Revisiting 1963 Topps Mantle Potential Color Variant

[G1911]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Here is my half faded Ron Jackson. I threw most of the stuff I experimented on away and also like a dumb a$$ never kept notes.

I keep my experimental subjects to low grade cheap commons of cards with huge populations, and most get destroyed. I usually only keep one type for future reference, that goes into a separate container marked as intentionally altered. I usually make a note in pen on the back too. My notes are complete, but that's the only thing I have organized in my card mess.

The desire to believe is vast, a majority of color 'variations' on the market are sadly not genuine but continue to bring money from people who want to believe a whole lot more than they are willing to question things.

[packs]

I said I would like to see other 1963 Topps cards with green boxes that are blue instead. That is not what you posted.

The Kaline card is what I'm looking for. That card is interesting because it's supposed to be green but is blue. Unlike Mantle, the Kaline has a yellow background around the inset image of him above the box. The Mantle has blue. Does that mean all cards with green bottoms are entirely blue underneath because it's part of the printing process and color has been stripped, or does the sunlight turn the green into blue?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by packs

I said I would like to see other 1963 Topps cards with green boxes that are blue instead. That is not what you posted.

The Kaline card is what I'm looking for. That card is interesting because it's supposed to be green but is blue. Unlike Mantle, the Kaline has a yellow background around the inset image of him above the box. The Mantle has blue. Does that mean all cards with green bottoms are entirely blue underneath because it's part of the printing process and color has been stripped, or does the sunlight turn the green into blue?

I'm sorry, is your argument now that in 1963, Topps uniquely used inks and stocks that respond to light completely differently from every other year invalidating these other examples? I'm not following why 1963 is unique and these examples are invalid.

Green is created primarily from yellow and blue ink. So the answer is both, removing the yellow via sunlight reveals the blue, turning it from green to blue, although that blue usually gets toned by the light a bit too as affected areas fade a bit overall.

I'm not a fan of teaching people to doctor cards but how to do this is available online and has been posted here before. With a quick search and a light you can just go make 1963s of any green subject into a blue in a day or two.

[packs]

When you compare things, it's common to compare like things. In this example, two 1963 Topps cards. The reason I was curious about seeing another like example, is because I'd only previously seen the Mantles.

It seems like I explain a lot of seemingly obvious things too but I guess I don't get the same thrill.

[ALR-bishop]

Still interested in why my Mays backs differ

[G1911]

Originally Posted by packs

When you compare things, it's common to compare like things. In this example, two 1963 Topps cards. The reason I was curious about seeing another like example, is because I'd only previously seen the Mantles.

It seems like I explain a lot of seemingly obvious things too but I guess I don't get the same thrill.

Seems you get your fun from denying the obvious and pretending you have a snowflake. Numerous people have told you the obvious truth and explained it. Good luck with your faded card.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Still interested in why my Mays backs differ

Most likely it was faded on both sides. If you look at it under magnification while also looking at a normal colored card for comparison you should be able to tell if it was faded or not.

If you want to know for sure send me the Mystery Mays card and a normal Mays along with return shipping and I will tell you exactly what you have. If you would like to see a real insanely rare missing yellow card let me know. I will mail you one to look at. Once in hand it is amazing how easy it is to spot the difference.

[Cliff Bowman]

.

[ALR-bishop]

Ben— I would need at least 6 common cards from the set with the same colors front and back to be convinced

It’s not that big of a deal to me. Just a curiosity how it got faded on both sides. Maybe a very sneaky person. It’s not going anywhere. Safe from further light in a binder with the set in my office. Someday someone else can figure it out

[Zach Wheat]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

....there's no way to actually prove beyond reason whether it's a printing issue or just some 'window toast.'

"Window toast". Nice one

[steve B]

Originally Posted by packs

I said I would like to see other 1963 Topps cards with green boxes that are blue instead. That is not what you posted.

The Kaline card is what I'm looking for. That card is interesting because it's supposed to be green but is blue. Unlike Mantle, the Kaline has a yellow background around the inset image of him above the box. The Mantle has blue. Does that mean all cards with green bottoms are entirely blue underneath because it's part of the printing process and color has been stripped, or does the sunlight turn the green into blue?

Yes, for nearly every card with a fairly true green it will be yellow printed along with blue. They use a few "tricks" to get effects that are needed. Like making the whole panel green so they don't have to worry about the yellow name having a green rim around it if the blue isn't opaque enough. So you get easy registration and can run lighter thinner blue.

Some cards I think may have had custom mixed colors, but I haven't studied modern ones enough. Nearly all are just cmyk overlays. Or in usual order ymck. A subtractive order has yellow being printed last, which would expose it more to fading

Im not sure it applies, but we've also just seen that yellow can be water soluble, at least on some 1972s, so that's a possibility as well now.


The process for expertizing and authenticating most things is to start assuming nothing then prove what it is. For example, I'd look for other green box 63s that had poor registration so I could see the different layers.