1989 Upper Deck Griffey - "Eyelash" print error
Willymac
Posts: 206 ✭✭✭
So this was interesting - I bought 6 boxes a few years ago from a guy - who also sold me a case of 89 fleer "error", which I can attest having opened a few boxes is most definitely an error case :-)
Going back through when I got the Griffeys and others they went straight into sleeves and hard cases....when looking at them the other day, I was perplexed how an eyelash got into the sleeve. Upon closer look, its not an eyelash, but a very noticeable printing line. when looking at the group of them that came from the boxes (all from the same case), I had a sequence of Griffeys that seemed to go from the early stage of the print line to the late stage with the full line....pretty cool
Combing eBay I can find no other Griffeys with the print line....
Thoughts? Would it make sense to keep these all together - kind of like a mint error coin - early stage to late stage die error?
Comments
I take that back - there are some - and it seems like someone else has noticed to as they seem to sell for a bit more than usual
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1989-Upper-Deck-Ken-Griffey-Jr-Rookie-Card-1-Seattle-Mariners-PSA-BGS/133411104628
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1989-Upper-Deck-Ken-Griffey-Jr-Star-Rookie-1-Mariners-ROOKIE-CARD/114229106004
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1989-Upper-Deck-Ken-Griffey-1-HOF-RC-Seattle-Mariners-Rookie-MINT-CENTERED/313069994083
seems much less common and varies from light line to dark line
No one has any idea on these? does any one else at least have one in their collection?
My personal opinion is that it is, at best, an ignored and inconsequential imperfection. At worst, it's going to be docked as an undesired print defect.
There is a much more egregious recurring imperfection on the full sized 1975 Topps Robin Yount, a big splotch of blue color right between his legs, that no one seems to care at all about. I refer to it as a "puddle", and while, to my knowledge, a PD grade is never given because of it, I try to avoid examples with the puddle on it. Once you see it, you can't unsee it. Now that you've pointed out the eyelash, if I'm ever in the market for a Griffey, I will try to avoid one with that imperfection.
The puddle only shows up on the full sized versions, maybe 10 or 20 percent of the time. There's an old thread where it's discussed more. But apparently, no premium or negative value is assigned to this variation. I would assume the same collector response for the Griffey eyelash variation.
The difference between a print defect and a variation is art, not science. Here are a few things I've learned over the years about the subject.
You need a good story. Letters printed in a different color. No name on front. Blackless. Blue heart. Colored lines are much more likely to gain traction than just a black line. Was the print defect consciously fixed (airbrushed) or did it resolve itself in the natural printing process?
It needs to be rare but not obscure. If there are too many (1990 Topps Griffey bloody arm), no one cares. If there are too few, it gets written off as an outlier. It needs to find that magical wheelhouse where it's rare enough to command a premium but not so rare that people don't buy in.
It has to be multi-sourced. I see that you've found other examples, that's good. For anyone ripping a box and thinking they found a variation, you have to perform redundancy. Find the same variation from another source in another piece of unopened. If your case is the only place it occurs, it's not a variation.
Don't hype bogus sales. If the card is selling for $3 at auction but there are a few $100 BINs, don't point to those BINs as reference points. Those are BS sales that were created solely to manipulate the market. If you want your research to be taken seriously, be serious about your research.
Cool card. I'll definitely keep my eye out for them when I look from now on.
Arthur
Pretty sure PSA views it as a print defect. I’ve never seen one of these with a grade above an 8.
If you could get Billie Eyelash to sign those then you'd have something.
cool - thanks!!! we shall see how this plays out over the years - reminds me of a 1952 topps black and red star backs
pretty cool thing in my opinion having the variation from light line to dark line....
My 7 has it... none of my others do... inconsequential in my book..
Nic
Guides Authored - Graded Card Scanning Guide PDF | History of the PSA Label PDF
1981 Topps Harold Baines has a similar eyelash version. Inconsequential at this point.
Thanks,
David (LD_Ferg)
1985 Topps Football (starting in psa 8) - #9 - started 05/21/06
now you have......heres mine. this was one of the cards that appeared in that quasi-famous YouTube video of the guy who subbed 52 or so pack fresh Griffeys and had a variety of grades ranging from PSA 6 to PSA 10. he revealed each one in the video after he got them back and didn't check the grades ahead of time. spoiler - there were a surprising amount of PSA 6, 7 and 8's among the batch.
on a side note, I wonder if it was indeed an eyelash or similar particle caught in the printing plate and by the time a ton of sheets were printed, it was noticed during QC, cleaned and printing resumed.
I used to search for hours upon hours and then it turned into days, months and years for the "purple hat" variation which I thought was rare and incredibly hard to find but finally came to the conclusion that I was on an island all by myself and nobody really viewed it as a "variation" so I just gave up! I would put this in that category now the trademark icon vs the TM in the grass should be considered a variation.. I think this is cool and I will check for them! Here is another variation that I bought hook, line and sinker! Someone erased the name, which is a thing!
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
Thanks for all the replies!!!
Yes it is!
I may have watched that video. He had a stack of 6,7 and 8s. I started feeling for that guy. Man, that was brutal.
I have one of these Griffey Rc’s with the eyelash mark. It’s in great shape. I sent it in to PSA a few months ago and I’m still waiting to get it back. I’ll update this thread with a picture and the grade. Thanks for posting this, I have wondered for a while what that mark was, it came straight out of the pack with it.
Mine has it too...very faint.
the more I think about, the more I think I have a plausible idea how this could've happened. ive never worked in the industry however, so I could be wrong. im under the assumption that the black plate is printed last, starting lightest to darkest plates from what I recall seeing on the internet. on the black plate must've been some kind of high spot (defect in the plate or indeed some type of debris that was raised enough to pick up a dark layer of ink. the earlier cards in the printing process left a solid dark line, as is seen in the OP's post (cards 2, 5 and 6). as the printing plate was continuously pressed into the ink and onto the sheets, whatever the debris was (or the raised metal piece on the plate) was eventually flattened enough to the point where it no longer held ink (cards 3, 4, 1 in that order) until eventually it would no longer transfer ink at all. which in turn, would yield you normal copies without the mark.
myslabs.to/smzcards
This is clearly picking up steam....several folks ;posting them to ebay and referencing this discussion....
If this was a. coin it would be a designated variety (think "1804 half cent with spiked chin"....
This is not some funky ink spotting or slightly off color....this is something with the printing plate that has an entire life cycle from faint to dark, but consistently in the same spot....
ZI have 6 of them, but they all came from the exact same case....and I have them from faint to dark (or likely dark to faint) as it was wearing off the plate....
Given the importance of this card, this absolutely should be a designated variety....any have any ideas how to get PSA's attention on it?
Thread seems to have died. Any updates here? Came across one this week.
I think many people have moved on to the "no period after inc" on the Donruss variation that theyre trying to sell for thousands
Or the 1990 Topps bloody scar Ken Griffey Jr #336
I still have mine - don’t see tons of them - in due time it will get noticed - just like coins - a “mint” error….this isn’t a print dot or something like that
are there any NON bloody scar 90 topps griffeys? every one of mine has the scar.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
No, there is not. Just varying color dominance of red/blue/yellow due to ink levels. The card never received a second printing with any changes made to the blotch.
Some of the box toppers have it less apparent than others but that is as close to a "corrected" version you can get.
Namath butterfly
Nope. All Griffey's have the mark on his arm, unlike the Namath.
And unlike the Griffey UD - how many folks here have a mark on your 89 UD Griffey - if 10 people on this board have one it’s not rare….