Friday, July 15, 2016

HOBBY TOPIC

This series is all about you, the readers. My opinion is mum on every subject, however, you guys have the open mic per say on here. So without further ado, here is today' topic:

ON-CARD AUTOGRAPHS VS STICKER AUTOGRAPHS, PART 2

I am calling this part 2 because I did this topic once a long time ago. But, with more fans now I want to see others give their input or returnees give theirs because they may differ from the first time.

What do you think, are you ok with sticker autos or do you prefer on-card?

6 comments:

  1. It really doesn't matter to me. While I am approaching the 1000 autograph mark for my collection (roughly 200 away) I chase the base cards, and any autographs I get are simply an added bonus. If they are on card or not doesn't matter to me- they are still an autograph. What I would have a problem with is if the sticker was on wrong- I've seen upside down and even on the wrong player's card. While I do chase errors autographs are usually too expensive to chase oddballs like that.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I am very firmly entrenched in the "on-card autos" camp. They look better, the players have more room for a decent signature, and it means that player had handled that particular card (which is kind of the point!). Also, stickers can be off-center, tilted, or even have debris under them (happened to me on a freakin' Carson Wentz auto!). That said, if stickers are cleverly incorporated into a card and not just slapped on there like my five-year-old would do, they can look decent. 2015 Panini Black Gold football actually had stickers that were inside a shadow box type card, for example. Also, one suggestion - make the stickers bigger so players have room for a decent auto and can color inside the lines when they do sign them.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm with Bryan.. definitely prefer on-card.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I prefer on-card signatures, but I don't mind sticker autographs all that much. One thing I don't like, though, is autographs that run off the edge of the stickers. It also is nice when the card company goes out of their way to hide the edges of the sticker with a frame or other design element. I really hate the sticker autos that seem to be just thrown onto the card wherever they will fit. Stickers do also have a tendency to collect fuzz around the edges or underneath. On-card autographs eliminate a lot of those problems, but stickers are probably easier for card companies to obtain, store, and use in different products. I am okay with that for the most part, as long as the cards are designed to lessen the visual impact of the sticker itself. Some products, like Allen & Ginter's for example, just should never have sticker autos.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I could go either way. On-card is cool because like Bryan said it means the player actually handled that card. At the same time, stick autos are fine with me and I treat them the same. I'm just happy to get an auto!

    ReplyDelete
  6. I have always preferred on cards autographs over sticker autographs, but for years I continued to add both to my collection. However over the past year or so... I've stopped picking up sticker autographs unless the card is way too cheap to pass up or the athlete's on card signatures are nonexistent or out of my price range.

    ReplyDelete