Revisiting 1963 Topps Mantle Potential Color Variant

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by packs

I purchased my SGC 2.5 years ago and asked initially whether anyone felt like the blue box on the bottom of the card, which is supposed to be green, was a variation of the card.

Nearly everyone said it was the result of natural fading due to some kind of exposure.

I moved on. Then I found a second example in another auction a year or two later. Now, I've found a third.

Here are all three examples of the blue box that I have found since I bought my own. They all have the same look to them. While I was originally happy to accept that a fade was a fade, I find it harder to accept that the same fading occurred in the same way three different times. There is almost no variation between the cards, but you'd think there would be if it was the result of natural fading under various different circumstance.

Is it still everyone's opinion that these cards are simply faded?

Yes still just as faded as the never ending supply of faded 58 Blue Hank Aaron cards.

In hand if you know what to look for it is really easy to tell the difference between real missing color cards and faded ones. On real missing color cards all the rest of the colors are still nice and bright. Not so much on faded cards.

[packs]

The thing is though, I've seen plenty of faded 1963 Topps cards. Here's an example. It retains the yellow and the green doesn't turn to blue, just to another shade of green:



I haven't found other cards from the 63 set with an all blue box either. Only the Mantle.

It's not unusual that three independent cards owned by who knows how many people since 1963 all have the exact same "fade" with no variation at all? Like for example, none of the three Mantles I've found are only partially blue or even anywhere in between each other. They're the same, even though they've worn independently.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by packs

The thing is though, I've seen plenty of faded 1963 Topps cards but none that have a blue box other than Mantle. Here's an example. It retains the yellow and the green doesn't turn to blue, just to another shade of green:



I haven't found other cards from the 63 set with an all blue box either. Only the Mantle.

It's not unusual that three independent cards owned by who knows how many people since 1963 all have the exact same "fade" with no variation at all?

LOL, just put it back out in the sun longer. With that card it is super easy to see the fading. Do you have one with nice color? If so just look at the color of the face. Those are way beyond obviously faded.

Here this shows different stages all in one card.

[packs]

Ok I know that but wouldn't it be unusual for there to be multiple Spahns all with that color swirl? You would expect variation with something that occurs naturally and independent of itself, right? Like, unless you're a twin, you aren't going to be a twin. That kind of thing?

[ALR-bishop]

These are the backs of the above Mays cards

[packs]

I'm glad you brought up the back. Here is the back of my card. If this card is the product of being blasted by the sun into oblivion, the back seems like nothing happened to it to me:

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by packs

Ok I know that but wouldn't it be unusual for there to be multiple Spahns all with that color swirl? You would expect variation with something that occurs naturally and independent of itself, right? Like, unless you're a twin, you aren't going to be a twin. That kind of thing?

I have no idea what you posted means. I was showing you the different stages of fading on a single card. The Spahn is altered to get that look, there are no others like it.

Originally Posted by packs

I'm glad you brought up the back. Here is the back of my card. If this card is the product of being blasted by the sun into oblivion, the back seems like nothing happened to it to me:

LOL, it would only change the back if the back was ALSO faded.

You can believe whatever you want but all 3 are way beyond obvious faded cards.

[packs]

Originally Posted by bnorth

I have no idea what you posted means. I was showing you the different stages of fading on a single card. The Spahn is altered to get that look, there are no others like it.



LOL, it would only change the back if the back was ALSO faded.

You can believe whatever you want but all 3 are way beyond obvious faded cards.

I'm asking you to explain your opinion is all. If there are no other Spahns like that one because that was done on purpose, how does that support the idea that three cards with the same exact issue happened naturally? Wouldn't that mean there should be variation because something wasn't done on purpose?

The cards all have the same box. If it is fading, I would expect to see other 1963 Topps cards with blue boxes. But that is not what I have found and believe me, I have been looking otherwise I wouldn't have spotted the third Mantle in this thread.

[ALR-bishop]

That is why I was first excited about the Mays card. It would seems to me fading would normally only affect one side of the card unless it was erect in a holder of some kind or turned over for even tanning . But would trust Ben and Steve on printing issues

[Peter_Spaeth]

To me the Beckett one still has an ever so slight greenish hint to it towards the left side?

I vote fading.

[ALR-bishop]

I have a Blue Aaron and this Blue Mays. But believe them to be just faded, but am no print expert. What do backs look like ?