topic: why are exhibits so underrated as a set?

[Exhibitman]

The two-slot counter-top model. This:



I restored to this:

[BioCRN]

As a kid in the late 70s/early 80s I remember some of the machines once used as exhibit vending machines turned into sticker sheet vending machines.

[dbussell12]

Originally Posted by BioCRN

As a kid in the late 70s/early 80s I remember some of the machines once used as exhibit vending machines turned into sticker sheet vending machines.

great to see you here from reddit biocrn!! i'm sayheykid861 over there. always awesome chatting with you. it would have been great to see some of these in person... i was born mid 90s

[dbussell12]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

The two-slot counter-top model. This:



I restored to this:

adam this is awesome

[BioCRN]

Originally Posted by dbussell12

great to see you here from reddit biocrn!! i'm sayheykid861 over there. always awesome chatting with you. it would have been great to see some of these in person... i was born mid 90s

Ah, I caught on that you were around here, but now I got the name from both places. Hiya.

[Brent G.]

Arcades were mentioned, but were these machines in stores too? Were they mostly in high population centers or more widespread? Seems like something most of the country wouldn’t have seen.

[wolverinejayhawks]

There is a nice history of the Exhibit Supply Company here: https://www.madeinchicagomuseum.com/...bit-supply-co/

As noted in that article, Exhibit Supply Company started actively marketing the machines to drug stores starting in the 1920s. That was about the same time that their first baseball set came out (1921).

Back then, drug stores were a center of retail activity where you bought candy, cigarettes, newspapers, etc. They also had soda counters and people hung out. I got all my first sports cards as a kid in the 1970s at several drug stores in my hometown.

Hence, distribution would have been pretty mainstream in the USA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Zach Wheat]

Originally Posted by dbussell12

really curious to hear your guys' thoughts on this. i just never understood it myself. they seem to me to be so fundamental as a consistent and essential undercurrent to the history of baseball cards themselves. and yet they are valued as less than! pic is a dimaggio from my collection. i personally think its his best most iconic card. i also feel similarly with the nyg mays, and perhaps even the ted williams salutations.

these cards are just so fundamental to me. they're deeply powerful in how they were distributed and accessed/accessible. and perhaps that contributes to their perceived market valuation now.

would love to hear your thoughts.

Personally I like this set. However, I used to collect individual HOF'ers that interested me due to the size as some have mentioned previously, and the difficulty picking up the nuances of the set. Exhibits are sort of like JD McCarthy postcards are the to the'60's - '80's. I like JD McCarthy postcards because all of the poses were not on printed on the main issues of a players card and the set contains the images cards or postcards produced of many players. However, there are so many postcards and variations...something like 2,496 at last count

[Schlesinj]

Nothing to add except a piece of advertisingIMG_6971.jpeg.

[Brent G.]

I know there are some wide year ranges as to when Exhibits of any given player could've been printed. Someone mentioned there are ways to tell the difference between older and newer versions. Anyone care you share those tips?

[dbussell12]

Originally Posted by Brent G.

I know there are some wide year ranges as to when Exhibits of any given player could've been printed. Someone mentioned there are ways to tell the difference between older and newer versions. Anyone care you share those tips?

hey brent - here's some dating info that helped me awhile back. haven't been on there in awhile but it was great while i was doing research! cheers --

https://keymancollectibles.com/exhibitdatechart.htm

[dbussell12]

Originally Posted by Schlesinj

Nothing to add except a piece of advertisingAttachment 658391.

this is great jamie -- thanks for adding this. sometimes advertisements for the cards are just as cool if not even cooler than the cards themselves!!

[Brent G.]

Originally Posted by dbussell12

hey brent - here's some dating info that helped me awhile back. haven't been on there in awhile but it was great while i was doing research! cheers --

https://keymancollectibles.com/exhibitdatechart.htm

This is perfect — thanks!

[dbussell12]

Originally Posted by Brent G.

This is perfect — thanks!

no problem man. its really cool getting deeper and deeper into them. some great information added to this thread already from our community which is great to see

[insidethewrapper]

I'm always afraid of getting stuck with counterfeits, that has kept me away of several purchases. I need a lesson and visual of how to tell the difference.

[GrewUpWithJunkWax]

I'm a fan of Exhibit cards. I only have about a dozen, but range from 1921 to the '47-66 run and the (1948, '49 or '50) Hall of Fame. There are several more I'd like to add to my collection though.

I like oversized issues, just that much more picture of the player you enjoy. Some people knock the black & white, but there are lots of great images.

And of course, I also picked up a copy of Adam's book to learn more about them.

[Exhibitman]

https://imageevent.com/exhibitman/in...ngexhibitcards

[darkhorse9]

I actually tried collecting the complete "set" of Salutation cards and came within six cards of completing.
It was then I realized there was no such thing as a "set"
. It's all a bunch of individual cards. Therefore completing it became a useless venture
I broke it all up, sold them individually and moved on to actual pre-war sets.

[Mungo Hungo]

Originally Posted by darkhorse9

I actually tried collecting the complete "set" of Salutation cards and came within six cards of completing.
It was then I realized there was no such thing as a "set"
. It's all a bunch of individual cards. Therefore completing it became a useless venture
I broke it all up, sold them individually and moved on to actual pre-war sets.

