Hi, I’m posting this mega-thread here for the lovers of repeating errors and particularly for pioneers in the hobby of repeating errors. I’m not a size-queen (unlike some) so any repeating error, big or microscopic, is on the table as long as it is repeating and undocumented. We want to bring knowledge to the repeating error card community.
There seems to be some confusion about why I created this thread so I would like to list the unique goals I hope to achieve:
Inspire people to look for new repeating errors; don’t just assume they’re all found.
Create a hub for those seeking sidequests in life to grab one and start the hunt. That’s why I’ve stressed these must be repeating errors. Preferrably new ones because the oldy goodies are already too expensive and too sparse.
Have a concentrated and organized hub for not (well) known repeating error/quirky cards. Like the Koga’s breedrill with the red dot. I’ve never heard of it but I’m going to look for it now.
P.S. This is a judgement-free safezone for people to post their personally discovered repeating errors and quirks. Please refrain from minimizing and dismissing contributions. Let people have their fun because why not?
@fritz If you like text errors here’s an undocumented one I discovered recently. Legendary Collection Gyarados Holo 12/110 . I was saving this one for a rainy day but now is as good a time as any. The “e” in “paralyzed” has two printer hickeys. The error varies in severity and i have seen it with just one slightly larger hickey on the top corner of the “e”.
Offset printing works by transferring ink from a plate to a blanket, then to the card stock. A hickey occurs when dust, lint, dried ink, or foreign particles gets caught between the printing plate/blanket and the card stock. Because cards are printed in sheets, and because many sheets are printed using the same plates/blankets, errors (including printer hickeys, oversprays, etc.) will repeat.
If you have to use a microscope to see a printer hickey, is it noteworthy at all? I can understand your curiosity and interest in documenting these, but I do not believe that they are noteworthy enough for a grading company to acknowledge them or to command a premium.
Are you hoping to raise awareness to financially benefit from these “errors” or is this more of a passion project so to speak?
I collect errors and these are my opinions. Others may disagree or see value where I don’t.
I have experienced this sub’s dislike for posts like this, but I like the idea of pooling these cards together in a single post, even those that are minor, for community awareness.
edit- to be fair though, there is an error card megathread
Only in part, a minor thing not worth the magnification as it doesn’t actually cause problems. In the linked thread I mention
I’ve seen a lot of the subculture of people who pop in thinking they have the new rarest error card lol, no worries there.
There is, at times, a small pushback (curbing of enthusiasm) until to poster makes clear their intentions (not trying to make claims/hype/sell their item). Likely a response to the years of people doing exactly those things
100%. It’s a learned response because generally the “problem” with these types of threads is that it’s often someone trying to argue for increased value due to some extremely minor error.
If we are just documenting small errors for the sake of curiosity I’m am fully behind it. Having one large thread makes more sense too that way it’s all in one place and people can mute it if they aren’t interested.
I think a lot of folks who get into Pokemon collecting clamor over any minor error until they begin to understand the value of various errors in the market. That’s why you see thousands of listings on eBay for “error cards” that you have to use a microscope to see, but they have $1,000+ listing prices.
The reality is that collectors love to chase something rare or to feel like they own something unique. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that - I think this is an innate collector desire. But it’s also important to help people understand value in the error community, because it’s so often overblown and unfounded.
I am excited about documenting errors for the sake of knowledge alone. I do not feel as though these cards merit documentation by a grading company, nor do I believe that they should command a premium.
Honestly, I have a passion for the discovery of errors. I’ve never made a single penny on error cards (and probably never will because I can’t let go of them) . I collect them and I prefer to get a few inhand before I put my neck on the line to claim that a repeating error exists. Furthermore, like with the Articuno I posted, sometimes there are less noticeable repeating characteristics that make the card more interesting, which are better seen in person.
This being said, your input isn’t needed if you are going to be dismissive of what I and some others enjoy. Imagine if I came into a subject you liked and said “This is objectively worthless and not noteworthy” as if my opinion is the law of the land. I enjoy all repeating errors and think they are all noteworthy. You don’t have to agree with me but there is no net positive that can come from raining on someone’s parade - unless you just enjoy that kind of thing.
None of the errors I’ve posted require a microscope to see but, like large errors, they look pretty cool under one - cept the Arbok. They can’t all be knockouts.
That’s all I’m doing. I’ve got tons of common repeating errors to add too. I’m not dropping everything at once though. This is just a hobby… not a job.
My goal was not to rain on your parade. You are clearly very passionate about this and I’m glad that you have a thread on this forum to post your discoveries in.
I was hoping to ask more of a philosophical question about what makes an error an error and the parameters that make errors noteworthy or not to the larger community. I am not some sort of “outsider” who doesn’t understand errors; you are welcome to see some of my postings in the dedicated error thread.
Obviously our opinions differ, and that’s bound to happen. That’s what makes forums really great places - diversity of opinion and community-shared knowledge.
Not the same. This is undocumented repeating errors only. No one-offs. It’s for sleuths who enjoy the hunt of finding new errors and posting them. And for passionate error enthusiasts and collectors to have a new side quest in life.
I understand. I just see errors as the character of a card. Like a card with no error is like a vanilla Minecraft zombie with nothing. A repeating micro error is like a Minecraft Zombie holding a poison potato. A grail error is like a Minecraft Zombie with diamond armor. You see, those teeny tiny errors may help you legitimize a card one day - determine if it’s real or fake - because forgers are likely going to try to replicate the perfect card.
If you’re referring to the edit, I understand your purpose. It was an olive branch to not ignore obvious counter-arguments. I think everyone means well, and people really do appreciate these errors in their own right.
I’ve posted one of my own finds on this forum, check it out
I appreciate the Minecraft analogy (though admittedly I don’t understand it all that much ), but I am not following with this line of reasoning.
These microscopic repeating errors on a handful of cards will not help to prove authenticity of real cards one day. There are more reliable and valid ways to authenticate a card from a forgery (e.g., core black layer, off-set CMYK printing dots, ink examination via heavy metal XRF analysis, ink fluorescence to 365 nm UV light, card stock texture, card stock transparency with bright light, etc.).
Again, I don’t mean to burst your bubble, but to offer valid methods used by grading companies and by collectors.
), but I am not following with this line of reasoning.