked at some point. For a card like this, the difference in value between a rebacked card and an original one is pretty minimal.

[rhettyeakley]

Didn’t see this until today (not sure how I missed it). This is my card and it is not a reprint in any way, not sure what those that thought that were seeing? It doesn’t appear to be rebacked just a low grade OJ with some pretty extensive wear.

[Joe_G.]

I too missed this as I was distracted over the Holidays. Rhett has handled more than a few 19th century photographic cards over the years. I would be surprised if this card is rebacked (all things considered). As for the albumen print (photo) falling short of the cardboard backing, not all that unusual on heavily worn card. The new N172 Healy pose recently discussed is another example of the same.

[bigfish]

Originally Posted by rhettyeakley

Didn’t see this until today (not sure how I missed it). This is my card and it is not a reprint in any way, not sure what those that thought that were seeing? It doesn’t appear to be rebacked just a low grade OJ with some pretty extensive wear.

Nailed it

[chlankf]

Thanks Joe and Rhett.

I had no doubt it was authentic, especially coming from Rhett. I did send you a message through eBay, no need to respond. I just don't own any OJs where the photo doesn't extend out so uniformity. All my original concerns are now mute.

Sincerely
Craig

[Leon]

Sometimes a scan or photo can make a card look a little different, with respect to edges, especially if there is a curvature to the card. Glad the concerns are muted .....