So we recently discovered that shadowless thick stamp 1st eds have a -15 magenta layer(parallel to N) back and all other following shadowless have +15(other image). With this knowledge, machamp and all the theme deck pokemon now become discoverable. Thin stamp 1st editions appear to have +15.
What is everyones thoughts on this for potential value of the alpha theme deck foils vs the beta thin stamps? Personally have a tough time calling thin stamp foils true first editions.
If anyone owns any 1st eds please check the backs and let me lnow whether they are + or -. My conclusions are only based off a card pool of about 40 1st edition holos so more data would be helpful to proving this!
Adding credit due to @OCDCompletist for connecting the -15 dots to the thick stamps.
I had no idea that the thin stamps were actually from a different source or print run. This seems to flip my assumption on shadowless cards on its head. I always assumed that shadowless were Leftovers from the first big batch of cards printed for 1st edition. But they did different print runs entirely within 1st edition itself? So this means that non-thick stamp cards are always -15 magenta, and thin stamps will always be +15? This is wild.
Have you examined the “ghost” stamp cards yet? I’m also curious to know how this lines up with the revision of red cheek vs yellow cheek pikachu.
I don’t have any base set to examine sorry, but I hope you get more posts here, this is great!
Ah i think this is actually what you were looking for. These are what i believe to be the stampless first edition holos with -15 magenta on the back. My bad for not understanding, just woke up.
Mewtwo and ninetales were the the original foils from my brother and my first decks interestingly
Thick stamp machampss were printed with +15 as well just fyi. they printed alot pf them. Machamps a valuable card imo because it shows how the process changed over time. They always printed it
Can confirm that my Ghost Stamp Pikachu has a -15 front and +15 back like the Shadowless cards.
I only have one copy, so I don’t think anything definitive can be said about it yet, but I think you’re indeed right that they follow a similar print run as Shadowless for all Ghost stamp Pikachu - even though it IS a different print run, since otherwise they wouldn’t have had those Ghost stamps in the first place.
Ghost stamps are the traps applied without the stamp right?
1st ed stamps back then were 2 parts if i recall, thats how the 3d effect came to be. I own a few cards that are actually missing the trap and have only the stamp.
You’re indeed correct that those were printed with the sheets and the stamps were placed on top of it. Sometimes this is slightly misaligned, causing the 3D effect:
In my experience, the 3D thick stamps are actually more common to find on (non-holo) 1st edition Base Set cards than 2D stamps, although not by much. Probably 60-40% distribution if I had to make a guess.
I was asking about 1st Ed commons and uncommons. Nearly all of them would be thick stamp. If the thick stamp holos were first printed with a -15 magenta layer, a portion of the commons and uncommons should also have this too, right?
Unless, -15 thick stamp holos were printed on a different printer than the rest of the 1st Ed Base Set Shadowless print run… in which case this difference would not be time-dependent, but printer-dependent instead.
Can you clarify whether the 1st Ed commons and uncommons are all -15, +15, or a mixture?
Def interesting how it would end up in the theme deck. They mustve dragged the images from a 1st ed sheet, wish i had a better understanding of it but that tells me traps were on the black plate if it was only pikachu. In the deck. Mistake was prob in the file and never edited out
Not positive how youre asking the question. Any chance of rewording it? Thin stamp foils and non-holos are +15 on the back and thick stamp are -15. Sounds like all your stuff aligns with my findings though🔥
The normal shadowless backs are +15 and the fronts are -15. I havent seen any non holos that are -/- or +/+ yet.
Thick. -/-
Thin. -/+
Nonholo -/+
Yep, everything lines up with your findings from what I can see!
Sorry, let me try to tidy the question up:
Are all non-holo 1st editions (including thick stamps) +15 on the back?
Then off the back of that…
If that is the case, then how can we differentiate a “first” print run for the non-holos?
And if this -15 printing variation only applies to the thick stamp holos, then can we really class it as a smoking gun for the first print run, since it excludes 86/102 of the cards in the set from ever being considered “true” first editions?
Out of curiosity, I also checked some 4th print holos and they’re +15 on the back too.
