D-Lite
New member
Get those scans posted!That's because I'm being totally lazy and haven't listed my case worth yet. Hit some nice ones including a Mike Tyson with full on face tattoo.
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
Get those scans posted!That's because I'm being totally lazy and haven't listed my case worth yet. Hit some nice ones including a Mike Tyson with full on face tattoo.
IMO about 1/3 of these look amazing but about 2/3 look so amateurish. This has been true of every baseball sketch card product ever as far as I know (this is probably the best ever honestly, most products are more like 1/10 decent art). I don't think the problem is that good artists are hard to come by, or hard to afford -- I just think that the majority of card producers and card collectors have a really bad eye for art. I'm not talking about DaVinci here, just sketches where the facial proportions are not off and the players don't look like distorted bloated awkwardly asymmetrical versions of themselves.
At least nothing here is Tempy Moore level sad. And the good ones truly are real 1/1s and deserve lots of attention and a high price tag. Good idea for a product but please, get a real art director in charge of the next round.
Some people get so stuck on realism that they can't see the art in some of these.
Wasn't saying they should all be in a photorealistic style. In fact, a lot that I consider good ones from this set are not.
Still, I maintain that only a small percentage of the cards in all styles are beyond an amateur level.
The same can be said about the design and typography on many card sets. The custom cards made here by users with intermediate level Photoshop skills compare to virtually any pro release. So many sets (especially those going for a "vintage" look) just throw pre-packaged Photoshop filters on their photos and call it a day. There's hardly a set issued that couldn't be done by a freshman level design student.
I love baseball... and I love art... but the vast majority of baseball related art is just really bad. Honestly though this is part of its charm -- ie the 80s Diamond Kings (the first mainstream "artsy" baseball cards) are really pretty awful aesthetically but have a great kitschy appeal.
Of course this is all subjective... but I think it's safe to say that most card collectors are not very sophisticated aesthetes. And this is no judgment, I would rather hang out with baseball fans than art critics any day.
I believe I had 6 Pangan and 5 Jason Hughes out of my 18. Definitely the "simpler" of the sketches, but I do think some of them are nice from those artists. Some not so much.I don't know if I just got unlucky or what, but out of my 18 cards, about 7 of them were Jay Pangan with only 2 more being from one artist and the rest mixed around. If my case was indicative, that might explain why Jay didn't bother with logos as he was too busy cranking out as many as possible. It's a shame as the logos really do help the cards.
BG'll tell ya...Simple=Cheap.I believe I had 6 Pangan and 5 Jason Hughes out of my 18. Definitely the "simpler" of the sketches, but I do think some of them are nice from those artists. Some not so much.
Luckily for me you pulled at least 1 Jim Kyle. Got it today, thanks again! My new fav card...
View attachment 24079