Night Owl Cards

All right, I was a little hasty in my previous post, speculating that Fleer was a little smarter than we thought they were in 1982. If the card makers were thinking of the "rule of thirds" when they composed the cards, they didn't do a good job of it. Chances are they weren't thinking any such thing, as the comments in the last post suggested. I had my suspicions anyway based on a few things that were also mentioned in the comments. First, I agree that the image on the Sutcliffe '82 Fleer card should be on the right, not the left. Also, while posting the cards, I kept thinking that the rule of thirds would have worked better if the cards were horizontal and not vertical. But the big thing is the background. I didn't really think of that. In order for the rule of thirds to be effective, you need something in the rest of the photo that is interesting. Fleer fell flat on its face in that area. So, I decided to go to my favorite photographic set of very r...

Yes, I'm still stuck on 1982 Fleer. Deal with it. You see something better in the card aisle now? As you well know, probably from the yammering on my blog, 1982 Fleer has issues. Most of them have to do with errors on the back and blurry photos on the front. My particular issue with '82 Fleer has always been with the tremendous amount of off-center photos. There are many, like this Tom Griffin card. It is glaring because most of the time the subject on a card photo is centered. It's just the way we collectors like them. The '82 Fleer set looked plain dopey. But then, out of the blue, almost 30 years after this card set was issued, I thought of something. Do you know about "the rule of thirds"? If you have any photography experience you do. It's a pretty basic concept . The rule of thirds states that with any photo, you should imagine it divided into nine equal squares by two equally spaced horizontal lines and two equally spaced vertical lines...