 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1
06-09-2009, 10:05 PM
|
||||
|
||||
What's the market like for these guys (Topps negatives from ToppsVault)
I was watching a few of these, and was wondering how popular Topps negatives are and especially Topps final negatives, like this:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=370210493627 
|
|
#2
06-09-2009, 10:50 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
What's the market like for these guys (Topps negatives from ToppsVault)
Star goes for big bucks.
Toppsvault really knows how to make money!!!
|
|
#3
06-09-2009, 11:00 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Do any of you know what these things actually look like? They are supposed to be color negatives, which should look really horrible. The scans in all the listings look like final photos, not negatives, but there's a note in the listings that they have all been enhanced to show off the image.
|
|
#4
06-10-2009, 07:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Paul:
Although I don't own any, my guess is that they are not very attractive and I think the prices will ultimately come down significantly with the large volume appearing on e-bay recently. At one time, I owned a vintage negative of a Josh Gibson Winter League photo and it was so difficult to present when it came time for me to sell it that it went for a relative bargain price and that's a c1940 Josh Gibson which I don't think you can even compare to 1960's, 1970's & 1980's Topps negatives. Just my opinion...........
|
|
#5
06-10-2009, 03:53 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
They're actually positives
For the most part, the pieces that are advertised as "color negatives" are actually positive transparencies (like slides). I have bought a few Milw. Braves and the years have not been kind to the color balance on many of these historic pieces, especially those from the late 1950s and very early 1960s.
You'd be surprised, however, how fast and how well a single-click color correction can be made in a program like Photoshop after scanning the positive.
__________________
My (usually) vintage baseball/football card blog: http://boblemke.blogspot.com Link to my custom cards gallery: http://tinyurl.com/customcards
|
|
#6
06-10-2009, 05:00 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I bought one and was a victim of bait and switch. A nice, bright transparency on Ebay (from Topps Vault) was a dark mess when I got it and was also a different pose than the one I bought. I complained but the only option they gave was said to send it back as they could not send the correct one. I would have been out shipping and some other BS cost so I kept it but they really pissed me off.
|
|
#7
07-05-2009, 07:29 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
1958 Topps Vault Mantle/Aaron World Series Batting Foes.
I'm very pleased with mine. And even looks great in hand. Especially along side a '58 card...
1958TOPPSvaultnegative.jpg1958mantleaaron.jpg Last edited by thekingofclout; 07-05-2009 at 07:32 AM.
|
|
#8
07-06-2009, 01:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
If the image is negative it's called a negative. If the image is positive, it's called a transparency. Other than the positive/negative part, they are the same thing used for the same purpose. Some professional photographers prefer making photos from negatives, some prefer making photos from transparencies. It's a matter of personal taste.
The reason Topps calls the transparencies negatives in the titles is because they know most people haven't heard of photographic transparencies but know what are negatives. Notice in the description Topps calls them transparencies. As a collector, I prefer transparencies because the positive images are better for looking at. Negatives might be neat as artifacts, but don't make great viewing. Last edited by drc; 07-06-2009 at 02:05 AM.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
