Someone explain to me about blank back proofs

[Yanks2151]

I have been in this hobby for years. I have always added any type of errors I could to my Yankees collection. Wrong backs, wrong name, no name, no foil anything different. One of these flaws I includes blank backs or fronts. Now in the last couple years any blank backs listed are titled "proofs". Is there any truth to this? Are these blank backs in any way a part of the printing process or meant for a promo or is it just a flaw by the companies part? Even Topps Vault sells blank back and lists them as proofs. What's your take on these?

 

[sierra79]

I've always considered them a proof, just like a blank front, color separation proofs, etc. I think they were just printed on one side as a way of testing the printing process before going to full production (but then again I'm not a graphic designer). Whether or not some where slipped into packs, that would be a good question.

As far as the current '1/1' blank backs Topps sells now, I usually stay away from it unless is before they started selling on the secondary market - I think some of their new stuff seems like a gimmick - just as the 'sp variations' are.

 

[RStadlerASU22]

I can say that there def are sheets produced as "proofs" that are one sided. I'd consider a blank back/front a proof type card. But they could also be produced from sheets that were just done incorrectly also and came from scrap, but I'd say Proof fits blank f/b. The items that get described as Proofs, that I'd say more than not aren't, are the "oversized" items. Not that original ones couldn't exist, but most of those are regular sheets cut to whatever size the 3rd party wants or panels etc.

Ryan

 

[DonnieBaseball]

I completely agree. Even though I like buying them for my collection all the oversized proofs are is someone cutting them off of a uncut sheet bigger than a typical card.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Yanks2151]

I completely agree. Even though I like buying them for my collection all the oversized proofs are is someone cutting them off of a uncut sheet bigger than a typical card.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have a small album of these over the years. As far as your comment about the over sized proofs. They are not just cut bigger they are actually bigger. I have examples to show you but not in front of me at the moment.

 

[RStadlerASU22]

I have a small album of these over the years. As far as your comment about the over sized proofs. They are not just cut bigger they are actually bigger. I have examples to show you but not in front of me at the moment.

It all depends, a lot of sheets have dead space/scrap area in between cards. So if the only thing different is the border size leading to a larger card, then I still assume it was a regular sheet cut down that way. If any of the other non-border part of the card changed then that is something different. Post pics when you can.

Ryan

 

[Yanks2151]

It all depends, a lot of sheets have dead space/scrap area in between cards. So if the only thing different is the border size leading to a larger card, then I still assume it was a regular sheet cut down that way. If any of the other non-border part of the card changed then that is something different. Post pics when you can.

Ryan

I guess I do have some in my PB. You can see they are larger and sometimes there is no foil process yet.

 

[Yanks2151]

These are actually larger than the regular version but unfortunately I don't have the reg version next to them in the pic to compare.

 

[RStadlerASU22]

I'll have to look more closely later, but the Stadium ones for sure look like they were cut from sheet. The sheets have full size images on them, then the scrap area, created by tick marks on the sheet, are cut away to create the standard card. I'll see if I can find an uncut sheet photo. Unless O'Neill is larger on the photo you posted. If the details on the card are larger, then that's different.

Ryan

 

[Yanks2151]

I'll have to look more closely later, but the Stadium ones for sure look like they were cut from sheet. The sheets have full size images on them, then the scrap area, created by tick marks on the sheet, are cut away to create the standard card. I'll see if I can find an uncut sheet photo. Unless O'Neill is larger on the photo you posted. If the details on the card are larger, then that's different.

Ryan

I see what you are saying. I will have to dig those out and verify. The ones above without the foil are larger.

 

[RichardMib]

Hello guys

Thanks!

 

[mouschi]

I don't have a pricked calling sheet cuts proofs as the sheets were probably a part of the design process. Some may disagree but that is my thought!

 

[Yanks2151]

I think what I am trying to say is my blank back card collection goes back to at least 1978. Now in 2016 anyone selling a blank back card it seems titles it as a "proof" when forever it was just looked at as an error.

 

[RStadlerASU22]

Here is an example of Stadium Club just as reference.

http://m.ebay.com/itm/1991-TOPPS-ST...LAVINE-RIPKIN-ALOMAR-/271439904425?nav=SEARCH

Look at picture #3 , Ripkens batting glove, then look here at the final card

http://m.ebay.com/itm/1991-ORIOLES-Stadium-Club-430-Cal-Ripken-EX-/310995744773?nav=SEARCH

These types of "proofs" I like though as they include more images vs just more border.

Ryan

 

[Mark70Z]

Blank Back

I believe in the earlier years of Topps for example, i.e. 60's, 70's (maybe even the 50's) blank backs were sometimes inserted in the packs in error. I don't think the intention was to put these unfinished cards into circulation. Also, some got backdoored and/or cut from sheets, or dumpster divers got a hold of them that were unfinished and ultimately got out to collectors. The blank back cards at thetoppsvault currently it seems are produced intentionally to be 1/1's and distributed as such. I know the vintage blanked backed cards there are likely far more than one blank back produced and/or out there...

So, to answer you question, I think you can call them proofs since they are an unfinished card. I don't think you can call the current one's proofs since they are designed to be blank backed; therefore in my view, are finished cards even if they are 1/1's.

 

[Yanks2151]

[MENTION=6048]Mark70Z[/MENTION] I think that is the response I was looking for. Probably because that's what I was thinking myself.

 

[Mark70Z]

@Mark70Z I think that is the response I was looking for. Probably because that's what I was thinking myself.

You know, "great minds... wait you already know the rest. [MENTION=10970]Yanks2151[/MENTION]

 

[predatorkj]

I really don't fool with them. You can delve into it if you really want to as there is a lot out there. I've purchased some before. But I've got too much new stuff and old stuff that is check listed that I don't have yet. I'd much rather go after that.

 

[mouschi]

A question for you all: Is a Topps Vault blank back that is encased, and comes with a coa, etc. considered a 1/1?

 

[Mark70Z]

A question for you all: Is a Topps Vault blank back that is encased, and comes with a coa, etc. considered a 1/1?

I believe currently the blank backed cards put out by Topps are considered 1/1. Now are they as desirable as other 1/1's that come out I would doubt it since it appears Topps is producing basically the whole set and just not adding the backs to the cards. As a single player collector I still like them. Also, as said earlier the vintage cards that are blank backed are likely not 1/1's.