batmagadanleadoff

Zvon wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: [fimg=333]https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7091/26237761103_a27e45dd28_o.jpg[/fimg] Is this a real card? Glossy maybe? I'm not a fan at all of the '86 Topps design but that is one beautiful looking baseball card. It's a fake and I'm the faker. The big giveaway that that card's a custom is that McReynolds never signed a contract with Topps while he was with the Padres. He signed with Donruss and Fleer, but held out for more money from Topps. There are no real KMac Topps Padres cards.

[fimg=400:1sms8l9b]https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7411/26780487811_ae9e9eccb3_o.jpg[/fimg:1sms8l9b] [fimg=377:1sms8l9b]https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7363/26233531583_8f25299cbc_o.jpg[/fimg:1sms8l9b]

[fimg=333:lxoqjr43]https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7091/26237761103_a27e45dd28_o.jpg[/fimg:lxoqjr43]

Edgy MD wrote: Is that the card that launched a thousand locker room taunts?

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Lunchie with the Kool Kustom Kingman Kard.

I'll start.

Zvon wrote: That looks a lot like Chuck Tanner, #48 in the corner. Other than that and what you've figured out, who knows. Back then I think they were a lot looser about what uni was worn in spring training games so I wouldn't necessarily go by that. Yeah, but as far as I know, which I can't document, the Mets didn't have those front numeral unis with them in Spring Training at Butterball Field. The number unis were shipped to New York and were waiting for the Mets to arrive. Besides, the Cubs trained in Arizona in 1965, so that can't be a Spring Training shot. That dugout sure looks rinky-dinkyish, though.

Nah. That's just a one-off. I think theyll go with the trademarks for the base set. I'll betcha a Blue Smoke fried bologna which I don't think they serve anymore. If not, a brisket.

Thinking ahead. I'd bet that Topps makes regular Astros cards with all the appropriate logos and trademarks. And then, some variations in the logoless Houston style.

G-Fafif wrote: A friend suggested perhaps teams that didn't exist in the years that are being replicated should have simply been left out until they were born. Probably wouldn't have gone over, but that's pretty damn authentic. You mean like this? Before: [fimg=555]https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7483/26188061994_ab7efa4092_o.jpg[/fimg] After: [fimg=555]https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7252/26188062034_522b277b98_o.jpg[/fimg]

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: You don't need logos to make beautiful cards [fimg=333]http://img.beckett.com/images/items/2073017/marketplace/86499652/front.jpg[/fimg][fimg=333]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FCfTGGFizZY/VY8jM2rHEnI/AAAAAAAAU-w/Bh9Vn3C2T6M/s1600/78topps304.jpg[/fimg] Logos every year stinks of sameness. Both those cards have logos. They're on the uniforms. What Donruss has had to do in recent years is airbrush off all the logos on caps and jerseys because the company doesn't have a license from MLB. Card manufacturers must have two deals, one with the players union to run images of the players, and one with MLB to use logos. Topps has an exclusive deal with MLB at this point. Other companies can strike deals with the union. You get stuff like this: [fimg=333]http://cdn2.bigcommerce.com/server1800/a9c49/products/125670/images/92546/2016d221__42553.1457565279.1280.1280.jpg[/fimg][fimg=333] I see what you guys were talking about. I thought you were talking about logos as design elements on the cards. Yeah, I agree with youse. I always hated that look. Doesn't everybody? And not just on cards, but on print ads or TV commercials where the sponsor was too cheap or didn't have the budget to pay for the use of the logos.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: The dugout Bang Zoom. For that comment, your punishment is to watch Turkish Batman in its entirety and tell us what your favorite and least favorite scenes are.

Here's what I can figure out from looking at the picture: It's a reunion of sorts of teammates on the great Milwaukee Braves teams of the late 50s -- Eddie Mathews, Warren Spahn, Lew Burdette and Bob Buhl. The Mets debuted their jerseys with numerals on the fronts at the start of the '65 season, so that shot can't be from Spring Training. Burdette was sold to the Phillies on May 30, 1965, so the latest date for that pic is either the 29th or 30th of May. I'd also rule out an Old Timer's Game because the four players were all active on the day the photo was shot. That's all I got.

You don't need logos to make beautiful cards [fimg=333:2888egtg]http://img.beckett.com/images/items/2073017/marketplace/86499652/front.jpg[/fimg:2888egtg][fimg=333:2888egtg]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FCfTGGFizZY/VY8jM2rHEnI/AAAAAAAAU-w/Bh9Vn3C2T6M/s1600/78topps304.jpg[/fimg:2888egtg] Logos every year stinks of sameness.

Anybody here know where this picture was taken?

