What can you get at a card show for 75 cents. Quite a lot actually if you're willing to sort through a bunch of cards. At one table a guy had a couple of boxes of cards for a dollar. He was offering 25 for $20. I pulled out 26 which he let me have for just $20. That works out to about 75 cents a card.
1995 Topps Traded Power Booster #8 Jeff Bagwell
"At The Break" was a subset in 1995 Topps Traded. Topps took this subset, printed them on thicker card stock, added some refractive foil on the front and included them as an insert called "Power Boosters".
2007 Artifacts Antiquity Artifacts Paul Konerko
A serial-numbered card with a striped jersey relic. Not bad for $0.75 when I didn't have any of these. 2007 Artifacts was a nice set. I'm not sure why this is called "Antiquity", Konerko wasn't all that old.
2009 UD A Piece of History Rookie Autographs Violet #111 Phil Coke
On the other hand, 2009 A Piece of History wasn't a great set, but I'll put out $0.75 for any autograph from any set from which I don't have a card. Even if it's only Phil Coke. And a sticker auto. This card is currently available on eBay for between $7 and $8, so good deal.
2013 Topps Silver Slate Blue Sparkle #360 Khristopher Davis
When I saw this in the box I scratched my head wondering what it was. tradingcarddb.com calls it a wrapper redemption.
2014 Bowman Chrome Dualing Die Cut Refractors Oscar Taveras/Gregory Polanco
A crazy die-cut card of the late, could-have-been great Oscar Taveras.
2014 Bowman Chrome Fire Die Cut Mark Appel
I never saw any 2014 Bowman Chrome in retail so these are a surprise to me. This is supposed to look like a burned card with, I guess, the player rising from the ashes?
2014 Topps Triple Threads #100 Ken Griffey
High-end cards like Topps Triple Threads don't make it to my neighbor Target so this is a good find for me.
2015 Bowman Chrome Series Next Die Cuts George Springer
Come to think of it, I never saw any 2015 Bowman Chrome either, so more surprises. There are a lot of cuts on this card making it difficult to scan straight. The scan looks almost as good as the actual card.
2015 Bowman Chrome Prospects Profiles Minis #15 Mark Appel
That Springer card had some intricate cuts but here they just lopped off the sides.
2015 Topps Chrome Blue Refractors #40 Jon Singleton
A nice refractor parallel I didn't have.
2015 Topps Chrome Sepia Refractors #23 Stephen Strasburg
I generally like Topps Chrome and their crazy parallels but I'm not sure that sepia was a good choice.
2015 Topps Chrome Pink Refractors #151 Jose Altuve
Although I'm not sure that the color pink belongs anywhere near a baseball card but it sure looks better than that sepia card.
2015 Topps Triple Threads Gold #61 Craig Biggio
Not only a Topps Triple Threads card, but a gold parallel, numbered to 99 of Craig Biggio!
Showing posts with label biggio. Show all posts
Showing posts with label biggio. Show all posts
Thursday, February 18, 2016
Friday, September 18, 2015
The 1990s Baseball Cards Face-Off - First Seed
Here's where we left off last week.
We've had head-to-head competition among 16 sets from the 1990s and are left with 8 sets to go forward in the 1st Quartile of the Babe Ruth Division. Since we'll be dealing with sets we've already I was going to run the table here and see who is the first seed of the final 16 cards in the overall competition. But this is a lot of cards to look at so we'll get to the Black level with a post next week. I can use that opportunity to explain the competition level from Black on forward.
Red Level head-to-head
1998 E-X-2001 vs. 1993 Flair
1998 E-X 2001 Craig Biggio #34
1993 Flair Willie McGee #145
Both these sets were great. Nice crisp graphics on the E-X 2001. A creamy smooth finish to the Flair. Gold foil, but not to much on the front and back of both cards. I think 1998 E-X 2001 could have beaten many cards and risen hight but it had the misfortune to come against 1993 Flair early on. In the head-to-head I'm giving the nod to Flair because ultimately plastic cards are a dead end design choice. There were a few plastic sets in the 1990s, but not much today. I imagine they were too costly to produce.
Results - 1993 Flair squeaks by.
1995 Ultra vs. 1996 Studio
1995 Ultra Jim Thome #42
1996 Studio Juan Gonzalez #105
Both cards feature full bleed printing, multiple photographs, a little foil, and great photography. I like the front of the 1995 Ultra but the back, with the funny shaded photo leaves me a little cold. The smaller color inset photo looks out of place.
The results: 1996 Studio by a back.
