[bornagaincollector]

Would this be considered a Variation?

[HawkHOF]

Would this be considered a Variation?

Tough call here. This is a low ink type of misprint. I wouldn't consider it a variation, tho some might. The blackless, blueless and redless cards are the same type of misprint, yet I have seen them called variatons (and probably called them that myself). It is a good, pronounced example of that type of misprint I will say. If it were a Cub, I would certainly want it in my collection.

[onionring9]

Would this be considered a Variation?

I honestly say no to these just because all you have to do is put a card in the sun for a day and you will have the same effect. The foil-less or wrong color variations were actual errors on the companies production line, not just an ink cartridge running low. The biggest problem about going the discolored route is that you can find a discolored variation of probably every card that exists. I'm personally going to stick to factory errors/variations and stay away from 'faded' variations.

This was why I brought up the "Bold" Donruss card earlier. I'm not considering it a variation unless it actually is more than just one of the first cards printed with a new cartridge.

[Thrill 22]

I also think the front page needs a FAQ. Any suggestions for it? Anything that you'd specifically like to see in it?

I personally think this thread should be renamed, with "Error &" removed, as it's primarily focused on variations, as opposed to errors. I also think you should make that point in the FAQ. I'm not saying that errors are unimportant, but they probably deserve their own thread, so one doesn't confuse the other. I'd say it's a variation if it can be seen in many or most cards in a set, and an error if it's only found in one or a handful. Anyone agree? Disagree?

I also think it's not a bad idea to include the UD gold holograms. Yeah, they're relatively well-known, but not everyone is aware of them. Same for the Donruss border variations. (FYI, I firmly believe that not ALL 1988 Donruss cards have border variations. I busted a sealed set about a year ago, and only the Will Clark DK was different than the stack of duplicates I had at home. Now, it's possible I had 15 factory singles and no wax, but that's highly unlikely.)

Oh, one more point on the variation v. error issue. I consider a variation to be intentional, as opposed to, well, an error (most of the time, anyway). The *, ** and INC.,INC are examples. Sure, they're different, but I'm sure there was a good reason for that, and someone at Topps or Donruss could tell us why they made the distinction. (The *denotes* and *denotes aren't the same, but affect so many cards that it makes sense to call it an error, at least in my book.)

Ramble off.

[toadfan106]

FYI, I firmly believe that not ALL 1988 Donruss cards have border variations. I busted a sealed set about a year ago, and only the Will Clark DK was different than the stack of duplicates I had at home. Now, it's possible I had 15 factory singles and no wax, but that's highly unlikely.)

I was starting to wonder about the border variations in 1988 Donruss and where they were available from. I was always under the assumption that all of the cards had a different border configuration from packs and factory sets. I busted tons of wax, cello and racks over the years (who didn't) as well as acquiring a bunch of them from a friend and I could never figure out why some of the cards had border variations and some didn't. I just chalked it up to somehow getting some factory set cards from some source mixed in. I bought a factory set about a year ago, broke it down just to make sure and still had some cards without border variations. (This is before I was aware of the back variations) I compared a few of the factory set cards to the Cubs team set I have in sealed cello packs and they have the same borders. Is it possible that not all of the cards have a border variation but do have differences in printing on the back? I think my head is going to explode with all these new variations to go look for.

[HawkHOF]

FYI, I firmly believe that not ALL 1988 Donruss cards have border variations. I busted a sealed set about a year ago, and only the Will Clark DK was different than the stack of duplicates I had at home. Now, it's possible I had 15 factory singles and no wax, but that's highly unlikely.)

Is it possible that not all of the cards have a border variation but do have differences in printing on the back? I think my head is going to explode with all these new variations to go look for.

I believe that to be the case (not all having border variations) as it is also my experience with the 1988 Factory Donruss sets.

[bondshof]

Does anyone have a factory set of the 89 Donruss, to tell us what variation runs in them and if they are consistent, *denotes or *denotes* or Inc. or Inc , you would think they would be consistent with *denotes & Inc. the corrected versions??

[011873]

Maybe I passed over it, but I dont recall anyone listing any 1991 Topps "40th Anniversary" logo variations.

On the back of all 1991 Topps cards, theres a large 40th anniversary logo ghosted behind the stats.


I have some where the logo is BOLD red (not ghosted pink). Its very obvious.

[011873]

Theres also a 2002 Prospect Premieres variation involving Tigers Matt Pender.

Card can be found with a black player (Granderson) or white player (Pender).

The corrected version also comes with refractor foil and UD logo.

[jacksoncoupage]

Maybe I passed over it, but I dont recall anyone listing any 1991 Topps "40th Anniversary" logo variations.

On the back of all 1991 Topps cards, theres a large 40th anniversary logo ghosted behind the stats.


I have some where the logo is BOLD red (not ghosted pink). Its very obvious.

These have already been listed on the first page as 1991 Topps A*/B*. They do not affect all 1991 Topps, just the cards that come on A* or B* sheets. I recently found another type of these that has the "bio" area bold red as well. These seem to be much scarcer.