The Error Card discussion thread

[DynaEtch]

Not sure if anyone else cares much about these, or if Im just one of the few, weird collectors of errors out there. Collecting error cards is pretty niche in the hobby, not an investment vehicle or anything like that. To many people, these are just quality control annoyances and junk...but to others that little misaligned or missing foil makes all the difference! When I open boxes of old common sets like 1993 Marvel Masterpieces, Im digging for error gold, not really going after the sets and bonuses, which are pretty much old hat.

Im going to mostly constrain my focus to Marvel since that's the genre I collect, but welcome perspectives from any other genres, or any thoughts on error cards in general. Or pics of errors! Any one else collect these?

Glossary of terms

Definitions can vary, and are sometimes blurred. Here are the ones I use.

Uncorrected Error (UER): A mistake on the card (in the planning or layout) that was never changed throughout the print run. So it is the only variation of the card that exists, and the one in everyone's collections. These cards dont have value beyond whatever the regular base/insert set it's from. There are several examples to pick from in Marvel.

1994 Marvel Masterpieces Venom with copyright 1944 on back:





1995 Fleer Ultra X-Men Jubilee is spelled “Jubliee”


1994 Flair Marvel has two #8 bases (the Iron Man should be #6, Vulture #8 per the checklist)





2008 Marvel Masterpieces series 2 Hammerhead (image is of Tombstone, not Hammerhead):


None of the above have any variations, they are the only versions to exist of that card.

Corrected Error (CER): An error (from the design, layout stage) that was fixed at some point throughout the print run. So that there exist multiple variations of the card in question in people's collections. Examples of this are rare in Marvel cards, but there are at least a few:

1994 Fleer Ultra X-men Iceman base no # on back error:



1994 Fleer Ultra Marvel X-Men - [Base] #98.2 - Original Team - Iceman (Missing Card Number)

Corrected:



1994 Fleer Ultra Marvel X-Men - [Base] #98.1 - Original Team - Iceman

1995 Fleer Ultra X-men Sauron base, Sauron facing opposite way on reverse...since neither one is 'wrong', cant really say what the original error one was (and I'd be interested in why this was even changed). COMC doesnt differentiate them. Variant 1:



Variant 2:



An example of a corrected error from baseball would be the original and infamous 1989 Fleer Billy Ripken with the actual FF written on the bat. This 'error' was corrected with various blockers from black box to scribbles throughout the run. The value of corrected errors is highly dependent on how quick the error was caught and changed, aka how many examples of the error exist out there. In the above examples, the Saurons appear at about equal frequency, and there is no price difference. The Iceman no # is maybe slightly more rare, but not by much, and barely has any premium.


Misprints: Mistakes that happened during the actual printing process. So this would be past the design and layout stage, and typically happens when the uncut sheets are being printed/cut to make cards. Whenever Im talking about the term 'error', this is what I usually mean: misprint. They are not necessarily 'one-offs'- we'll get to that- but there are probably not many out there because they are random printing flukes. This is one way to tell apart misprints from corrected errors: ask yourself, do a lot of people around the world have that same error? If the answer is yes: it's likely a corrected error like that Iceman no #, which is in many people's collections. If the answer is no: it's likely a misprint (because generally, corrected errors arent caught immediately and many are printed first, and on the flip side of the token, generally printing flukes dont run for many sheets. The 1990 Topps Frank Thomas NNOF is an exception to this: it is properly classified as a misprint, since it arose from a mistake in the printing process, yet enough exist that several people have one around the world).

[DynaEtch]

Examples of misprints

Many of these posted in other threads

1. Missing Foil




2. Misaligned Foil




3. Extra Foil




4. Wrong name on front




5. Double printing

https://ebay.com/itm/125019227134
True double/triple printings are pretty rare to find. They look very crowded and weird, like the above

6. Off color




7. Miscut (careful with these: check if the back is regular. If it's also miscut in the same way, there's a possibility it's not actually a misprint, just someone cut it from an uncut sheet to make a 'miscut card'. If other side is normal: then it was definitely a misprint from printing process).




8. Wrong back (careful: some people have been known to cut up old 90s 4-panel or 9-panel uncut sheets to get a card with a 'strange' back, simply because the backs of those sheets werent of the regular card, they were promo related. If the back of the card has a quadrant or 9th of some promo ad..it's just that, not a misprint from production). True wrong back:

Venom on front, Rhino on back


Back that is not only wrong, but misaligned:



9. Flipped foil layer




10. NNOF, no name on front (generally the result of #1 or #2 above). This one due to misalignment of foil. Look how low the Flair logo is on the left card compared to right card. It's so low the VENOM is off the card.




