I have a very important question to ask you, dear readers. I've struggled with this internal dilemma for awhile, since before I actually started this feature, and an email I received recently from Smed's Baseball Card Blog reminded me to bring this up. Topps (and possibly others), clearly, uses Adobe Photoshop or other similar software to alter their card photos all the time. There are countless numbers of terrible looking cards that are modern day equivalents of what I post here. I've never considered them "airbrushed", however, because the technique is obviously different. That being said, I don't know how many of the original "airbrushed" cards actually involved airbrushes. The point I'm trying to make is this: Would you like to see more modern day abominations on cardboard thrown into the mix? I would love to hear your opinions. Feel free to send me an email, throw your comments in this post and/or vote in the poll I have hastily constructed. My goal is to come to a decision by next Friday.Dennis Cook had one of the most off-putting faces in the game of baseball, at least to me. For all of the reasons I once explained in this post, I for some reason couldn't stand to look at the guy whenever he pitched, which seemed to be ALL THE TIME. It must have been his multiple World Series appearances, for one. I also think he kind of looks like Biff from Back to the Future.
Why did Topps airbrush Dennis's photo? Cook was involved in a five-player midseason deal between the Giants and the Phillies. He wouldn't stay with Philadelphia for long, or any one team at all in his 15 season career. His longest stint seemed to be with the Mets from 1998 through 2000.
What's wrong with this picture, anyway? His FACE! Okay, fine, his cap and shirt were likely drawn on by a bored Philly-area art student.
If you are interested in obtaining a card featured here, please send me an e-mail. If you have a card you would like to nominate for Airbrushed Fridays, please get in touch as well. I will require that I am able to see the card in person, either on loan or as a donation, so that I can examine the card and experience it in all its cruddiness.
I wouldn't mind seeing the occasional "modern" day card in there, but I really like the older stuff as a staple of the post.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to see the modern stuff mixed in.
ReplyDeleteIt would be interesting because I don't think collectors look at the modern photoshopping of cards the same way as the old days of airbrushing (airbrushing seems to get the warm-and-fuzzy treatment).
I voted "I don't care" because it's your blog and you should do whatever you want with it.
ReplyDelete