General Forum

I'm in the process of adding a Cracker Jack "Fighting Planes" set from 1940. The set has 3 color varations of card-backs for each card in the set (grey, tan, white). The color variations are caused by different card-stock used on different print runs.Besides the card-stock, the cards are identical. My question: Are the card back differences considered card variations or parallel sets?

I'm leaning toward variation since it was not the intent to create 3 distinct sets. Thoughts?

Sounds like VAR to me. That way, if a collector had 1/3 of the set in each color, but still has one of each, the set would be considered "complete" as I'm sure anyone did back then.

Thanks! My thoughts exactly.

I'd consider them parallels.  If every card has every variation it's a parallel.  By definition all parallels are variations. Parallels don't have to be intentional.

I don't like when you and Dan disagree. You're both on my "go-to" list when I have questions. Your argument is the reason I was questioning which way to go. Since I was mid-stream in adding the set when Dan gave his answer I listed them as VAR. Now I feel like I made a mistake!

Everybody has their opinions when it comes to the stuff that's not clear cut.  In those cases I'd ask Admin for clarification.

I originally thougth Variant, but thinking futher I'd have to side with Parallel. My reasoning is the difference between parallels. Parallels are a type of variant. All parallels are variants but not all variants are parallel.

There are size variants, er parallels where the cards are identical except on is standard size, one a mini and one postcard sized or larger.

Most current parallels differ only in a frame or background color, but are virtually the same as the base card. The background color is changed, or the border color is changed or the font style, color or size changes. Or some extra text is stamped across the front (artists proof, Rookie Phenom etc...)

Variants often change the main image, a portrait vs an action shot. Used to be ages ago they would simply make a "different" card, not a "variant" or "parallel".

In my book if the difference is subtle (like a color change) it is a Parallel. If the difference is very noticable and the two cards don't look "alike" then it is a variant.

An error vs correct error is a variant the difference was unintended. An intended difference (color change) is a parallel.

Of course someone will probably find some cards that defy my explanations causing my parallel vs variant theory to go up in smoke.

I'd love to hear what Admin has to say on the topic.

I understand the logic behind the "parallel" thinking, as we have listed disclaimer backs and non-disclaimer backs as parallel sets and other oddities like that.

In this case, with the paper stock being different for the different printings, it reminds me of the Topps white back/gray backs for the 1956 baseball set. They are listed as variants, not as a parallel.

I'm okay with it going either way, I would check with Admin regarding it and get the take from the top.

Edit: Oh, and I don't have a problem with disagreeing with Chuck once in a while. No two people are going to see everything perfectly the same 100% of the time. I do, however, respect his opinion, and am open to hearing (reading) the reasoning.

I was just perusing the gallery. Nice scans.

BTW, parallel supporters: Which back is the "main" set?

Also, since we're looking at this set, why do 2 of the "United States: Vultee V-12A" cards have the word "Insert" in the Name?