Nice stuff, but if I may make a suggestion: I won't, as a rule, bid on any auction for key or vintage stuff where the "enlarged" image is still smaller than an actual card. Maybe it's my 50-year old eyes, but I just can't adequately judge them at that size.
---------------------- Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989 ----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
What I am seeing actually is quite a bit larger than the actual card. The interesting thing is that I scan them even bigger than that. I'm not sure why it doesn't show up larger, but it is quite a bit bigger than the actual card.
What I am seeing actually is quite a bit larger than the actual card. The interesting thing is that I scan them even bigger than that. I'm not sure why it doesn't show up larger, but it is quite a bit bigger than the actual card. >>
When I enlarge the box the picture of the card is exactly the size of a card held up against it.
Doofus alert --- OK, when I measure it closely, it is the same size as the card!! It just looks a lot smaller for some reason. Still, hard for my old eyes to judge details at that size.
---------------------- Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989 ----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
<< <i>Still, hard for my old eyes to judge details at that size. >>
I agree.
Example
Nice looking card described as low grade condition but I can't tell if that's a crease, fold, print line or whatever. Still has very nice eye appeal (in my opinion).
I am confused too. When I hold a regular card up to the scan, the scan is at least an inch wider than the actual card and top to bottom it is at least an inch and a quarter. Could someone else confirm this.
<< <i>I am confused too. When I hold a regular card up to the scan, the scan is at least an inch wider than the actual card and top to bottom it is at least an inch and a quarter. Could someone else confirm this.
Yes, the Aaron is creased. >>
What browser do you use when viewing the Ebay listing? I've tried Firefox and the image is right around "life-size". Odd....
---------------------- Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989 ----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
Nice selection of 60s HOFers. When I view the enlarged image, it is quite a bit larger than an actual card.
Always looking for Mantle cards such as Stahl Meyer, 1954 Dan Dee, 1959 Bazooka, 1960 Post, 1952 Star Cal Decal, 1952 Tip Top Bread Labels, 1953-54 Briggs Meat, and other Topps, Bowman, and oddball Mantles.
<< <i>I am confused too. When I hold a regular card up to the scan, the scan is at least an inch wider than the actual card and top to bottom it is at least an inch and a quarter. Could someone else confirm this.
Yes, the Aaron is creased. >>
I am using IE and the card is exact same size as another card, the scan itself is about the same as you describe.
Hard to do this with one hand holding the card and the other taking a pic but this is how I am seeing it.
Actual size (near as I can get it).
The actual image of just the card (not including the black background) when clicking on enlarge is only roughly 1/4" bigger then an actual card. I've tried Firefox and IE and it's the same as my pic is showing.
I do take pride in making the scans look good. That's why I'm so concerned about the the size. Could everyone chime in as to your monitor? I am looking on a wide screen monitor instead of a standard monitor. I will take a picture here in a second to show what I am seeing. Thanks for the input, guys.
Here is what I am seeing. I don't understand why some are seeing them small and some are seeing them bigger. Could it be the resolution of you guys' settings? I'll try changing my resolution.
The first one is on Ebay. The second one is on this thread. There looks like a little difference between the two, but it is only because of the angle of the picture.
frankhardy
Posts: 8,046 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
PM sent saying -
What I am seeing actually is quite a bit larger than the actual card. The interesting thing is that I scan them even bigger than that. I'm not sure why it doesn't show up larger, but it is quite a bit bigger than the actual card.
Shane
<< <i>bking,
PM sent saying -
What I am seeing actually is quite a bit larger than the actual card. The interesting thing is that I scan them even bigger than that. I'm not sure why it doesn't show up larger, but it is quite a bit bigger than the actual card. >>
When I enlarge the box the picture of the card is exactly the size of a card held up against it.
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
<< <i>Still, hard for my old eyes to judge details at that size. >>
I agree.
Example
Nice looking card described as low grade condition but I can't tell if that's a crease, fold, print line or whatever. Still has very nice eye appeal (in my opinion).
Jeff
Miscut Museum
My Mess
Nice scans...
Nice cards...
GOOD LUCK!
Looking for 1970 MLB Photostamps
- uncut
Positive Transactions - tennesseebanker, Ahmanfan, Donruss, Colebear, CDsNuts, rbdjr1, Downtown1974, yankeeno7, drewsef, mnolan, mrbud60, msassin, RipublicaninMass, AkbarClone, rustywilly, lsutigers1973, julen23 and nam812, plus many others...
Yes, the Aaron is creased.
Shane
<< <i>I am confused too. When I hold a regular card up to the scan, the scan is at least an inch wider than the actual card and top to bottom it is at least an inch and a quarter. Could someone else confirm this.
Yes, the Aaron is creased. >>
What browser do you use when viewing the Ebay listing? I've tried Firefox and the image is right around "life-size". Odd....
Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
----------------------
Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
Nice selection of 60s HOFers. When I view the enlarged image, it is quite a bit larger than an actual card.
Always looking for Mantle cards such as Stahl Meyer, 1954 Dan Dee, 1959 Bazooka, 1960 Post, 1952 Star Cal Decal, 1952 Tip Top Bread Labels, 1953-54 Briggs Meat, and other Topps, Bowman, and oddball Mantles.
Thanks for looking, Judge.
Shane
<< <i>I am confused too. When I hold a regular card up to the scan, the scan is at least an inch wider than the actual card and top to bottom it is at least an inch and a quarter. Could someone else confirm this.
Yes, the Aaron is creased. >>
I am using IE and the card is exact same size as another card, the scan itself is about the same as you describe.
Actual size (near as I can get it).
The actual image of just the card (not including the black background) when clicking on enlarge is only roughly 1/4" bigger then an actual card. I've tried Firefox and IE and it's the same as my pic is showing.
Other then that the scans are great.
Edited to add: Another pic.
Jeff
Miscut Museum
My Mess
I do take pride in making the scans look good. That's why I'm so concerned about the the size. Could everyone chime in as to your monitor? I am looking on a wide screen monitor instead of a standard monitor. I will take a picture here in a second to show what I am seeing. Thanks for the input, guys.
Shane
Viewed on my laptop, barely can see the border of the scan showing with my card on top.
EDIT; this pic here is showing the same size as the enlarged eBay pic that I am seeing.
The first one is on Ebay. The second one is on this thread. There looks like a little difference between the two, but it is only because of the angle of the picture.
Shane
Shane
Shane
Jeff
Miscut Museum
My Mess
Width of monitor straight across is 16". Not sure if that matters. I think monitors are sized diagonally.
Shane