Skip to main content

Artistry or too artsy?

With the arrival of Topps Series 2 and some of the other midseason card releases, there has been a re-examination of the photography in the sets. Several posts, including a couple today, have followed the theme that maybe Topps is trying a bit too hard this year. The cards are "too artsy."

This topic makes me smile, because it is something that I deal with on a regular basis in my job. Every photographer is different and each photographer will shoot according to what they've learned, but also according to their personality. Some provide straightforward sports action shots. Some provide consistently fantastic stuff. Some stray toward the artsy stuff.

Artsy is good sometimes, but in the sports world you're treading a fine line with that kind of shooting. Most sports followers want good, solid action photography, like the Hank Blalock card at the top of the post, which is a great shot. But "artsy" turns off a lot of folks. So sometimes we have to tell the photographer, "No, that's too artsy. What else do you have?"

I think that's what some collectors are saying with the arrival of Series 2. "It's too artsy. What else you got?"

Well, it's too late for a recall, so we just have to live with some of the odd shots. But really, it's in the eye of the beholder. Some people like those photos. So, what I have done is pull 10 cards from the Series 2 packs, which I bought Friday, that could be construed as "artsy." You tell me. Is it "artistry" or "too artsy"?

1. Jeff Clement, Mariners. "Man Behind the Mask."

2. Joe Girardi, Yankees. "The Boss Approves"

3. Eric Chavez, A's. "Road Block"

4. Alfredo Aceves, Yankees. "Comin' at Ya"

5. Esteban German, Royals. "Numbers Game"

6. Pat Neshek, Twins. "Loco Legs"

7. Carlos Beltran, Mets. "Duck and Cover"

8. Jacoby Ellsbury, Red Sox. "Face in the Crowd"

9. Travis Ishikawa, Giants. "Well in Hand"

10. Nate Schierholtz, Giants. "Face in the Shadows"

What do I think? Well, the Giants photos suck. The rest I don't mind. Some of the shots are different, but that gives the set character, something to remember. I don't have a problem with people trying too hard. It's a lot better than not trying at all.

Comments

Nachos Grande said…
I think I like 'em. I collect enough different sets that I don't constantly need to see the typical batter hitting, pitcher pitching, speedy guy running poses that often plague sets (especially recent year Topps base sets).
Sooz said…
I like this post.
RWH said…
I'm definitely a fan of the artsy look. It's not like 1986 when you had one Topps set a year and you had to live with only that. With so many sets today, it's really nice to have something different.
capewood said…
I just bought a bunch of Series 2 packs and I was struck by how many really interesting action shots are in the set. I like 'em.
Fuji said…
Great post... I think it's like most things in this hobby. Some enjoy it, others don't. If you think about it, how often does everyone agree on something. Some are okay with redemptions... some aren't. There are collectors who like high tech, fancy, shiny cards... other people like the retro look. I'll assume that most people love on-card autos... but I know some of my students love Topps' holographic sticker autos. In this hobby, you're always going to find someone to rave or complain about something. Personally... I agree with you... most of those actions shots are pretty cool... especially the Girardi, Acevez, and German photos.
Laurens said…
For as long as I can remember from the late 80s on, Topps has been satisfied to go with the typical hitters hitting and pitchers pitching type of images.

At the end of the day, it is still basic Topps we are talking about and it seems the images are never as 'crisp' as Upper Deck's, but the actual images of their 2009 version of their flagship brand have a unique quality to them that makes UDs cards kind of boring in comparison.
skoormit said…
These are all great shots. The Ellsbury in particular has a chance to be an iconic image that collector's identify at a glance years from now. There are several 87 Topps cards that I can identify if you show me just one quarter of the card. Sure, part of that is because I spent about 500 hours busting wax and sorting cards that year, but part of that is also because the shots themselves were so memorable. Sure, in 2009 Topps runs the risk of having so many of these shots that they run together, but if that is what we are complaining about, that this set has too many great shots, I think we might need to consider the possibility that we are impossible to please.
night owl said…
Excellent point, Tim.

Popular posts from this blog

That was easy

   My approach on 2021 Topps, after seeing the cards, empty shelves and the tales of inflated prices, was that I could last the entire year without buying any.   The effort wasn't worth it. I'll just take my Dodgers and go home.   I went to Target once after the release date a couple weeks ago, I don't really remember what day I went, and saw empty shelves and shrugged.   So, move forward two weeks and it's birthday season. Those who have read this blog for awhile know I have a lot of birthdays in my family in March and it's the primary shopping time of the year, besides Christmas. I went to Target yesterday for a few items and I made sure to check the card aisle, just in case. I didn't expect to find anything, but I think you know me by now, I have to buy my first packs of the season if I have the opportunity. It's worth a look. The shelves seemed fairly empty as I approached. But they weren't. When I got there, I saw maybe six or seven 2021 Topps baseb

Reliving my childhood isn't easy

  My favorite part of collecting cards doesn't have to do with collecting current players, rookie cards or prospecting.   Although I pay attention to and buy modern cards and also seek out cards from before I was collecting or even before I was born, none of those cards are why I'm doing this.   The best part of collecting for me -- where the warm fuzzies reside, what I'd save for myself after chucking the rest of my collection -- is any card that was released when I was a child or young teen. I don't think I'm special in that way. A lot of collectors probably feel that way. But, unlike, say, the adult who grew up during the junk wax era, who can open pack after pack of 1990 Donruss and get that nostalgic rush without fear of packs ever disappearing, it's a little more difficult for me. I can go to a discount store a couple of miles away in town and grab some 1988 Donruss packs (I think I can still do that, who knows with the hobby weirdness lately). But there&#

G.O.A.T, the '80s: 20-11

  Big news at the night owl nest today. I subscribed to MLB.TV. Finally, I can watch any game I want this season. I no longer have to suffer with seeing the Mets play the Marlins for the 197th time or grit my teeth through Michael Kay because there's no baseball to watch anywhere else. I can ignore the Yankees for 162 games if I want! And that's what I plan to do. The Phillies-Orioles spring training game is on right now and then I'll search out something even more obscure later. I know, I know, I'm late to the party. That's the way it's been when it comes to entertainment viewing for most of my life. Taking years to land an MLB subscription was more of a cash-flow issue, but when I was younger, I'd miss out on the popular movies all the time because of a relatively sheltered existence. While high school classmates were quoting lines from Caddyshack and Stripes in the lunch room and on the school bus, I knew mostly Star Wars movies and E.T. HBO was the big t