To me, this is kind of an "emperor has no clothes comment" -- you're clearly right, but so many people turn somersaults to avoid that conclusion.

I'm not one of the people who claim that Exhibits are not cards. They're literally made of cardboard and they picture baseball players in uniforms. But I also think that there's a very good reason for many people to discount them, at least the "1939-46 set" and the "1947-66 set."

To my mind, one of the main components of most baseball cards is their temporal feature--that is, they're intended to memorialize a player at a certain time, and are intended to be released only over a short period, usually no more than a year, but occasionally over a period of 2-to-3 years. The early Exhibits fit that description, but the "1939-46" and "1947-66" cards certainly do not.

From a Pre-War Cards article:

"[W]hile many collectors assume all of the Exhibits with salutations ceased in 1946, that isn’t really true. Some of the Salutations Exhibits were printed into the 1950s and even 1960s."

From a Sports Collectors Daily article on the 1947-66 cards:

"Many cards were redistributed year after year with new players added over the years. Some players that remained on the same teams had many cards printed while others that changed teams may have fewer ones."

In short, the 1939-66 Exhibits (aside from a couple of separate sets that are not often discussed) were, from my reading of things, reprinted at will for a couple of decades. In this, they're similar to team-issued photocards and postcards issued by Rowe, Elder, McCarthy and others. Again, that doesn't mean that the Exhibits aren't cards. But a card that can be reprinted year after year is very different in my book than one that is issued for a year (or maybe even two or three) and never again.

[Brian]

I absolutely love exhibits. I collect both photos and cards, and for me, they are the best of both worlds. I have a couple of Ruth and Gehrig, Cassius Clay, but also Marilyn Monroe and that Julie Newmar that Adam posted. I would say that Ruth and Gehrig have certainly taken off, although I would argue that they still don't get their due.

My newest fascination is buying signed exhibits. They don't come cheap, however.

To all those guys who have some Ruth and Gehrig exhibits that are "too big, too monotone, too homogeneous, etc." please let me know so I can buy some of these "undervalued" gems and relieve you of your burden!

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Mungo Hungo

To me, this is kind of an "emperor has no clothes comment" -- you're clearly right, but so many people turn somersaults to avoid that conclusion.

I'm not one of the people who claim that Exhibits are not cards. They're literally made of cardboard and they picture baseball players in uniforms. But I also think that there's a very good reason for many people to discount them, at least the "1939-46 set" and the "1947-66 set."

To my mind, one of the main components of most baseball cards is their temporal feature--that is, they're intended to memorialize a player at a certain time, and are intended to be released only over a short period, usually no more than a year, but occasionally over a period of 2-to-3 years. The early Exhibits fit that description, but the "1939-46" and "1947-66" cards certainly do not.

From a Pre-War Cards article:

"[W]hile many collectors assume all of the Exhibits with salutations ceased in 1946, that isn’t really true. Some of the Salutations Exhibits were printed into the 1950s and even 1960s."

From a Sports Collectors Daily article on the 1947-66 cards:

"Many cards were redistributed year after year with new players added over the years. Some players that remained on the same teams had many cards printed while others that changed teams may have fewer ones."

In short, the 1939-66 Exhibits (aside from a couple of separate sets that are not often discussed) were, from my reading of things, reprinted at will for a couple of decades. In this, they're similar to team-issued photocards and postcards issued by Rowe, Elder, McCarthy and others. Again, that doesn't mean that the Exhibits aren't cards. But a card that can be reprinted year after year is very different in my book than one that is issued for a year (or maybe even two or three) and never again.

There's a lot more nuance to it than that. The company revised its baseball runs nearly every season from 1921-66 (ish). Some cards were repeated. Some were not. As far as I can tell, the cards of a player basically ended whenever the player's career ended, and some guys had new designs from time to time. That's what makes it fun. We can say for sure that certain years had certain cards based on checklist cards that were created. I don't recall if I posted these before but here you go:

1950 set checklist:



1951 set checklist:



Some guys, like Paige, appear to have been one-year issues. The "An Exhibit Card" at the bottom was exclusive to new designs in 1949 and Paige is not on the 1950 or 1951 checklists.

[Harliduck]

From someone who considered starting to collect them, but ultimately chose not too...

I love the pictures, love the B&W...and the size doesn't bother me at all. I put a set of 1953-55 Dormands together. That set was a stretch, but it did have clear boundaries. They were numbered, had a clear date range, and a very few easy to get variations that were clearly defined. When considering to next move to exhibits...the date range was too wide, they are not numbered (blank backed), WAY too many variations to chase...without jumping in it felt like herding cats from the onset. I moved on. Just my thoughts.

I would however like to, and will, own a few of the HOFer's one day. They are beautiful. Just didn't appeal to me as a "set" collector.

[tobychin]

I have fond memories of the exhibits at the county fair. I discovered them in 1958 around the same time I discovered topps cards. I have always loved them.

[oldjudge]

I think Exhibits are the ultimate autograph cards--big enough so the signature can also be big. The Satchel Paige in REA shows that prices are inching up, albeit at a slow pace. I much prefer a signed exhibit to a signed Topps issue.