NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you write anything concerning a person or company your full name needs to be in your post or obtainable from it. . Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. When you click on links to eBay on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
ebay GSB
T206s on eBay
Babe Ruth Cards on eBay
t206 Ty Cobb on eBay
Ty Cobb Cards on eBay
Lou Gehrig Cards on eBay
Baseball T201-T217 on eBay
Baseball E90-E107 on eBay
T205 Cards on eBay
Baseball Postcards on eBay
Goudey Cards on eBay
Baseball Memorabilia on eBay
Baseball Exhibit Cards on eBay
Baseball Strip Cards on eBay
Baseball Baking Cards on eBay
Sporting News Cards on eBay
Play Ball Cards on eBay
Joe DiMaggio Cards on eBay
Mickey Mantle Cards on eBay
Bowman 1951-1955 on eBay
Football Cards on eBay

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Main Forum - WWII & Older Baseball Cards > Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-18-2025, 04:56 AM
obcbobd obcbobd is offline
Bob Donaldson
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Boston
Posts: 1,163
Default

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/
__________________
My wantlist http://www.oldbaseball.com/wantlists...tag=bdonaldson
Member of OBC (Old Baseball Cards), the longest running on-line collecting club www.oldbaseball.com
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-18-2025, 07:01 AM
SAllen2556's Avatar
SAllen2556 SAllen2556 is offline
Scott
Scott All.en
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Detroit
Posts: 646
Default

I suspect they went from 2 and 1/4 film to 35 mm, which led to those mid 70's awful quality photos - though I like the composition of the 73's.

I agree with the '69 set being terrible in that it largely copied photos from the year before or even much earlier. That combined with all the "black caps" makes the 69 set really pointless if you have the 67 and 68 sets. There's maybe a hundred 1969 cards that are even remotely interesting.

s-l500.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-18-2025, 07:32 AM
D. Bergin's Avatar
D. Bergin D. Bergin is offline
Dave
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: CT
Posts: 6,867
Default

I used to really dislike the 1973's, but they've grown on me through the years. Now I like how weird and interesting their choice of photos was. Would be even better if it wasn't for that thick white border, which I've never liked about the set either.

Absolutely love the card of Terry Crowley barreling towards Thurman Munson, with the ball just coming into the frame.

I'm going to have to go with the 1958's for worst. The horrible big heads (or little bodies) on the monochromatic backgrounds, along with the giant fonts.

The ironic thing is it was probably a nightmare for the graphic designers to put together, compared to the beautiful, yet simple 1957's that came the year before.
__________________
*
*
WAR Hates Dante Bichette!
*
*
So what is it good for?
*
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-18-2025, 07:54 AM
BillyCoxDodgers3B BillyCoxDodgers3B is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,381
Default

It's refreshing to see that I'm not alone in not particularly caring for the '58's. The backgrounds in the '57's are so much of what made that set both perfectly of its era yet timeless to collect. The colors pop magnificently and have aged so nicely over the decades. And the backgrounds work so well with the jerseys.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-08-2025, 11:52 AM
timn1 timn1 is offline
Tim Newcomb
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,182
Default agree - 1957 vs 1958

Long ago I did a run of Topps sets all the way back to 1956, but I could never bear to spend money on the 1958s - I kept putting it off. And then I started selling my sets to make money for prewar cards, and never did do it. On the other hand, The 1957 set is the only one I have always kept because it's so beautiful.

The comedown in Topps quality between these two years was horrendous!


Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyCoxDodgers3B View Post
It's refreshing to see that I'm not alone in not particularly caring for the '58's. The backgrounds in the '57's are so much of what made that set both perfectly of its era yet timeless to collect. The colors pop magnificently and have aged so nicely over the decades. And the backgrounds work so well with the jerseys.

Last edited by timn1; 03-08-2025 at 11:54 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-14-2025, 09:36 AM
Balticfox's Avatar
Balticfox Balticfox is offline
V@idotas J0nynas
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,213
Default

In further defence of the 1958 cards, they have the most whimsical and thus the best backs of any Topps Baseball set:



Plus the set includes the single best shot of one of my very favourite players:



__________________
That government governs best that governs least.

Last edited by Balticfox; 03-14-2025 at 09:41 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-14-2025, 09:36 AM
Balticfox's Avatar
Balticfox Balticfox is offline
V@idotas J0nynas
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,213
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by timn1 View Post
The 1957 set is the only one I have always kept because it's so beautiful.
I used to think that the 1957 set was rather boring because of the uninteresting design but I agree that it's chock full of fabulous player pics. Here are the last three cards I picked up from the set:



And of course the Lucky Penny card (without which no 1957 Topps Baseball set is complete) takes the 1957 set over the top!

(Sadly not mine.)

__________________
That government governs best that governs least.

Last edited by Balticfox; 03-14-2025 at 09:52 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-14-2025, 10:38 AM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 9,389
Default

And a Lucky Penny to go with the card . And other inserts
Attached Images
File Type: jpg img112.jpg (41.5 KB, 74 views)
File Type: jpg Document_2025-03-14_112234.jpg (173.9 KB, 75 views)
File Type: jpg Photo_2025-03-14_112607.jpg (178.5 KB, 75 views)
File Type: jpg Document_2025-03-14_111929.jpg (201.1 KB, 77 views)
File Type: jpg Document_2025-03-14_113415.jpg (189.7 KB, 77 views)
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-18-2025, 09:51 AM
Balticfox's Avatar
Balticfox Balticfox is offline
V@idotas J0nynas
 
Join Date: Jan 2023
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,213
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by D. Bergin View Post
I'm going to have to go with the 1958's for worst. The horrible big heads (or little bodies) on the monochromatic backgrounds, along with the giant fonts.

The ironic thing is it was probably a nightmare for the graphic designers to put together, compared to the beautiful, yet simple 1957's that came the year before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyCoxDodgers3B View Post
It's refreshing to see that I'm not alone in not particularly caring for the '58's.
I have mixed feelings about the 1958 Topps issue. I rather like the basic design of the fronts with the player photo silhouetted against the brightly coloured background with team logos at the bottom. But in general the photo selection is really lousy. Far too many head shots. The set would have been much improved with many more waist up or thigh up shots. But the 1958's have my favourite card backs for any Topps Baseball issue up to at least 1970!



__________________
That government governs best that governs least.

Last edited by Balticfox; 02-18-2025 at 12:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-18-2025, 11:47 AM
Brick442 Brick442 is offline
Mike R
member
 
Join Date: Sep 2023
Location: NJ
Posts: 60
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SAllen2556 View Post
I suspect they went from 2 and 1/4 film to 35 mm, which led to those mid 70's awful quality photos - though I like the composition of the 73's.

I agree with the '69 set being terrible in that it largely copied photos from the year before or even much earlier. That combined with all the "black caps" makes the 69 set really pointless if you have the 67 and 68 sets. There's maybe a hundred 1969 cards that are even remotely interesting.

Attachment 651711
You are correct! 35mm 100 ASA film is what Topps required. Not great for the action shots.
Reply With Quote
Reply




Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Which Topps issue has the worst centering? frankhardy Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) 29 01-09-2023 03:12 PM
Vote! Worst Topps produced set of the 50's almostdone Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) 60 12-27-2015 07:03 PM
Worst Topps card 1952-1979 jason.1969 Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) 37 11-09-2015 08:16 PM
Vote!! The worst Topps produced set of the 1970's almostdone Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) 17 07-23-2015 10:07 PM
3 best. 3 worst Topps issues kailes2872 Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) 62 03-06-2014 04:34 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:07 PM.


ebay GSB