From Turkey, it's the craziest Batman movie you'll ever see, in its entirety below: Nudity and plenty of hijinks. A criminal organization is killing all of the beautiful and stylish women in Turkey. Turkish Batman saves the women and then has on screen sex with them. In fact, that's why Batman is rescuing all of those beautiful and stylish women in Turkey in the first place -- to have sex with them. And the Turkish Batman uses guns, too. In one scene, he takes Robin to a strip joint to watch a stripper. More nudity. And whenever Turkish Batman/Turkish Bruce Wayne is about to have sex with one of the women, he first has Robin leave the room. Then comes the nudity. Holy Turkish delight. How do you say "Kapow" in Turkish? [youtube:33gls9m5]0dXsaLLuEcM[/youtube:33gls9m5]

OFFENSIVE JUGGERNAUT!

Zvon wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Here's some stucco. Don't go flinging this card around or you're liable to take somebody's eye out. [fimg=444]https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1586/26666997326_241d2413e7_o.jpg[/fimg] Wow, that's an amazing effect. You can feel those pointy parts. Here's the last one, then I'm putting this card in storage. I took the stucco off of the people and played around with the shading on the remaining stucco. This, I think, gives the Maz image somewhat of a 3-D effect. [fimg=777]https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1515/26607603482_4d7609347e_o.jpg[/fimg]

Frayed Knot wrote: Niese ... and a league leading 7 HRs/allowed. There'd be some real sweet Niese-Walker symmetry going on if Niese gave up two more HR's.

Zvon wrote: Quality, horrendous. But I needed a card for that event. What the hell did Staub need his bat for? The home town fans were on his side. Here's some stucco. Don't go flinging this card around or you're liable to take somebody's eye out. [fimg=777]https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1586/26666997326_241d2413e7_o.jpg[/fimg]

Those Mets-Reds cards are great. Even if they're not exactly like the Topps Baseball Thrills, they stand up on their own. That there's hardly any detail in those faces is my favorite part of those style cards. Those faces are like one big blob of thick pink color and a coupl'a dots and a dash. And yet there's enough context that you know who the faces belong too. Whered'ja get that source picture of the Met contingent marching out to the outfield to calm down the angry Mets fans? Here's an update on the Maz HR card. A little more coloring, and another cartoon-photo attempt. It's not Topps 50's style but it's a style. [fimg=600:1vni16g7]https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1650/26686909525_7aa6341189_o.jpg[/fimg:1vni16g7]

Come-on, finish that color work. That card is looking great! When making cards that contain game action I always seem to prefer the horizontal view. Possible tip that may not even apply: If you are working in layers make the skin layer semi transparent, and see how that looks. I think I know what you're talking about. The images on a lot of those Topps hand colored cards from the 50's and early 60's have this part cartoon - part photograph look to them. Especially the faces. Like this: [fimg=400]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-rySENsN7QRI/VEaYYrZk3vI/AAAAAAAAX2c/ZNhNmGV2v5w/s1600/IMAG0837.jpg[/fimg][fimg=555]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-O0ww-HBh0no/Usgu6s3kBnI/AAAAAAAAX3I/9Xe1G3YXCDE/s1600/IMAG0841.jpg[/fimg] That's what I was going for. Actually, I've been trying to get that particular look ever since I started doing these cards, with only some progress. I know that I colored the faces on that Maz card heavier than I should've, but I was too lazy to fix it. I'll fix it when I get around to adding some more color.

This team sucked it awfully for so many years, I still can't get used to the current model even though they pretty much ran away with the division once they "re-constituted" themselves last August -- and then went to the WS. Nowadays, I think, sometimes, that these Mets are an offensive juggernaut.

Here's a traditional vertical style card for Game seven. I think the horizontal shot works better. The wider angle captures all the ensuing mayhem going on at home plate that you would expect, given the dramatic nature of what ESPN ranks as the greatest HR ever. [fimg=300:2xgaxha4]https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1586/26074300433_aee26e6060_o.jpg[/fimg:2xgaxha4] [fimg=444:2xgaxha4]https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1538/26599794531_44e694d784_o.jpg[/fimg:2xgaxha4][fimg=544:2xgaxha4]https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1537/26040717884_34f30c1bc0_o.jpg[/fimg:2xgaxha4] Here's the video of the shot, -- the entire broadcast was discovered a few years ago in Bing Crosby's basement. And a shot of that fan who, if you didn't see his smile, looks like he's about to mug Mazeroski. [fimg=444:2xgaxha4]https://blog-blogmediainc.netdna-ssl.com/upload/SportsBlogcom/100290/0159566001444592044_filepicker.jpg[/fimg:2xgaxha4] [youtube:2xgaxha4]FE1nYMg-jU4[/youtube:2xgaxha4] [fimg=333:2xgaxha4]http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2010/1013/pg2_g_bmazeroski1_576.jpg[/fimg:2xgaxha4]