(Major Update) Drum roll, please... I now have 1952 Topps Mantle (MAJOR UPDATE)
frankhardy
Posts: 8,142 ✭✭✭✭✭
I have also posted this in my "1952 Topps Set" in the vintage trading forum.
I realize that many of you guys have some very nice cards, and some of you even have nice 1952 Topps Mantles. However, I never thought that I would own one, so this is a big deal for me. I got this for less than the price of a PSA 1, and I think it has better eye appeal than many PSA 1's that I have seen. This card will be going to PSA this weekend.
Since this is such a high profile card, and since I have always said that I would NEVER buy a 52 Topps Mantle unless it were authenticated, I feel that it is necessary to make proactive statements regarding authenticity. Before I make these statements, I will say that I was able to get this card fairly inexpensive because the blue background has obviously been recolored. This was apparently done years ago, probably by some kid in the 50's. It appears to be some sort of paint substance (possibly the same kind of paint used on model cars or the paint that I used on beat up Hotwheels as a kid).
Now, in regards to authenticity -
I bought this from a trusted source with a money back guarantee if it does not get holdered by PSA.
I have studied the online guide by Josh Alpert at 1952 Topps Mantle Guide and it is definitely not ANY of the counterfeits that he discusses.
It passes the "flashlight" test in the dark. This is where a flashlight shines through nearly every counterfeit because of the thinner card stock used by counterfeits. I have a counterfeit (the one where the 2 print flaws are evident on the back) and a flashlight shown through. The original blocked out all light.
I have viewed this card under 10x magnification (loupe). The pixels are identical to other 1952 Topps cards. The black ink (main border, border around the stars, border around team logo, Mantle's name, and facsimile autograph) are solid black and are not pixelated. In other words, half tone was not used.
So, without further ado... drum roll, please.....
Here is a closeup, high relosution, partial scan to show the pixels and the solid black ink.
I realize that many of you guys have some very nice cards, and some of you even have nice 1952 Topps Mantles. However, I never thought that I would own one, so this is a big deal for me. I got this for less than the price of a PSA 1, and I think it has better eye appeal than many PSA 1's that I have seen. This card will be going to PSA this weekend.
Since this is such a high profile card, and since I have always said that I would NEVER buy a 52 Topps Mantle unless it were authenticated, I feel that it is necessary to make proactive statements regarding authenticity. Before I make these statements, I will say that I was able to get this card fairly inexpensive because the blue background has obviously been recolored. This was apparently done years ago, probably by some kid in the 50's. It appears to be some sort of paint substance (possibly the same kind of paint used on model cars or the paint that I used on beat up Hotwheels as a kid).
Now, in regards to authenticity -
I bought this from a trusted source with a money back guarantee if it does not get holdered by PSA.
I have studied the online guide by Josh Alpert at 1952 Topps Mantle Guide and it is definitely not ANY of the counterfeits that he discusses.
It passes the "flashlight" test in the dark. This is where a flashlight shines through nearly every counterfeit because of the thinner card stock used by counterfeits. I have a counterfeit (the one where the 2 print flaws are evident on the back) and a flashlight shown through. The original blocked out all light.
I have viewed this card under 10x magnification (loupe). The pixels are identical to other 1952 Topps cards. The black ink (main border, border around the stars, border around team logo, Mantle's name, and facsimile autograph) are solid black and are not pixelated. In other words, half tone was not used.
So, without further ado... drum roll, please.....
Here is a closeup, high relosution, partial scan to show the pixels and the solid black ink.
Shane
0
Comments
Bosox1976
pat
Successful Deals: tennesseebanker, jvette,
<< <i>Why does the background on the smaller pic look so weird?? >>
I mentioned this in my original post - the background was colored in years ago by (most likely) some sort of paint product.
Shane
I would sure like to soak him in some rehabilitative baths.
A Q-Tip with a drop of thinner would test your paint theory.
I suspect Tempera/Tempra and NOT Testors.
Tempra
I wonder why the guy painted the thing. Damage, writing, pen-marks?
Even if the card was rehabed, it would still only go "authentic." But, it might be better looking.