11. Blank back or front (careful...sometimes blank backs were intended as promos, so they are not misprints: such as the 1993 Marvel Universe Red Foil 2099 promos). Here is a true blank front missing the hologram image.



12. Missing the base print layer on front, and just foil on a blank white card. These are among the most interesting errors (also the most elusive...)
https://ebay.com/itm/373906336851
Such a neat error, although priced way, way too much. The whole point of Spectra Etch was etched foil only on certain regions of the card (pretty innovative idea at the time). This shows exactly where those regions are on the Thing vs Hulk card, for example Hulk's hair....without the rest of the card!

13. Sketch error (inverted drawing with respect to template...not really an error of printing, and people probably dont care much one way or the other about them, but they do exist).



(although is Nightcrawler just...hanging upside down...here. But you get the gist of this error).

There are misprints of lesser significance such as crimp errors, lesser miscuts (with a tiny sliver of next card visible), and minor registration/blurry photo errors (not as common in modern nonsports like marvel, more so in vintage sports cards).

[DynaEtch]

Why are errors sought after/have any value at all?
After all, they are just mess-ups, sometimes ugly.. shouldnt that make them less desirable because people like perfection?

-They can be very scarce/unique. It's human nature, when there exist zillions of the same thing (such as a common base card from the 90s), and only one or a few examples of the error...people will prefer the rare thing. This is one reason why errors are so heavily collected in things like coins, money, and stamps: there are zillions of the regular version of the dollar, coin, or stamp out there, but errors are pretty unique and stand out.
-People interested in the printing process, how cards are made, and what can go wrong with that.
-They are generally unintential. This is a big one for me. When a misprint happens, it's usually because some mistake during the printing process. Not because the card company thought, "hey, lets mess things up for just a few uncut sheets and make a rare card". You could picture Upper Deck doing this for a new set, making a 'No Name on Front' variation or something like that- that would be manufactured scarcity, and artificial. Most errors, like old misprints, came to existence organically.
-Desired by the character collectors of that character.
-Error cards are a natural extention of master set collecting...perhaps even an inevitable extension. Once the master set collector has 'everything' for a set, say a common 90s set- all the base, inserts, and promos, errors are basically the only thing left to add if the person wants to continue collecting the set. And since a full set of errors will basically never be exhausted, there will always be more to chase and add. Errors make a master set different than the countless other master sets that exist out there...gives the collection a sense of uniqueness. It’s end stage master set collecting, if you will.

How are errors usually valued?
It is very difficult to gauge the value of errors (talking mostly about misprints here). Since they are nearly unique, there arent a lot of comps out there and it's very subjective. Here is what determines value to me:

-The type of error: like in paper money and coins, a general rule of thumb for errors is the more egregious the error, the more value it has. People want to see grossly botched cards like a double print or missing all the foil...not a slight miscut or crimp error.

-Errors on the front are preferable to ones you have to turn a card over for. This is why, say, a card with the wrong name on front is probably more desirable than a card with a wrong back.

-Nonsports misprints tend to get more attention than sports errors in my experience (outside the mega-examples): Not too many people care about a wrong back 1996 Donruss baseball error, worth maybe $5 tops. A miscut or wrong back 1996 Marvel Masterpieces card on the other hand would be desirable by many, maybe getting into $100's.

-The set it's from. Iconic sets like 1992 Masterpieces will do better than say 1996 Marvel Onslaught.

-Insert card errors are usually more desired than base card errors.

-The popularity of the character featured on the card.

Common misconceptions regarding errors
-That uncorrected errors have value. You'll see sellers advertise these as special errors, like that 1994 Masterpieces Venom 1944 copyright above, with higher than regular prices because they are interesting. Well they may be interesting, but they are equivalent to any other base card in the set and arent rare, so really dont carry any extra value. Another common example: the 1990 Topps Griffey 'bloody scar' uncorrected error...it's just a 90T Griffey, worth a buck, not some outrageous price of 4 grand or whatever they are asking. Which brings us to..

-That error cards are worth thousands and thousands, as they are so commonly put on ebay for. They are almost certainly NOT worth that much, outside the iconic example like the Thomas NNOF. Scarcity itself does not equal high $! This is the thing I most wish wasnt such a misconception, since it completely bars me from picking up some neat errors which are technically on the market, but not really, since the seller doesnt understand value and is asking a price too high by one or two orders of magnitude...$20k, or some insane price that no one would pay for a marvel error card. A card that, at auction, would go for few tens or hundreds of bucks.

