Home› Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum
Options

Need help with identifying 1994-95 finest refractor or base

illinifan912illinifan912 Posts: 1,462 ✭
in Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum
Hi,
I got a 1994-95 Finest Jason Kidd rookie card but I am not sure if its a refractor or not. The back doesn't have any indications to help here is a pic of the front-
image

If you can lmk if its a refractor or not that would be great.
Thanks,
Andrew

Comments

  • Options
    EAsportsEAsports Posts: 1,566 ✭✭✭
    Refractor. This is base:

    image

    I don't think Topps labeled them as refractors on the back during that time frame.
    My LSU Autographs

    Only an idiot would have a message board signature.
  • Options
    illinifan912illinifan912 Posts: 1,462 ✭
    Thanks EA. Its tough for me to determine the refractors and nons of the early 90s.
  • Options
    bouwobbouwob Posts: 100 ✭


    << <i>Refractor. This is base:

    I don't think Topps labeled them as refractors on the back during that time frame. >>



    What's the difference?
    I am working on the Nolan Ryan master set. Need 1004 more cards to complete. I might actually spend more on plastic than I did on cardboard.
  • Options
    byronscott4everbyronscott4ever Posts: 932 ✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>Refractor. This is base:

    I don't think Topps labeled them as refractors on the back during that time frame. >>



    What's the difference? >>



    Originally Topps did not label them but then started too, probably because people needed to know what they had. The base is a regular card while with a refractor, if you tilt it side to side, you see a rainbow effect that changes.
  • Options
    bouwobbouwob Posts: 100 ✭
    What is the difference in the 2 picture which look the same to me other than scans? I can tell the difference in hand (speaking baseball), but how can you tell with just images.
    I am working on the Nolan Ryan master set. Need 1004 more cards to complete. I might actually spend more on plastic than I did on cardboard.
  • Options
    HallcoHallco Posts: 3,627 ✭✭✭✭✭
    That's a good one!!! image
  • Options
    mtcardsmtcards Posts: 3,342 ✭✭✭
    Not to disagree with anyones opinion, but I cannot tell from the scan if the OP's card is a refractor or not just based on the scan. The scanner/photo is at a different height level, one has the protective peel, the other does not, one is PSA encased, the other is not. It may be a refractor, but I would still go with the "in hand" check as its possible that the listed differences may actually be making them look different
    IT IS ALWAYS CHEAPER TO NOT SELL ON EBAY
  • Options
    byronscott4everbyronscott4ever Posts: 932 ✭✭✭
    Bad scans can hide a refractor for sure but in this case, you can see how the background has some color differences too it. Most decent scans will show that color change off or will make the card look lighter than a regular card. Peel doesn't necessarily mean anything as it could be that the peel was taken off or just left on. Topps did some Finest with refractors that had no peel in at least one set but those cards had a refractor finish on front AND back.
Sign In or Register to comment.