Saturday, March 6, 2010


"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."

This famous quote is what came to mind after I recently read a posting about a new card release. There has been some pretty heated debate about the cards and their "desirability".

The cards in question are from a release called Famous Fabrics. They span all different types of sports and incorporate memorabilia into the cards.

Here's an example of one of my favorite cards from the set - a Wayne Gretzky, Kirk McLean dual memorabilia card.

It seems the center of the debate revolves around the exclusion of player photos on the card.

This was done on purpose by the makers of the cards and it could be because they didn't have the rights to some photos? It could be because they couldn't find certain photos? It could be because the didn't like the photos? It could be because they never wanted photos?

Fact of the matter is, the company made the call to not include photos.

Does that make this card less desirable? Does that make the design of the card less enjoyable?

I don't think so. I think the card looks pretty slick.

There will always be cards that don't appeal to me and some that absolutely look phenomenal. Whether it comes from one company or another is more or less irrelevant.

What looks good to me is what I consider good.

I am always interested to know why other feel certain cards are less desirable than others. Critiquing and criticizing is more than good debate to me.

Where I draw the line is when someone comes out and says "This is garbage." or "It looks unprofessional." I think that if someone has some harsh comments towards something, that they explain why. I'm also curious as to why people spend time commenting on things that they have no interest in. To me, it's nothing more than trying to get a rise out of people.

At the end of the day, collect what you want, enjoy what you want. If there are things that you don't like, be a part of the process constructively or just avoid it completely.

For me, cards with photos are great. Cards without photos...they're great too.


  1. I don't mean to be rude because I really like this blog and you've a very good thing going on here, but are you serious? This card looks like there's 3D-glasses on it, and an eye that winks!

    Seriously, I guess for people who are in 'card business' for just collecting, the photo wouldn't matter. For a hockey fan, that lives in Finland, who may never get to actual NHL hockey game, the photos are big part of the hockey interest itself. I wouldn't buy an Ed Belfour card without a picture of his cool mask. However, with fantastic design, players name, huge jersey number, team logo and very effective texture..yeah, why not! (without photo I mean)

    That's a very good question. I hope there will be more comments.

  2. Hey, I'm all for card photos. Don't get me wrong.

    I'm showing what cards look like that don't (or can't) put photos on the front.

    I think the spectrum of what one wants to collect is the choice of the individual. If he or she wants photos - no problem. No photos - they can do that too. Only memorabilia - yup, that's possible.

    The variety of what is out there is enough to please everyone. So why not have the choices?

    I can appreciate you not liking the card, but if someone else it wrong?

    I don't think so.