Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Vintage Star Wars Collecting
Vintage Collecting Chat
Baggies - font variations & miss classed types etc
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Frunkstar" data-source="post: 410819" data-attributes="member: 314"><p>Thanks Mike, I needed a pick me up mate <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /> the clincher from what I can tell is that many of these know & now re-classed baggies have text variations (minor ones), but the baggie material / font size & length & even the heat seals match up as identical, but on some examples the coo's are not the same, which sort of makes life that little bit harder in being 100% that what I think maybe a simple case of 2 production facilities producing the same baggie type sometime even both styles in a single multi pack, so essentially getting the same stock of baggies from a sole distributor, both using the same heat sealing process & equipment, but using a different print process/press to make the font on the baggies, that coupled with them also possibly being supplied figures from more than one production plant is making for quite difficult conformation of my findings.</p><p></p><p>Example of the SW-b baggie or should I say baggies, these are both from the same multi pack BTW & as you can see the font is quite bled out on one whilst the other is sharp edged thinner font with a kind of patterning effect the other is devoid of.</p><p></p><p>[ATTACH=full]161179[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p>[ATTACH=full]161180[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p>[ATTACH=full]161181[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p>[ATTACH=full]161182[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p>[ATTACH=full]161183[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p>Additionally, up until the Palitoy-k baggie was indeed confirmed a palitoy baggie type, it was generally considered the font's with more bleed out were used mostly if not solely by Palitoy/Europe, the k baggie is a way disproves that, but on the flip side (see why my head hurts) the Palitoy-k baggie was also the sole baggie type (to date) to have been used by both Palitoy & Kenner before things became more standardized, see easy init :roll: :?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Frunkstar, post: 410819, member: 314"] Thanks Mike, I needed a pick me up mate ;) the clincher from what I can tell is that many of these know & now re-classed baggies have text variations (minor ones), but the baggie material / font size & length & even the heat seals match up as identical, but on some examples the coo's are not the same, which sort of makes life that little bit harder in being 100% that what I think maybe a simple case of 2 production facilities producing the same baggie type sometime even both styles in a single multi pack, so essentially getting the same stock of baggies from a sole distributor, both using the same heat sealing process & equipment, but using a different print process/press to make the font on the baggies, that coupled with them also possibly being supplied figures from more than one production plant is making for quite difficult conformation of my findings. Example of the SW-b baggie or should I say baggies, these are both from the same multi pack BTW & as you can see the font is quite bled out on one whilst the other is sharp edged thinner font with a kind of patterning effect the other is devoid of. [ATTACH=full]161179[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]161180[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]161181[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]161182[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]161183[/ATTACH] Additionally, up until the Palitoy-k baggie was indeed confirmed a palitoy baggie type, it was generally considered the font's with more bleed out were used mostly if not solely by Palitoy/Europe, the k baggie is a way disproves that, but on the flip side (see why my head hurts) the Palitoy-k baggie was also the sole baggie type (to date) to have been used by both Palitoy & Kenner before things became more standardized, see easy init :roll: :? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Vintage Star Wars Collecting
Vintage Collecting Chat
Baggies - font variations & miss classed types etc
Top
Bottom