Thursday, October 23, 2008

So, what is this?



8 comments:

Voltaire said...

D) Obvious photoshop.

Tom the Ripper said...

is "D)" some kind of symbol for sarcasm?

If not then uh, well just think about that one.

The Duckman Says said...

Why cant it be a jackass who has nothing better to do but photoshop cards upside down for attention?

dayf said...

The second and third answers are for all intents and purposes the same.

Tom the Ripper said...

one of the people selling the Bruce has 4000+ positive feedback, no negs.

why would you risk a negative plus a "seller faked card" comment for the $10-$20 you'd make on this.

the whole "seller photoshop" conspiracy theory is probably the most retarded thing I've read this year.

dayf said...

The photoshop theory was quite plausible when there was only one on the market. It became less plausible when a second hit eBay. Now that there are at least 5 the bunk theory has been debunked.

Still, that card has no foil from what I've seen in the scans. If there is no foil on the card and the name is printed in silver ink, that means it is not an error. There is no way in hell that Topps printed 328 cards in the set with foil and #1 and #100 in ink, made a layout error so blatant that any proofreader that committed it would commit seppuku in shame, and then correct the error (despite having a 'no correcting errors' policy) and suddenly decide to use foil instead of ink like the rest of the set.

My current theory: The chose the Palin Beauty Pagent card as their gimmick du jour for this set. They announced it and got meh reviews. Then Palin started getting hammered in the media and they realized that their gimmick was a flop. They came up with the unsubtle flip cards right before the deadline and only had time to print them up without foil to get them in the pack out. That's my story and I'm stickin' to it. At least until new information arises.

My captcha verification word is tater.

THEY CALL ME TATER SALAD

starkill1138 said...

As someone who uses photoshop quite frequently for work I'm falling on the side that these are actual errors/gimicks. My reasoning - the signature. One of the hardest things to do in photoshop is to separate intricate linework from a background - especially a complex, multicolor background. You'd have to be really good at photoshop, and really bored, to create those cards.
Scott

madding said...

I can't believe that of all the cards they made an error on, it was some super-hyped rookies. That's crazy!