Topps, this is not acceptable

One of the great things I loved about collecting back in the late-80’s as a youngster was how companies like Fleer, Donruss, & Topps could get right in the mix of the action and feature wonderful photography with each card.

Today, the collecting scene is out of control and it’s not unthinkable to see 15-20 different releases each year. As you can imagine, with that much of a workload on their hands, the product suffers from quality and design issues. Case in point, the Prince Fielder you see below from 2009 Bowman.

There is no reason I should pull a card from a $3 dollar pack and find a photo that could have easily been snapped by a fan sitting in the first few rows. I’ve seen some pretty bone headed ideas from Upper Deck’s baseball line this year but this lone card might take the cake.

Surely someone could have provided you with a better shot of Prince, no? Was this Gregg Forwerck’s work? If so, you guys might need a new photographer cause he’s getting a bit lazy with his concepts. I already had to put up with lazy batting practice photography in 1990, I don’t want to go through it all over again.


26 thoughts on “Topps, this is not acceptable

  1. I can’t imagine being a Fielder collector and pulling out that garbage. You should not have anything blocking the actual player in the card.

  2. Okay, based on this card, my far-off shots taken at Arlington, Chicago, and St. Louis would qualify as masterpieces. Where do I sign up to be a Topps photog, because I can put this guy out of business. I might as well get paid for it!

  3. I don’t mind it. It’s something different. It’s trying to be artsy. It’s almost like he’s caught in a spider web and he’s trying to hit his way out. Imagine what kind of catch Prince Fielder of all people would be for a spider. That’s what this card does. It makes you imagine that.

  4. Yeah, this is pretty awful. It wouldn’t be so bad that they used a batting practice shot, but why does the net need to be the focal point? It is too in focus and dominating in this shot. What makes it worse is that this is an autograph card that will wind up selling for respectible dollars, despite the terrible player photo.

  5. To tell you the truth, I don’t think it’s all that bad. It’s a different perspective than you would see on most cards. They probably just thought “Hey this is something different. Let’s give this a shot and see if people like it.”

    Is it great? No. But I really don’t mind it at all.

    Then again, there is also the possibility they they got lazy and nobody cared.

  6. I’m with motherscratcher and SteveC. Sure, it’s not particularly nice, but I like it when cards give a different perspective or angle than they have before. I think for a player collector, this would be a nice little variation on the typical Prince Fielder swinging card.

  7. To be honest I prefer this photo instead of the hundreds of cookie cutter pics that have been in Bowman the past few years. If I had a dime for every picture used by Bowman that was taken of the back of some guy’s jersey while he was standing in the batter’s box or the pitcher in the middle of his delivery all shot from the exact same spot, I could buy a jumbo case of Bowman.

  8. Well, at least you can’t see his man-boobs in the picture, so that’s a plus. But still pretty lazy in my opinion.

  9. Those back shots from any cards are the worst cards ever printed. Out of thousands of pics companies pick one that shows his backside. Completely lazy. Topps did it to 2008-09 LeBron James card.

  10. Does it make me jump for joy? No. Is it a unique look, sure. Would i actually pay money for it? Dont make me slap you…

    Also, Mario, the Canseco was taken at my old stompin’ ground – Tiger Stadium

  11. I don’t have a problem with it. They were trying to do something different and it didn’t work. It happens.

  12. Hmm… Actually, I was going to take these same kind of photos at a game. Kinda changes my mind a bit after I see how they actually look. I don’t know if you should put this in a pack.

    I would try referring to the old topps where they would set up a photo shoot, and make them hold the bat or if it is a catcher make him squat or so. Well, you get what i am talking about. If i pulled this, I am a naturally easy goin’ guy so I would take it. I do appreciate they are trying new stuff.

    I think they may have hung themselves when they included the bucket-o-balls where the Pitcher just picks one at a time to chuck. It may have been acceptable with serious collectors if they have taken the picture during an actual game. Although, considering i have bought 2 beckett magazines one of them”Sports Card Monthly” and one “Baseball”, This card will be marked up to a crazy price only because it is different. So this could be a good thing or bad, I’m looking at it as a cool thing. It’s not bad, it’s actually pretty neat.

    I don’t like seeing the same old thing on cards, I like crazy designs by eccentric artists, I like Starquest cards when they put Chase Utley on a card with a backround consisting of: Violet, pink, and purple. I like when they animate CRAZY cards in A & G. I like when they put Richie Sexson on a round card shaped like a baseball then it puts a baseball on the back. I like when they title cards with crazy names.

    Overall, I like new stuff, but I am known to be a bit eccentric. :mrgreen: Good post Mario, and one more time, congratulations on 1 million.

  13. Interesting concept but poor execution i guess. But one thing u got to admit is that people in companies are going to be more concerned bout how they can squeeze money out of us instead of looking for photographs.

  14. I kinda like it. It would be terrible if there were a lot of photos like this in the set, but there aren’t as far as I know. I’m a fan of mixing it up.

  15. The picture is OK, it’s different, but not outstanding. But worse than that is the pedestrian design with the bowed framing. It looks like the picture was tacked loosely onto the background and will fall off at any moment.

  16. This is Topps going retro in remembrance of the 1973 Topps baseball set with picture where you never actually see the players face that’s listed on the card. Check out 1973 Steve Garvey’s card.

  17. You do realize that what ends up on the cards isn’t up to the photographer. They shoot all kinds of shots, and someone else picks what makes it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s