Worst Topps set for photos?

[OhioLawyerF5]

73 rocks!

[G1911]

1961, the year of bad, rushed capless portraits. 1973 at least tried something new but mostly failed.

[campyfan39]

Agree. look like football photos

Originally Posted by G1911

1961, the year of bad, rushed capless portraits.

[Kutcher55]

69 is up there too. Lots of repeat images from earlier sets.

[JollyElm]

Can't locate the thread I did a long time ago about how cool the 1973 Topps set was with all of the (far from typically used) in-game action shots, but was able to locate the group of catchers (including airbrushed-jerseyed John Ellis playing first base) graphic I used to illustrate it...

1973catchers.jpg

[butchie_t]

I'd say the ones the year after an expansion. Either head shots with no hats, or hats with hideous airbrushed new teams.

There are a few to choose from.....

Butch.

[Bigdaddy]

Originally Posted by Kutcher55

69 is up there too. Lots of repeat images from earlier sets.

Agree with the '69 nomination. Lots of head shots either without caps or ones that have been airbrushed. And repeat images. I believe that I read somewhere that there was some contractual glitch between Topps and MLBPA in 1969 that contributed to this.

Every time I think about putting together a '69 set, I start thinking about the horrible photography and put it off.

[Bobbycee]

Originally Posted by Bigdaddy

Agree with the '69 nomination. Lots of head shots either without caps or ones that have been airbrushed. And repeat images. I believe that I read somewhere that there was some contractual glitch between Topps and MLBPA in 1969 that contributed to this.

Every time I think about putting together a '69 set, I start thinking about the horrible photography and put it off.

Ditto. Ugly design and all those capless heads & airbrushed cards. Yuck.

[robw1959]

I've always hated the '73 Topps set. In fact, this set is so ugly that Pete Rose himself refused to sign his regular issue '73 Topps card.

[OhioLawyerF5]

Originally Posted by robw1959

I've always hated the '73 Topps set. In fact, this set is so ugly that Pete Rose himself refused to sign his regular issue '73 Topps card.

I don't think this is true. My favorite Rose auto in my collection:

[obcbobd]

Lot of bad years to choose from 58, 61, 69, 73. 69 especially is a shame as I really love the design and at age 7 it was one of the first sets I bought as a kid. And then there's the all-star cards which look quite nice, but most of them have actdion shots that aren't related to the subject of the card. https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.co...ews-all-stars/

[robw1959]

And for the reason I stated, I question it's authenticity!

Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5

I don't think this is true. My favorite Rose auto in my collection:

[bk400]

Originally Posted by Bigdaddy

Agree with the '69 nomination. Lots of head shots either without caps or ones that have been airbrushed. And repeat images. I believe that I read somewhere that there was some contractual glitch between Topps and MLBPA in 1969 that contributed to this.

Every time I think about putting together a '69 set, I start thinking about the horrible photography and put it off.

I vote for 1969 for the worst as well. I personally like the 1973 for the reasons stated above.

If we are including the borders in the discussion, I think the 1962 and the 1972 are tied for the worst overall. The 1972 in particular just looks horrific.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by OhioLawyerF5

73 rocks!

Love this set.

[Brent G.]

Shooting a stationary target is quick, easy, and cheap. There are some good action shots, but others look like they either didn’t have the right camera equipment, didn’t know how to use it, and/or didn't bother trying again for a decent image.

[bbcard1]

although I don't think it can own worst overall, there were some gems in 1958. along with this legendary one, I'd add Yogi and Mossi.

[hammertime]

I like 1973 because there are a bunch of the behind home plate perspective photos, which are my favorites.

[Brick442]

A photographer who worked for Topps during this era told me that Topps had strict film requirements, unfortunately that film, combined with the camera he used, wasn't so great for these action shots. Most of the photographers Topps used preferred the posed still shots.

I remember the George Scott card in 73 had a fake crowd background added in.

[Brent G.]

Originally Posted by hammertime

I like 1973 because there are a bunch of the behind home plate perspective photos, which are my favorites.

Now that is a gem, Andy — great framing.

[KJA]

Originally Posted by bbcard1

although I don't think it can own worst overall, there were some gems in 1958. along with this legendary one, I'd add Yogi and Mossi.

This card always makes me think of Gomer Pyle.

[packs]

I always thought the 58 Clemente was a really nice card. I also like the Koufax.

[JollyElm]

Being an expansion year certainly didn't help matters, and the 'dreadshots' were over-the-top plentiful.

Here's what you find with a "1969 Topps Padres" eBay search...


1969padresheadshots.jpg


Very hard for a kid to get excited about all of the old man noggins coming out of packs that year.