Ask me tomorrow and I'm liable to hand you the binder and never miss it. That sort of parallels how I feel about these specific cards, all coming from Fuji. They are all 'game action' shots. All show the player prominently but have sort of odd angles where the player isn't facing the camera. The backgrounds of each of them is out-of-focus. Are they brilliant, offbeat, quirky, artsy? Or do they suck?
I dunno, ask me tomorrow.
The background on that Kingman has some weird "souls in purgatory" feel to it.
ReplyDeleteThat's a perfect description of them.
DeleteThat’s one of my favorite cards. I think the set has some really good cards. I don’t dislike it overall like I do many modern sets.
DeleteWhenever you can't see their faces clearly, I don't like 'em!
ReplyDeleteSame, although these are better (somewhat) than the ones in 1971 that had pictures taken from a different zip code.
DeleteI definitely know how I feel about this set: first cards I ever owned. I love this set so much.
ReplyDeleteThat's my exact answer to the question of another set that gets mixed reviews, the '58 Topps set.
DeleteI've grown to love this set a lot the past few years. Some of the action shots are truly breathtaking... like the Fingers and Marichal.
ReplyDeleteOops. Almost forgot. Congratulations on completing this set! My arms are wide open whenever you want to hand that binder over ;D
DeleteLove that Kingman. Is the only one I need for my team set (it's on my pile at Cliff's).
ReplyDeleteOK... you have one lined up? Because I have a dupe if you need it.
DeleteOne of these days when we can go out and travel across state lines again I'll visit the Oriolesrise museum, make a donation, and pick up my pile.
Delete