Error cards are very niche...people arent buying these up to invest and flip, they are curiosities bought by a narrow group of collectors. I would say a typical marvel error ranges about $20-100 or so. A really, really interesting one, perhaps an egregious error of an insert from an iconic set, might go for a few hundred to even like $1k in the rarest of cases...but not multiple thousands.

So why do sellers mistakenly think they are worth thousands? I have a few guesses: 1. they think uniqueness automatically means very high value, 2. they are misled by other famous errors known in pop culture such as the Inverted Jenny stamp, 3 legged Buffalo nickel, or 1990 Thomas NNOF, and think they have a gold mine. Only one small problem, various things had to happen for those to make them iconic, resulting in demand vastly outnumbering supply. There was only like 1 block of 100 Inverted Jenny's (upside down plane), and stamp collectors all wanted it. The Thomas NNOF just happened to be a printing error affecting the most desirable card in the base set (Thomas RC), creating a very rare version of that smack dab in the middle of the overly-massed produced junk wax era- in a very cool way too, with the missing blackness just happening to include his whole name, instead of just sections of borders as in some other cards affected. In short, the stars completely aligned for that one card, and it was a rather amazing coincidence. That card has organic, hobby-wide recognition. A random 1992 Marvel Universe misprint, while interesting to me, is a curiosity collected by a niche group of buyers.

-Finally, that printing errors are unique and mysterious. Actually, if you have pictures of the uncut sheets in question, you can deduce what happened for that error card to have come about. The error, while scarce compared to the print run, is in several cases NOT unique, for two reasons: 1. Same printing error could have been carried over multiple sheets (and gotten through QC). 2. Uncut sheets might have multiple examples of that card on that sheet (some base do, but more often insert sheets, which had to fill out a whole sheet with just a set of 5-9 cards, so they have multiples). In the case where a sheet has multiple repeating cards, an error affecting it will affect the whole sheet and the error is 'numbered' out of at least that many as on the sheet...assuming they all got past QC. The point being…if you see a misprint up for sale, often advertised as a “1/1 misprint”, don’t assume it has to be 1/1. It might be…but it might not be.

[finfangfan]

Fun idea for a thread. You mention sketch card errors and there are probably quite a few of these. In the UD Dinosaurs set, the single panel sketches had about 50 different dinosaur subject variations and you’d see quite a few dinos popping up on the wrong template.

And then there are errors like this one… not sure what the artist was thinking when drawing this one…

[DynaEtch]

That's a great one! lol. I mean in some ways it's a shame to have what's otherwise a very cool piece of art 'tarnished' by the error. But I suppose people can look past it, and it gives it an element of humor. I wonder how value is impacted.

The concept of error sketches is curious. I almost have to image the Dino sketches on wrong templates might have been AP's? Since how does UD accept a sketch on a different dinosaur template. Or maybe got through the cracks I guess. As for error sketches, that means we can have

-Upside down on template
-On wrong template (where applicable...UD Dinosaur, Marvel Premier, etc)
-Error in content (like your Hulk vs Thin(k))

Wonder if there's any other way a sketch can be an 'error'.

[Rictor]

Miscut cards bother me...I don't like looking at them. I could never own that miscut Venom hologram.

I did like looking for blank back, blank front, and other printing errors during the junk wax era of baseball cards though. There weren't really any inserts to look for back then.

[Fenway55]

I am going to use this thread to vent about something that has irritated me since release. I guess this counts as an uncorrected error, and it sure seems to be horrible quality control. Apologies if this has already been mentioned elsewhere in this forum.

In the recent Star Wars Masterworks "Out of the Box" subset (which overall I really liked), they put the vintage Anakin Skywalker figure with Obi-Wan. I mean yeah they look similar but come on, Topps... hire some people who know what they're doing.

[DynaEtch]

Originally Posted by Fenway55

I am going to use this thread to vent about something that has irritated me since release. I guess this counts as an uncorrected error, and it sure seems to be horrible quality control. Apologies if this has already been mentioned elsewhere in this forum.

In the recent Star Wars Masterworks "Out of the Box" subset (which overall I really liked), they put the vintage Anakin Skywalker figure with Obi-Wan. I mean yeah they look similar but come on, Topps... hire some people who know what they're doing.