1991 Upper Deck vs. 1994 Collector's Choice
1991 Upper Deck Todd Zeile #164
1994 Collector's Choice Bret Saberhagen #250
What a difference a few years makes. In 1991, Upper Deck released another variation in it's 1989 set, but it was still way ahead of it's competitors that year. 1994's main problem is that it look's just like 1993 Upper Deck, with pin-stripes. Both cards feature good designs, but in 1991 Upper Deck's case, the design was still state-of-the-art. 1994 Collector's Choice was a copy of a great set.
Result: 1991 Upper Deck.
1994 Topps vs. 1996 Circa
1994 Topps Ivan Rodriguez #165
1996 Circa Curt Schilling #189
1994 Topps was Topps first glossy set and they did a good job. Good photography with a colorful title block with a good sized color photo on the back with a colorful stats/bio block. I'm afraid that 1996 Circa is just a mess. It only got to this level because it was up against 1994 SP, a card design I really dislike.
The Result: 1994 Topps
1993 Flair, 1996 Studio, 1991 Upper Deck and 1994 Topps survive the Red level.
Labels:
1990s Face-Off,
astros,
baseball cards,
biggio,
phillies,
studio,
topps,
ultra,
upper deck
Monday, April 13, 2015
Capewood's Theory of Baseball Card Evolution
Over the past week, I've reviewed how Bowman, Donruss and Fleer evolved in the 1990s. I'll be getting to Score, Topps and Upper Deck next. Before that however, I want to present my theory of baseball card evolution. A few disclaimers and caveats first.
First, there are a lot of card blogs out there and there have been a lot of posts since I started card blogging in 2008. I haven't read them all. If someone else has already espoused on this theme, I apologize in advance.
Second, we've seen a lot of card designs over the years. There are some things I don't consider to be evolutionary such as: holographic cards, cards with texture (think 1999 Metal), die cut cards, odd-sized cards, cards that open like a book, foil board or dufex printing, etc. I consider these to be gimmicks.
Third, I don't consider cards printed on something other than cardboard, such as plastic, cloth, metal, or wood to be evolutionary. They might be nice, but they're gimmicks as well.
Fourth, I'm not making any value judgements here. If I say a card is higher up the evolutionary scale than another, I'm not saying it is better. There are a lot of design decisions that go into a card. The technical level of the card may not even be the most important.
Stage 1
The first baseball cards were rectangle shaped pieces of cardboard with a player photo on the front and some information about the player on the back. Eventually we got to the current 'standard' size and 'standard' layout with a player photo on the front and player stats on the back. Card stock was generally grey or brown (occasionally white). The card borders (and at this stage, the cards always have borders) could be white, or some other color, or pattern. Pick any card from between 1951 and 1980.
Stage 2
White card stock. When Donruss and Fleer successfully fought the Topps monopoly in 1981, they both took this step, going to white card stock. This stage doesn't have much else to distinguish from Stage 1. Again, border colors may be white or colored. The backs have stats and little more, although some Fleer cards from this era have tiny photos on the back. Think of any Donruss or Fleer card from 1981 through 1992 or so.
Stage 3
Take your Stage 2 card and add a color photo to the back. This is how both Score (in 1988) and Upper Deck (1989) started. Other brands would eventually follow.
Stage 4
Take your Stage 3 card and add gloss to it. There was nothing new about glossy baseball cards. All three main brands in the 1980s had produced either parallel sets (think Topps Tiffany), or specialty sets with gloss. Glossy main stream sets began appearing in the early 1990s. I think 1991 Stadium Club was the first main stream set with gloss but this set started several more stages up the evolutionary ladder. Of the 6 sets I'm tracking, Bowman was the first with gloss, front and back, in 1992.
Stage 5
Now add some foil embossing to the front. Again, Stadium Club was doing this in 1991. Topps started printing gold foil parallel sets in 1992 but by 1995, foil was an integral part of nearly every card design.
Stage 6
The next stage is full bleed printing. This is actually a big technological change in how cards are printed. There is a lot less leeway for printing errors, especially off-center cutting, with this technique. It is typical that Stage 5 cards will include the Stage 3 and 4 techniques as well (that is, these cards will be glossy and have foil). Originally, cards printed this way were considered premium cards but eventually, it became the norm (think Upper Deck from 1995 on).
Stage 7
I had originally planed to stop at Stage 6 but decided that there were two more stages in technological evolution. Stage 7 is very high gloss cards like Topps Finest or Topps Chrome. Another early example would be Flair, a Fleer product from the 1990s. This is 1995 Flair.