It is still just fine like it is, though.
Shane
////////////////////////////////////////////////
That won't help.
You would need some equivalent to Testors' thinner, or Tempra thinner.
Don't try the coarse stuff in the garage.
Don't do the test in the field. ONLY on the edge, just inside the black line.
TINY drop on the Q-Tip.
My eBay Auctions
<< <i>"I did try a little (very little) fingernail polish remover on a Q Tip."
////////////////////////////////////////////////
That won't help.
You would need some equivalent to Testors' thinner, or Tempra thinner.
Don't try the coarse stuff in the garage.
Don't do the test in the field. ONLY on the edge, just inside the black line.
TINY drop on the Q-Tip. >>
What is Testor's thinner or Tempra thinner? Is that something I can get at WalMart or at the hardware store? What do you mean by the "coarse stuff"?
Shane
It is one of the true icons of this hobby.
Congrads!!! Joe
"I spent 50% of my money on alcohol, women, and gambling. The other half I wasted.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////
The coarse stuff in the nasty square-can will/might hurt the paper.
Testors' (equivalent) is the product at the model-airplane shop.
Tempra/Tempera thinner/remover is sold at "craft-stores."
Looks like the white borders might have been painted, too.
I doubt the paint is Testors, BUT without looking at it in hand,
I cannot say for sure.
Tempra is pretty easy to remove. Testors harder, but doable.
REMEMBER: This whole discussion is about removing paint from
a card that under NO CIRCUMSTANCES can ever make it into a
PSA-graded slab. It will always be "authentic" ONLY. If you
make it look better/worse, it will still be ONLY "authentic."
Such projects are not about fooling people or adding unwarranted
value. If done correctly, such efforts can add some eye-appeal.
I suspect there must be some writing under the paint. There does
not come to mind another rational reason to paint a card. Such
writing might be less attractive than the paint; might not.
Maybe there are some swear-words under there.
mike
Hey, since it's painted anyway, why not do some "touching up!"
Nope, I don't think I could bring myself to do that!
Shane
I'd be very surprised if that "crap" could be removed without severely damaging the card - it's an interesting conversation piece, as is...I'd leave it alone.
1996 Select Certified Mirror Gold Ozzie Smith
2006 Bowman Chrome Orange Refractor Chris Carpenter
<< <i>awesome. congrats! now all you have to do is find a t206 wagner and you're collection will be complete. >>
Yep, because I already have a 52 Mantle and a Pujols rookie!
Shane
colored-marks made from vegetable dyes.
MM would roll over in his grave if he thought his picture was being soaked in milk.
For future experimenters: Remember, "paint thinner" is NOT "paint remover."
Paint-Thinner GOOD ---- Paint-Remover BAD.
Turpentine ALSO bad. Witch-Hazel pretty good.
I too would refrain from the test.
Steve
<< <i>
<< <i>awesome. congrats! now all you have to do is find a t206 wagner and you're collection will be complete. >>
Yep, because I already have a 52 Mantle and a Pujols rookie!
that's exactly my thought process but only if it's the bowman chrome auto.
1996 Select Certified Mirror Gold Ozzie Smith
2006 Bowman Chrome Orange Refractor Chris Carpenter
Kevin
<< <i>I think that is the way Monet would of like the Mantle rookie had he been in charge in 52! Nice pickup...where do you go from here???
Kevin >>
Well, I am trying to finish a very low grade 1952 Topps Set (I have 224 so far). I was actually just looking to price a very low grade Mantle, and I located this one. I am not 100% sure about this, but I am actually hoping that this Mantle represents 2 big steps forward, and one step back, with a net gain of 1 step (if that made sense). In other words, after getting this card into a PSA holder, I am leaning towards trying to flip this Mantle and take the gains and add to my set. Then, I will try to focus on getting a Mantle that's even in lower condition. To be honest, even though this Mantle has been recolored, it has alot better eye appeal than what I envisioned for my set. I am really wanting a beater for my set, just because it will be less expensive.
Shane
When you upgrade, just send it this way and I'll enjoy it just the way it is.