Wow that's a rather 2-bit mistake. I love stuff like this though- it's a great example of an uncorrected error. Poor Anakin ghost, replaced by Hayden, now getting mixed up with Obi-Wan

To your and Rictor's point...errors are pretty fascinating in that the same thing, like that Venom miscut, can be an annoyance/ugly card to one person, and highly coveted by another. One thing is for sure...error collectors are not searching for beauty and perfection. They are in search of the botched and strange...the outcasts of the card world.

Completely agree with the point about junk wax. They give those sets an element of chase in a pre-insert world. It is basically the one reason I would ever open a 90s Marvel box (it makes no sense to open those boxes for just the base and chase, you can buy the sets for way less than a box price. The errors are the true chase)

[newcokeandtaco]

I dabble in error card collecting of Garbage Pail Kids stickers. I enjoyed reading what has been posted.

What makes an error significant?
My answer: Uniqueness of the error + population of the error + history/origin of the error + hobby recognition of the error + sales + time = significant error.

[DynaEtch]

Originally Posted by newcokeandtaco

I dabble in error card collecting of Garbage Pail Kids stickers. I enjoyed reading what has been posted.

What makes an error significant?
My answer: Uniqueness of the error + population of the error + history/origin of the error + hobby recognition of the error + sales + time = significant error.

Right on. If you take a major error like the 90T Frank Thomas NNOF, it checks off basically all those boxes.

The bolded above cannot be stressed enough. In the most famous examples of errors, they are recognized from even outside the hobby and become a part of pop culture lore (as in the Billy Ripken FF, inverted Jenny stamp* etc).

*obligatory clip:


I cant believe in this whole non-sports error thread I didnt even mention probably the most famous error of all: the 1977 Topps C-3PO X-rated error. That might just be the most famous error in non-sports, full stop. It is of course a Corrected Error (CER). Marvel doesnt have something like that....something that is THE major error of recognition in the hobby...just a bunch of sporadic errors and misprints like above. Im not sure which is more prevalent for the C-3PO...the Golden Rod error version, or the corrected version. Anyone know that?

[Watchmee]

Dan,
You made me searching through my Marvel bulk!

... and here is the 1st result: X-Men Series 2 Black Queen #56 with misprinted back:



Only reference to this card being misprinted is from eBay ~1.5 years ago:
1993 Skybox Marvel X-Men Series 2 Black Queen ERROR Misprint but unfortunately Terapeak doesn't have photos from that listing so not sure what issue there was...

Alex

[Cujobyte]

Some miscuts in Magic the Gathering go for crazy $$

[DynaEtch]

Nice error! Now that's what I call a bona-fide error, a wrong back.

It would be interesting to see the uncut sheet for X-men series 2 to see how this came about (no doubt the sheet was upside down when they went to print the front or back). But apparently the uncut sheet for this set is hard to find and I cant find any images. So unlike the usual approach where I take an uncut sheet to predict errors.....we can use this error to predict the uncut sheet

Based on the numbering (Black Queen is #56, we see #94 showing), we know the cards wont be in order 1-100 on the sheet.

Based on the back being miscut and not aligned as a single card, we know the margins of the sheet must be asymmetrical.

Basically just those two things...will have to see a pic of the sheet to confirm. All of the cards in the 100-card set should have a wrong back error like this, since printing errors affect the whole sheet.

Very cool error though! I completely forgot I made this thread Btw the other example of "Black Queen Misprint" *might* have been this wrong back as well, but cant tell. There isnt much room for this card to be an error, since there is no foil anywhere on the card. The major thing that can happen would be 1. Wrong Back like you have, 2. Grossly miscut front, or 3. Crimp error. Which of those 3 it was, it's hard to say. It could possibly also be a double print, but I've never heard of that for 93 X-men series 2, so doubtful. Bummer it doesnt say what it was.

[Watchmee]

Weird card damage and I know it's not "man-made" only because i saw it coming from a pack like this:


Of course with the holo logo that's supposed to be in that corner missing is this _really_ UpperDeck card?

[DynaEtch]

Lol that's crazy. There's a fine line between an error card and bad QC...and man I have to wonder what happened to that card during production.

These are the types of errors that will be hard to sell at any premium due to inability to know it's not just damage....but still neat as a curiosity knowing you yourself pulled it.

[Lucas5709]

So I have this 95 Marvel masterpieces canvas card. It has a miscut front and the back is wrong. I've not found any other cards like it from this run and would like any input on the likelihood it is a real error.

[DynaEtch]

Originally Posted by Lucas5709

So I have this 95 Marvel masterpieces canvas card. It has a miscut front and the back is wrong. I've not found any other cards like it from this run and would like any input on the likelihood it is a real error.