Stage 8
Autographed cards and cards with relics are so prevalent today, and there are sets where every card is autographed or has a relic, that I decided to include this as the top level of evolution. Autographed cards began appearing as early as 1994 with relic cards appearing in 2000. Below is a 1994 Phillies Ultra Autograph and a 2000 SP Top Prospects Game Used Bat.
By the discussion above, you might think that I don't believe that there's been any real technological evolution in baseball cards since 2000. That is what I think. There has been some movement toward digital cards, but I'm sorry, a baseball card that you can't actually hold in your hand isn't really a baseball card.
To finish, here is the most technologically evolved card I own. A 2003 Topps Chrome Refractor Record Breakers Relics card.
First, there are a lot of card blogs out there and there have been a lot of posts since I started card blogging in 2008. I haven't read them all. If someone else has already espoused on this theme, I apologize in advance.
Second, we've seen a lot of card designs over the years. There are some things I don't consider to be evolutionary such as: holographic cards, cards with texture (think 1999 Metal), die cut cards, odd-sized cards, cards that open like a book, foil board or dufex printing, etc. I consider these to be gimmicks.
Third, I don't consider cards printed on something other than cardboard, such as plastic, cloth, metal, or wood to be evolutionary. They might be nice, but they're gimmicks as well.
Fourth, I'm not making any value judgements here. If I say a card is higher up the evolutionary scale than another, I'm not saying it is better. There are a lot of design decisions that go into a card. The technical level of the card may not even be the most important.
Stage 1
The first baseball cards were rectangle shaped pieces of cardboard with a player photo on the front and some information about the player on the back. Eventually we got to the current 'standard' size and 'standard' layout with a player photo on the front and player stats on the back. Card stock was generally grey or brown (occasionally white). The card borders (and at this stage, the cards always have borders) could be white, or some other color, or pattern. Pick any card from between 1951 and 1980.
Stage 2
White card stock. When Donruss and Fleer successfully fought the Topps monopoly in 1981, they both took this step, going to white card stock. This stage doesn't have much else to distinguish from Stage 1. Again, border colors may be white or colored. The backs have stats and little more, although some Fleer cards from this era have tiny photos on the back. Think of any Donruss or Fleer card from 1981 through 1992 or so.
Stage 3
Take your Stage 2 card and add a color photo to the back. This is how both Score (in 1988) and Upper Deck (1989) started. Other brands would eventually follow.
Stage 4
Take your Stage 3 card and add gloss to it. There was nothing new about glossy baseball cards. All three main brands in the 1980s had produced either parallel sets (think Topps Tiffany), or specialty sets with gloss. Glossy main stream sets began appearing in the early 1990s. I think 1991 Stadium Club was the first main stream set with gloss but this set started several more stages up the evolutionary ladder. Of the 6 sets I'm tracking, Bowman was the first with gloss, front and back, in 1992.
Stage 5
Now add some foil embossing to the front. Again, Stadium Club was doing this in 1991. Topps started printing gold foil parallel sets in 1992 but by 1995, foil was an integral part of nearly every card design.
Stage 6
The next stage is full bleed printing. This is actually a big technological change in how cards are printed. There is a lot less leeway for printing errors, especially off-center cutting, with this technique. It is typical that Stage 5 cards will include the Stage 3 and 4 techniques as well (that is, these cards will be glossy and have foil). Originally, cards printed this way were considered premium cards but eventually, it became the norm (think Upper Deck from 1995 on).
Stage 7
I had originally planed to stop at Stage 6 but decided that there were two more stages in technological evolution. Stage 7 is very high gloss cards like Topps Finest or Topps Chrome. Another early example would be Flair, a Fleer product from the 1990s. This is 1995 Flair.
Stage 8
Autographed cards and cards with relics are so prevalent today, and there are sets where every card is autographed or has a relic, that I decided to include this as the top level of evolution. Autographed cards began appearing as early as 1994 with relic cards appearing in 2000. Below is a 1994 Phillies Ultra Autograph and a 2000 SP Top Prospects Game Used Bat.
By the discussion above, you might think that I don't believe that there's been any real technological evolution in baseball cards since 2000. That is what I think. There has been some movement toward digital cards, but I'm sorry, a baseball card that you can't actually hold in your hand isn't really a baseball card.
To finish, here is the most technologically evolved card I own. A 2003 Topps Chrome Refractor Record Breakers Relics card.
Labels:
astros,
autographs,
baseball cards,
biggio,
Bo Jackson,
bowman,
daulton,
donruss,
phillies,
relic card,
score,
Stadium Club,
topps
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)