"I spent 50% of my money on alcohol, women, and gambling. The other half I wasted.
<< <i>The card looks awful the way it is. It doesn't have to look that way. Whether it's recolored and looks great, or recolored and looks awful, it's still a recolored card. So why not remove the ugly color job and start over again and make it look nice. You're never going to restore it to a point of being able to fool someone, but if it has to be recolored it might as well look semi-decent. You're not doing anything wrong by removing the awful paint job and giving it a better paint job. Mick deserves better. >>
You have a very interesting point. The first thing that comes to mind is that I have a guarantee from the man that I bought if from. If I mess it up, that could void a guarantee.
I would love to get other opinions on KbKards's point.
Shane
<< <i>The card looks awful the way it is. It doesn't have to look that way. Whether it's recolored and looks great, or recolored and looks awful, it's still a recolored card. So why not remove the ugly color job and start over again and make it look nice. You're never going to restore it to a point of being able to fool someone, but if it has to be recolored it might as well look semi-decent. You're not doing anything wrong by removing the awful paint job and giving it a better paint job. Mick deserves better. >>
This is exactly what I was thinking as well. Maybe look into having it professionally done. Might cost quite a bit but if you are looking to get it into an authentic holder then the added eye appeal would more than likely pay for the work.
Chris
My small collection
Want List:
'61 Topps Roy Campanella in PSA 5-7
Cardinal T206 cards
Adam Wainwright GU Jersey
Shane
Just the thought of someone coloring it or painting it is pretty nostalgic, especially if it was done 50 years ago. Just thinking of who did it and why is pretty cool in itself.
Congrats!
<< <i>Would a "fresh paint job" negatively impact getting the card into an authentic holder vs a paint job that was done years ago? >>
Shane
That's a tough one - my instinct tells me if ya mess with it too much, ya could make it worse?
Now - if you're interested in seeing what could be "professionally" done with the card since you're only going for the "authentic" grade on the holder? Consider contacting someone like this and see what they say?
Don't know what you paid but it might be worth the time - I was wondering if the paint is water based? Looks like tempera or water color paint - if so - a pro may be able to remove it and see what the card looks like in it's natural state - and perhaps they can do a better job of presenting the card?
Just a thought.
mike
<< <i>Send it to a professional restoration expert. It would cost some money, but I think that could be a sweet looking card. >>
That would be my choice, if it was my card.
Man, after seeing that company's work on the posters and such, they should be able to make that Mantle into a stunning masterpiece.
I would leave it be, if it was me or an amateur trying to monkey with it, but I would let that company have a crack at it.
Removing pencil marks or glue on the back is one thing, but trying to remove paint from the front will only end up with many more condition problems than it already has.
IMO It looks like paint from a "paint by number" set.
<< <i>I never really thought about their being writing or markings underneath the "paint". I think I might just leave it alone and get it into an "authentic" holder.
Hey, since it's painted anyway, why not do some "touching up!"
Nope, I don't think I could bring myself to do that! >>
Buy another 52 player with a blue background, cut Mantle out of this one and paste it on. Presto, authentic 52 Mantle on an authentic blue background.
Now as far as condition, I agree with Stone. I would send a scan to the people that he posted about and get it restored. I think they could make it look like it used to. I don't know if PSA would slab it authentic or not, but it would be worth a try.
Would HIGHLY advise you not attempt anything yourself, unless you happen to be a professional conservator.
Matt Nelson's company link:
http://www.classicsincorporated.com/
Link
Shane
It's a nice card as is, keep it that way. Upgrade later if needed.
It's a nice card as is, keep it that way. Upgrade later if needed.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
There is a great deal of merit to the notion that somebody, in the future,
would/might try to use the card to defraud somebody.
However, I would not let the potential prospective bad acts of an unknown
third-party prevent me from restoring my own property.
The future integrity of 52-Mantles has ALOT to worry about; mostly from ChiCom
counterfeiters. I really don't think restoring a few AUTHENTIC cards, is going to
contribute materially to the fall of the card-empire.
http://www.unisquare.com/store/brick/
Ralph