Let's see your color oddities!

[Vintagecatcher]

Can't help but pick up these color oddities when I see them!

Here are my four favorites: T206 Schlei (Portrait), E102 Kleinow, B18 Otto Miller (Blue Infield), and E92 Harry Bemis.

I have included the "normal" examples for comparison.

Patrick

[DeanH3]

A favorite of mine.

[shammus]

Oh man oh man oh man. Where do I even begin with this....

I've been hunting these sort of oddities down for a couple decades now. If you saw my post in the recent REA pickup thread, you might recall me saying that discovering a new color variation / oddity is my absolute favorite part of the hobby.

I suppose I'll start with "Color vs. B&W" variations. As in, here are cards that should have color but instead turned up B&W....

m116mitchell-001.jpg

lfFYPFCR3B.jpg

lfRB8G0O9I.jpg

[shammus]

And for good measure, here's a w572 that SHOULD be black and white but actually somehow got a good dose of red....

w572red.jpg

Will try to dig out some more favorites later on today....

[jsfriedm]

Salmon-colored T205 Speaker:

[brianp-beme]

Here is an 1910 Odbakdity. I like to call it my Color Missing Persons.

Brian (his one white collar also really causes me confusion)

[Jay Wolt]

Here's 8 diff 1955 Armour coins Reynolds

[riggs336]

This is the only one I've seen that wasn't green.

[brianp-beme]

Here are some additional coloddities that were more resistant to having a new word coined for them. Featuring E90-1, T202 end panels, and the ever popular T206 red/orange dynamic duo.

Brian

[bnorth]

For many years the weird colored cards were my favorite. Then I learned that 99.99% of cards that are missing yellow or red, the area that should be green is now blue, and the cards that should be red but are now orange are faded.

After I figured out how to tell the difference between faded and a real rare color variation my huge collection of oddballs turned into very few real non faded weird color variations.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by bnorth

For many years the weird colored cards were my favorite. Then I learned that 99.99% of cards that are missing yellow or red, the area that should be green is now blue, and the cards that should be red but are now orange are faded.

After I figured out how to tell the difference between faded and a real rare color variation my huge collection of oddballs turned into very few real non faded weird color variations.

Same boat. The vast majority did not leave the factory that way. Glue or sun created most of these. I have very few I think stand a legitimate chance of being legitimate.

Orange instead of red (and the others) should sell for less, not more. It’s damage.

[obcmac]

Love this one...

[DeanH3]

Originally Posted by G1911

Same boat. The vast majority did not leave the factory that way. Glue or sun created most of these. I have very few I think stand a legitimate chance of being legitimate.

Orange instead of red (and the others) should sell for less, not more. It’s damage.

I have had these same thoughts as well. But then I wonder, why is the color fade so even across the entire card? Wouldn't the color fade be "blotchy" instead of even if it were due to glue or a foreign substance on the back?

And with the sun faded cards I've seen, all of the colors are affected. Yes, some more than others, but the entire card is noticeably faded.

Another thought. If these oddities where due to glue, wouldn't we see more copies since so many cards from this area were stored in albums?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by DeanH3

I have had these same thoughts as well. But then I wonder, why is the color fade so even across the entire card? Wouldn't the color fade be "blotchy" instead of even if it were due to glue or a foreign substance on the back?

And with the sun faded cards I've seen, all of the colors are affected. Yes, some more than others, but the entire card is noticeably faded.

Many of these cards had contact with glues and pastes along most or all of their backside. Some also cast an effect wider than the initial contact point, as I’ve seen in T cards I’ve yanked out of scrapbooks myself. There’s a reason we see the same effects recurring across issues that don’t make sense from a printing perspective.

There are two kinds of light fade we see, one being the extreme sun damage that you see on the spine of a book that’s been a shelf facing the sun for 40 years. Those cards are faded everywhere. Red ink is also extremely susceptible to fading from light, and takes effect long before any other color is affected. This thread from a couple months ago has cards with the telltale signs that this is exactly what happened shown and broken down: https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=328644

I love misprints and freaks and would love to believe. But the evidence all tells me these are not real. Debunking my own ‘misprints’ ain’t in my interest, but these really should not be bought and sold as if they are real when they aren’t.

There are also nefarious ways to do this or speed up the process, some of which work quite reliably and a person with no background in chemicals and such can do.

90%+ of T and E cards sold as misprints did not leave the factory that way.

[brianp-beme]

Here are scans of the T206 orange Criger card I showed on a previous post.

Back damage, yes. Actual color variation, probably no. Still cool, yes!

Brian

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by G1911

Many of these cards had contact with glues and pastes along most or all of their backside. Some also cast an effect wider than the initial contact point, as I’ve seen in T cards I’ve yanked out of scrapbooks myself. There’s a reason we see the same effects recurring across issues that don’t make sense from a printing perspective.

There are two kinds of light fade we see, one being the extreme sun damage that you see on the spine of a book that’s been a shelf facing the sun for 40 years. Those cards are faded everywhere. Red ink is also extremely susceptible to fading from light, and takes effect long before any other color is affected. This thread from a couple months ago has cards with the telltale signs that this is exactly what happened shown and broken down: https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=328644

I love misprints and freaks and would love to believe. But the evidence all tells me these are not real. Debunking my own ‘misprints’ ain’t in my interest, but these really should not be bought and sold as if they are real when they aren’t.

There are also nefarious ways to do this or speed up the process, some of which work quite reliably and a person with no background in chemicals and such can do.

90%+ of T and E cards sold as misprints did not leave the factory that way.

Here is the infamous 58 Topps Aaron card. It is amazing how many of these have sold over they years as rare error cards for big money. It is also amazing how many can be traced back to the same seller.
https://net54baseball.com/showthread...ght=blue+aaron

[G1911]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Here is the infamous 58 Topps Aaron card. It is amazing how many of these have sold over they years as rare error cards for big money. It is also amazing how many can be traced back to the same seller.
https://net54baseball.com/showthread...ght=blue+aaron

It's much cheaper to buy a '58 Aaron that's green, and make it blue at home yourself.

Vintage Topps green to blue and tobacco red to orange are the biggest red flags that you are not looking at an actual misprint. I still think they look cool, and when I get one that I do not believe to be the work of a doctor but to have happened naturally, I slot it into my set as an extra bonus card.