Looks like a real bona fide error! Very cool.

As always with any wrong back make extra sure it's not two cards stuck together but I dont think this can be since canvas cards dont stick, plus they are thick and you'd notice, plus based on the below the card is an error.

Here is the uncut sheet:



If you rotate the sheet 180 degrees (or in other words, flip it around so its top is at its bottom), the block of 4 Professor X's on right will coincide with the block of 4 Invisible Woman's on left. That is what happened- they had the sheet oriented the wrong way when printing the front vs the back. So the back of Prof X then is matched with the front of Invisible Woman. The miscut on front arises from the margins of the sheet being slighly different and they apparently cut the card based on the back. The card showing below on the front is the top of another Invisible Woman card, which would be the one underneath yours in the block of 4.

What is the orientation front vs back on your card? In other words is the number on the back matching the same side as the top of the front card, or bottom of the front card? In any regular canvas, the number matches the top side. Since yours is an error from a flipped sheet, it should be opposite and the number side should be on the side matching the bottom front card. (This would be extra assurance it's an error, but it is already obvious it is).

Given that errors of this type affect the entire uncut sheet, we should expect a similar error to happen to all the rest on the sheet (but maybe only occurred on just one sheet making it rare). You can predict others: there should be Surfer canvas's with a Gambit back, Spiderman with Galactus back, Prof X with Invis Woman back (opposite of yours), a different Invis Woman error with Archangel on back (based on the one at lower right), and even a Magneto with the correct back (Magneto) but flipped in relation to the front of the card, since Magneto's block is the center of the sheet. This is pretty neat and will have to look out for them.....yours is the first I've seen so far.

[DynaEtch]

Interesting error someone posted on reddit from Marvel Beginnings Vol.2 Series 1

https://www.reddit.com/r/marvelfinan...11eb/how_rare/

Just a CMYK strip with the parallel foiling lol. Pretty interesting card. Assuming back is the same thing, it begs the philosophical question...."is that a Marvel card?" if it's literally just strips of colors on a card, but it did come from a Marvel product. Questions, questions...

[mjohnatgt]

Originally Posted by DynaEtch

Just a CMYK strip with the parallel foiling lol. Pretty interesting card.

Not a card; it's detritus.

[DynaEtch]

Originally Posted by mjohnatgt

Not a card; it's detritus.

True could be considered not a card at all. For example I imagine COMC wouldnt accept it. Another take is it's just a super bizarre error card (it does have the foiling pattern for that parallel). Either way, value-wise it shouldnt carry much value at all besides some for the curiosity element, since it's featuring nothing at all.

It got me thinking. If a card had a blank back and a blank front misprint, inserted into packs..what then is it? It could be looked at as one of the craziest errors ever....or more properly, a nothingburger that someone would consider a decoy or trash. And obviously wouldnt carry any value, since it's not identifiable. I'd argue the example in that reddit thread is not quite to that level since it does have some identification by the strips (modern UD set) and the speicific foiling pattern. If it happened in MM I would actually pay for something like this being an error collector, if I could at least be sure it's from the set.

[Lucas5709]

DynaEtch, thank you for the information; it is much appreciated. The number lines up with the bottom, so I guess it's a real error card. Also, I just want to say that your knowledge of error cards is super impressive. Thank you again.

[DynaEtch]

Originally Posted by Lucas5709

DynaEtch, thank you for the information; it is much appreciated. The number lines up with the bottom, so I guess it's a real error card. Also, I just want to say that your knowledge of error cards is super impressive. Thank you again.

Awesome...definitely real error card- a rarity too since I havent seen one of these 95MM wrong back canvas before. Thanks for sharing!

[mjohnatgt]

Originally Posted by DynaEtch

If a card had a blank back and a blank front misprint, inserted into packs..what then is it? It could be looked at as one of the craziest errors ever....or more properly, a nothingburger that someone would consider a decoy or trash.

Agreed, it's a decoy, despite having the right card stock.

[Watchmee]

Has anyone seen copies of any MM'94 base cards where on the card back the background around the card number is not black but grayish?

While sorting large lot of MM'94 one Silver Surfer #111 "jumped" at me from the #111 card lineup and as far as i can tell everything else between the normal and the "strange" one is identical...

Later I'll post it on EB and add pics from there for reference

Alex H

[DynaEtch]

I don’t think I’ve noticed them on 94MMs, I’m curious to see a pic. I have a few 95MMs with a similar thing going on. Looks like this (this is actually a gray printing, not someone coloring over the area)