![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Will check what I have and get back tomorrow.
Brian |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I don't know how "big of a deal" this appears...I am an advanced type collector with a bunch of e90-1's...but don't see this as anything groundbreaking. Certainly not as groundbreaking as the ultra rare e94 single/double quotation variation on its backside?
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I would like to see one up close.... but my first guess is that this is nothing more than a print defect and not a purposeful variation.
__________________
Joe D. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Joe, wouldnt a Print defect be random? meaning it could happen to ANY card in the set?
how about this.....for a specific print run of the E90-1 series (which we know there are several), they used an older (or different) printing plate to make the reverse...the resulting cards ALL looked a bit different than the first few series backs...is this a print defect? dont think so Peter, do you have any of these backs? Last edited by ScottFandango; 02-18-2010 at 09:07 AM. Reason: spelling |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
no, a print defect wouldn't have to be random. print spots are print defects - - and they pretty much stick to the same spot on the same card(s). I'm not saying this is a print spot at all.... just giving an example of how a print defect is not random. most certainly during the printing process you can have a specific problem (a defect) on a specific area of the sheet (or on the whole sheet) / that eventually gets attended to. on to your point about using different plates. I would suspect MOST EVERY pre-war card went on press with different plates (edit: meaning more than one press run for each card). A printing plate only has so much usefulness in it. One could only guess how many different plates (of the same card) were used for the e90-1, or the T206 or for say Topps cards. A different press run / and a different physical plate does not make it a purposeful variation. A purposeful variation would come in the pre-press if someone change the artwork that was used for the plates. Basically what I am saying from the scan (not seeing it in person) - it looks nothing more than a print defect and does not look like an artwork change. I could be wrong. I've been wrong before and will be wrong many many times again.
__________________
Joe D. Last edited by bijoem; 02-18-2010 at 09:30 AM. Reason: clarification |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
scott...i haven't checked yet...i will try to when i get home today.
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
is the White Letter Mantle a print defect or a variation?
its both! many times a Print defect can be considered a variation, especially when they only appear on certain cards.... that is they key here, as Bob suggested....if ANY CARD had the shaded back, it means nothing....when only a few have it (predictably) then, there is something substantial..... |
![]() |
Tags |
e90-1 variation |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
!st known 1940 Play Ball hi# Superman ad back | Archive | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 4 | 09-27-2008 01:56 PM |
How many T207s make a set ??? variations ??? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 18 | 05-09-2007 12:26 PM |
WANTED: 1954 Bowman Back Variations | Archive | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 12-08-2006 02:07 PM |
Looking for 1933 WWG back variations | Archive | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 03-12-2006 12:08 PM |
Looking for W514's - Nice examples & Back Variations | Archive | Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T | 0 | 01-03-2006 12:17 PM |