'48 Leaf Wagner/Robinson - Print Variation?

[yanks87]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Brian

The differences you're pointing to are simply printing variants. The LEAF cards are replete with such color differences.
Here are some examples in my set......

Ted

I agree there are a TON of print variations, especially in regards to ink colors and plate order (typically black ink will always go down first). When a color block changes, like on the Aberson sleeves, that is a physical change to the blue plate. There had to be an actual replacement of that plate in order for the color block to change (short to long, long to short). I'm sure that there are more in the set than just the Robinson, Musial, and Wagner, but there are distinct plate changes as color block have changed or been removed. Or like that awesome Platt that you posted, some plates were totally missed! I guess my over arching question is should there be a designation for the difference like there is for Aberson and Peterson. Peterson is probably the closest to the Jackie/Stan change as part or all of the black plate detail was removed.

I'm fascinated by the prints, process and variations, being that I am a designer and do a ton of screenprinting. I mostly wanted to see if others thought that maybe the variations (outside of Hermaski) warranted a full designation, while the other changes don't?

[samosa4u]

Brian,

I love this thread you started.

If you look at the Post-war section, then you'll see that a few threads were started on this subject. It's very interesting, for sure.

I say YES, some of these print variations that we see should be given special designations. For example:



This is the most commonly found Jackie.



Now this one is the BLUE CAP variant. The black color is missing from his cap. This example is more difficult to find than the one above it, but it's not rare or anything like that. I also want to point out that the magenta found on his face is usually stronger for this BLUE CAP variant.

Again, this is a very interesting subject that very few collectors pay attention to. I think if you (or anyone) has the time to just sit around examining thousands of these cards, then a book could be written about it!

Oh, and by the way, I do have a Jackie, but it's the BORING one that I posted first. It's not a variant either. I would love to own the BLUE CAP variant someday.

[yanks87]

That's a good looking Jackie! I have a lower grade in the no detail version, and mine pales in comparison to your centering!!

[samosa4u]

Brian,

What you have is the BLUE CAP variant. And like I mentioned in my earlier post, the magenta is much stronger on this variant.

I don't own any of the examples that I posted above. I do have a PSA 4, but mine is the same variant as the SGC 6. I would like to own the BLUE CAP variant someday, but at the moment they are too damn expensive! I am hoping prices will come down in the future, but they might go the other way!

I'm going to take a wild guess here, but the BLUE CAP variant could have been a first printing. Afterwards, Leaf Gum Co. decided to make changes to the printing plates, colors, etc. I also think that certain variants should be priced higher than the others. For example, the BLUE CAP variant is harder to find, so it should be worth more. However, most collectors just care about one thing: the grade!

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by yanks87

Ted

I agree there are a TON of print variations, especially in regards to ink colors and plate order (typically black ink will always go down first). When a color block changes, like on the Aberson sleeves, that is a physical change to the blue plate. There had to be an actual replacement of that plate in order for the color block to change (short to long, long to short). I'm sure that there are more in the set than just the Robinson, Musial, and Wagner, but there are distinct plate changes as color block have changed or been removed. Or like that awesome Platt that you posted, some plates were totally missed! I guess my over arching question is should there be a designation for the difference like there is for Aberson and Peterson. Peterson is probably the closest to the Jackie/Stan change as part or all of the black plate detail was removed.

I'm fascinated by the prints, process and variations, being that I am a designer and do a ton of screenprinting. I mostly wanted to see if others thought that maybe the variations (outside of Hermaski) warranted a full designation, while the other changes don't?

You could say LEAF's printers were sort of "sloppy". And, if we were to "nit-pick" on all the possible permutations due to color printing anomalies, we would have numerous variations.

Illustrated here are the 98 subjects in the 1949 LEAF set. And, there are three additional (legitimate) variation cards [Aberson, Hermansk(i), and Peterson].

This gallery of cards in the set is from my 8-page article in Old Cardboard Magazine (Issue # 9). Check-it-out if you are interested in being more informed on this LEAF set.

Note....
Card # is on the left. On the Right is the COPYRIGHT date (1948 or 1949). All 98 of these cards were issued in 1949. 1st Series in the Spring, and 2nd Series (SP) in the Summer.









TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[steve B]

If you have Excel desktop, the spreadsheet I linked to has lots of these on it.

I really wish there was a way of sharing it that works easily. It won't email because it's a big file, and now Live won't open it. So downloading or opening with a desktop application is the only way.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Illustrated here are the 98 subjects in the 1949 LEAF set. And, there are three additional (legitimate) variation cards [Aberson, Hermansk(i), and Peterson].

All 98 of these cards were issued in 1949. 1st Series in the Spring, and 2nd Series (SP) in the Summer.



.

It amazes me that on a site for advanced collectors with so much information on the hobby that people still mislabel this set. Your article on the 1949 Leaf baseball set should be required reading.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by rats60

It amazes me that on a site for advanced collectors with so much information on the hobby that people still mislabel this set. Your article on the 1949 Leaf baseball set should be required reading.

Hi rats60

I really appreciate your kind words.

PSA has perpetuated the "1948" myth since the early 1990's. In the mid-1990's, they were informed that this BB card set was strictly issued in 1949. But, they ignored this information.

Thanks again,

TED Z

T206 Reference
.