1953 Bowman Color and B&W Card Backs

[jingram058]

Have seen discussion here at net54 and other forums about the many card back variations with Topps in the 1950s and 60s. I just finished a set of Bowman color raw, and I notice some of the backs of these cards are lighter in color, slightly more reddish, and some are darker and slightly more brownish gray across the entire set of 160. Looking closely with my 10x loupe, I see it is the card stock itself. I also see it in listings on eBay and other auction sites, but can't say for certain in online images where there are any number of brightness/darkness/contrast possibilities. I believe Bowman made their cards in layers like this: with the front applied or glued somehow to the card stock, and the back printed directly to the card stock, and then the sheets were trimmed. Several questions come to mind. Is this variance in card stock color common in this color set, or perhaps all Bowman cards, similar to Topps? Is it due to how these cards were handled and saved over the decades, and they lightened or darkened due to sunlight, heat, cold, humidity or lack thereof, or what have you? There is no question about authenticity here, I'm not talking about that or bringing it up; the cards are all real, no doubt about it.

[Tere1071]

I don't have a scientific explanation, but I've noticed that "regular" colored backs tend to be a light tan. I've seen a handful that had very light backs that weren't reprints, but I don't think Bowman used a lighter stock of cardboard for the reverse side of the card.

The difference in color has to do with the darkening or toning of the paper. Much of this could be attributed to exposure to the light. On some Bowmans you'll see the edges where there are streaks of the tan color before it's overtaken by the darker shade. You can also notice toning on the fronts of the card where the borders turn grayish in some cases. In my set, I have a number of cards where the reverse is darker and a handful where the white border on the front has dimmed. That also happens to the 51 and 52 Bowmans where some of the borders have darkened over time.

I've hinted at this, but those of us who have assembled 53 Bowman sets should compare notes and see what we've discovered. I'm interested in finding out about some of the idiosyncrasies in the production run and we have members that have collected this set over many years who have more knowledge than those of us who recently began to assemble it in earnest.

[jingram058]

Thanks, Phil, for answering my question. Thanks for the kind words all along, too.

I can't get anywhere asking about 1953 Bowman, it seems, with anyone other than a select few here on this forum. I did initially when I began back in October. I hope that implies that very few of us have collected them and there is just nothing more to say, and not something that I have either said or not said.

Well, it is a beautiful set of baseball cards, and I now know a lot more about ballplayers in 1953.

[Tere1071]

What I found interesting after returning to the set after having sold my handful in 1980 was how many cards now sell as stars as opposed to way back when- Shantz and Pierce immediately come to mind. I've also learned that certain cards are very difficult to find centered and command a premium when they become available. That wasn't really a concern some 30-40 years ago.

With prices rising I'll have to leave the set alone and live with what I have soon unless I sell the rest of my Topps Heritage sets. The cards I need aren't coming up for sale on this forum, which leaves eBay. I know that some eBay sellers are on this forum, hopefully, I can get a response.

[ALR-bishop]

I started building Bowman sets after Topps sets. Started on them because the 53 Bowman Musial was his favorite card for me. Having done the colored set, I had to do the B&W set as well. In looking at it again after this thread I have only one variation, Bevans card 43, which can be found with a DOB of 1930 or 1950. There are other incorrect and uncorrected bio facts in the B&W set, including the DOB on Casey Stengel's card. Interesting, to me anyway, that Bowman felt the need to correct the Bevan card ( although it was a pretty large error)

Bevan did not appear on a Topps card until 1961, and it was a rookie award card. Weird

[G1911]

I too have noticed; there appears to be a very light color stock variant, I’ve been calling them white backs vs. cream in my notes. The very light backs are much tougher than the normal cream. I’m not sure if it runs through every series (I still am not sure what the series even are, I suspect 5 series of 32 but nobody seems positive or has brought direct evidence), I will have to go through my set. I do not believe it to be toning but am happy to be shown wrong.

Bowman used different stocks in 1952 1-72 as well, and of course the 1949 1-3, 5-73 series’.