Do you prefer to collect 1st Edition Base Set, or Shadowless Base Set, and why?
Iām pretty sure that anyone who collects Shadowless over 1st edition, does because they either completed or canāt afford 1st edition.
1 Like
I actually prefer shadowless from an aesthetic point of view.
Likewise I prefer no symbol error jungle holos over first ed.
8 Likes
LOL that is quite the assumptionā¦
Like @peacock said, I picked them over 1st from an aesthetic standpoint. Iāve always liked the overall look of the base set without the stamp, but with the rich color of the 1stED.
On top of that, PSA labels look waaaaaay cooler with āShadowlessā on it than ā1st Editionā.
Just my reasoning for collecting them 
2 Likes
I have no graded 1st Ed Base cards but I have enough Shadowless to buy a complete PSA 10 1st Ed Set if I were to sell them soā¦
2 Likes
Me too;)
Shadowless is the best non-secret collectible.
No Symbols are the best secret value collectibleā¦the real treasure.
2 Likes
Is a 1st edition stamp really that ugly to everyone that says they like the aesthetics better?
Donāt get me wrong, collect what you like, but it seems stange that a little ink is deemed ugly enough that youād rather collect the second tier set as the sole reason over the first.
6 Likes
I find Shadowless to be more charming. It has a nice story. Iād rather have a 1st Edition card probably but Iām content with Shadowless because they are very similar. Like @swolepoke said, the colors are the same rich (and far superior) pallet as was on 1st Edition.
1 Like
As a kid I had majority unlimited cards. I knew what shadowless was and I had a few shadowless cards that I thought were pretty cool and I put them in a special place in my binder. But I had at best two 1st ed base cards.
So when I grew up and started making disposable income, I bought the cards I perceived to be the rarest and scarcest that I wanted as a kid (1st edition).
Well, I stand corrected.
Never really looked at it from an aesthetic prospective, since the difference
is so minor as Cullers stated.
Lol no one said ugly. I donāt think anyone here finds the stamp even remotely ugly.
But yes, Base Set Shadowless, imo looks the overall most appealing. With other sets thereās always a 1stED stamp on the left side, and a set symbol on the right side, which gives the card a sense of balance.
So with Shadowless not having a stamp or symbol + the nice color, I think just to some, it looks overall more appealing as a card.
And like I said, the PSA label is much cooler as far as the text thatās on it.
Idk, to each their own right? Lol
3 Likes
I really like both, but it is an expense issue for me. I cant afford to dump money into first edition holos, but I have a complete rare-common set. Iām now focussed on the shadowless holos. Although I do need a first edition blastoise o have all the starters as a 7 grade.
shadowless is attractive because:
- cheaper
- same beautiful, tonal artwork (Iām sorry, but unlimited looks like a bad bleach job)
- sophisticated - people need to know a bit of the history, so it adds an aura to those collecting it, right?
- understated - if you say you only collect 1st edition, itās like an art collector that only collects monets and Picassos, you come off as just rich
- rarity - as of now, it seems shadowless has a lower pop so it is a harder chase, especially the PSA 10
- potential value - last year this time, you can get some PSA 10s for about $300, right now they are still hovering at around 700-1000, which is SUPER undervalued, and many people perceive its growth ceiling to be great
- to be different - this sort of ties into the sophistication part; people like to feel like they are unique, even in collecting; this is just psychology of things; Iām not ashamed to say I love the same pokemon that 10 million others like, but many hate to admit this so they try to find a niche
I am the one that collects shadowless because I donāt have enough capital to get the 1st edition and, from an investment standpoint, Iām hoping it will grow faster than 1st editionā¦
I think that about covers it. only my opinionā¦
4 Likes
Shadowless hasnāt matured yet. As 1st Editions become more and more scarce, it will grow in popularity.
Nostalgia-wise, itās also a fairly niche set relative to 1st Edition. Few people remember āShadowlessā being a legitimate set when they were kids, but everyone remembers the 1st Edition stamp.
Iām 50/50.
1st ed is a must because of their noriety and slow but steady rise in price.
Shadowless is a must because they are extremely undervalued with high potential for a heavy price increase down the road (unless Gary unleashes his factory sized warehouse of stored product 
).
1 Like
I agree with your reasoning. I personally like that the central highlight of the card is the specimen. Itās subtle, but with the clean look of shadowless cards still with the full saturation of color like 1st edition cards, I slightly prefer shadowless cards.
I have both. Sometimes I look at the simpler Shadowless version and it looks more clean, subtle and simple; compared to the stamped one. Obviously the stamped version is a must(even though 1st edition and Shadowless cards are the same). The āShadowlessā name also sounds and feels more aesthetically pleasing, to me. But if I had to choose, Iād go with Unlimited.
1 Like
I prefer the look of the cards without the stamp, as well as having a monetary boundary. I do have roughly 60% of 1st edition base, but none of the holos. Maybe one day.
1st = 1st
I have an equal amount of both 1st ed and shadowless. Both were rumors back in the day. Occasionally someone had a Shadowless card. 1st Edition was completely non-existent.
I still have a visceral reaction when I see 1st ed base or shadowless cards. They are the most historic sets in the hobby.
Ultimately 1st will always be 1st. Itās more ubiquitous. Shadowless is always going to have an acquired taste = niche. While I love both, that is the reality.
3 Likes
So which one do you like more, Scott?