![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Yes I will post my graded Fro joys & Ruth candy cards too.
I have a question. It was stated that the "chase" card in the Ruth candy card set was card #6. Now in the auction write up in one of your posts it states the chase card is #3. What is your experience with that? Have you seen the #3 card more or is the #6 card more rare? What would be your guess on which card is the chase card for this set. I get back to you with the pics. Thanks. Howard |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
I don't know. I think FKW was saying the #6 card, where he's signing the ball. Forgot about these cropped ones. I'd guess that because these cards are pictured together as a set, based on that and the cropped images, fake: ![]() |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Greg,
Here are the photos of my Fro Joy card. It was the "first graded" by GAI and it passes the black light test and the black box corners on the back are closed. Its hard to photograph because of that stupid holder they put them in. If it was not graded so high and being the 1st graded, I'd bust that puppy outta there. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Here is card #5 in the Ruth candy card set. It was also graded by GAI and the 1st graded. It also passes the black light test. It has the San Francisco ad back.
Last edited by HBroll; 05-13-2012 at 04:44 PM. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Lastly this is card #1 from the Ruth candy card set. Again it was 1st graded by GAI and it passes the black light test. This one is blank backed.
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Oh good, the San Fran cards can be good. Those are obviously quality images and both are not cropped at all.
Unless someone can present a cropped Ruth Candy card that is photo engraved on 20's Fro Joy type paper and does not fluoresce under the black light, we have our culprit. Ever notice the ones that pop up on ebay with the two tone, manufactured aging on the back have cropped images, like the one on ebay now? Half brown and half dark brown...there you go. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Yeah, I noticed that too. You can tell it was artificially aged. We also proved that Ruth candy cards with the small numbers CAN be real. At least the better quality ones. I think some blank back cards are real also. My card #6 proved both points. Thanks for all your help Greg. I am glad we figured it out.
Last edited by HBroll; 05-13-2012 at 05:53 PM. |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
1928 George Ruth Candy Cards (Set of 6) | Archive | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 3 | 10-13-2008 07:08 PM |
1928 George Ruth Candy: Babe Ruth GAI 4 For Trade | Archive | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 2 | 03-31-2006 02:46 PM |
WANTED: E90-1 George Davis and 1928 Star Player Candy cards | Archive | Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T | 3 | 02-27-2006 01:16 PM |
1928 George Ruth Candy blank backs? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 1 | 09-18-2005 04:40 PM |
1928 George H. Ruth Candy Co. Cards | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 7 | 04-22-2003 01:44 PM |