Topps Project 2020 is the worst product since 1991 Fleer

[80pc]

I'm with OP on this. Majority of these are ugly and look unprofessional.

Art is subjective to an extent but there is objectively beautiful art and if you're honest with yourself you know this.

For example, find me someone that says Notre Dame is ugly? If they say it is, are you just going to say well that's their opinion, of course not, it's objectively beautiful to the human race.

Interpretation works when there is substance to begin with otherwise you see a white canvas painting sell for $15 million. Or a pile of crap end up in a modern art museum. Both are those are objectively lacking beauty or inspiration.

These are just my opinions.

[marterburn]

Originally Posted by 80pc

I'm with OP on this. Majority of these are ugly and look unprofessional.

Art is subjective to an extent but there is objectively beautiful art and if you're honest with yourself you know this.

For example, find me someone that says Notre Dame is ugly? If they say it is, are you just going to say well that's their opinion, of course not, it's objectively beautiful to the human race.

Interpretation works when there is substance to begin with otherwise you see a white canvas painting sell for $15 million. Or a pile of crap end up in a modern art museum. Both are those are objectively lacking beauty or inspiration.

These are just my opinions.

Viewers don't get to decide what art is. Art is art if the artist calls it as such. For instance, Dadaism.

Oh, and I'm rather positive Malevich's white on white work would clear $15 mil.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[CardFarmer]

Originally Posted by Turd Ferguson

I've been scouring Topps' site for awhile - is there a particular page on their site where all of the cards and print runs can be viewed?

The topps archive shows them, but there are also aggregators that update daily. The one I use is on Beckett. At the bottom of the link below they have a checklist with updated print runs.

https://www.beckett.com/news/topps-p...-iconic-cards/

[Orange October]

Probably not something I would buy

[cj828282]

First Jeter card coming out tomorrow.

https://twitter.com/Topps/status/1249864993178292224

[mwheeler27]

Originally Posted by cj828282

First Jeter card coming out tomorrow.

https://twitter.com/Topps/status/1249864993178292224

So much for this product being the worst product since 1991.

[80pc]

Originally Posted by marterburn

Viewers don't get to decide what art is. Art is art if the artist calls it as such. For instance, Dadaism.

Oh, and I'm rather positive Malevich's white on white work would clear $15 mil.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Sure they do. That's why some art ends up in the museum and some ends up in the garbage. It's not the artist deciding it's the viewers.

And as far as Malevich, if that's the artist that sold the white canvas, any amount over the cost of the canvas is too much. It is not art, objectively.

[Archangel1775]

Funny, at the start people were convinced the Koufax was "something else".... and here we are now... HAHAHA

[marterburn]

Originally Posted by 80pc

Sure they do. That's why some art ends up in the museum and some ends up in the garbage. It's not the artist deciding it's the viewers.



And as far as Malevich, if that's the artist that sold the white canvas, any amount over the cost of the canvas is too much. It is not art, objectively.

You missed my point. There have been movements in art history that are only art because the artist said it is, for instance Dadaism. It's the meaning behind said art that makes it art. Look up "Fountain" by Marcel Duchamp.

And again, just look up Malevich. He took Cubism to it's very basic form, calling it suprematism. Instead of using geometric shapes to stir portray action or emotion in a subject, which is the point of Cubism, his work used geometric shapes to create emotion, without subject. A prime example of this is "White on White". It's hanging a MOMA in NYC.

My point it this. There's a reason artists create in the way that they do. They know what they're doing. That doesn't make them bad artists. There's a purpose to every element of their work whether you think there is or not. There's a purpose whether it works for you visually or not. There's a purpose if the artist says there is.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[Tasupi]

Am i missing the 1954 in the Mays or did they fix it?

[no10pin]

Originally Posted by Tasupi

Am i missing the 1954 in the Mays or did they fix it?

Wow, they actually did update the picture. I wonder how this is going to work.

Edit: Or at least one of the pictures.

[Tasupi]

Rivera’s glove was on the wrong hand when they originally showed his and then they updated and they have shipped correctly. They probably have the artist do a quick update.

[80pc]

Originally Posted by marterburn

You missed my point. There have been movements in art history that are only art because the artist said it is, for instance Dadaism. It's the meaning behind said art that makes it art. Look up "Fountain" by Marcel Duchamp.

And again, just look up Malevich. He took Cubism to it's very basic form, calling it suprematism. Instead of using geometric shapes to stir portray action or emotion in a subject, which is the point of Cubism, his work used geometric shapes to create emotion, without subject. A prime example of this is "White on White". It's hanging a MOMA in NYC.

My point it this. There's a reason artists create in the way that they do. They know what they're doing. That doesn't make them bad artists. There's a purpose to every element of their work whether you think there is or not. There's a purpose whether it works for you visually or not. There's a purpose if the artist says there is.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

I don't think I did. You said anybody can create something and call it art. I disagree with this. Society decides what is art or not otherwise everything is art. It doesn't mean an artist cant create new forms of art as you showed, but unless it's accepted as art by a portion of society, it's just a thing someone made.

Let my say it another way. When I was in English class we were instructed to write poems. I wrote a bunch of semi gibberish that sounded good and argued to my instructor you have to give me an A on all my poems because they make sense to me and you are not interpreting them correctly.

Needless to say, she did not agree. It had to convey a message or serve a purpose to matter and as much as you want it to be up to the artist, from what I can gather, that's not the case.

I don't think we'll agree here based on your prior statement. With that, I would agree to not tell you what is not art as long as you don't tell me what is.

[Raymond23]

So, if I understand this product correctly...20 artists re-imaging the same 20 cards. So, 400 card in this set, at $20/each.

$8000 for this set? Wow...that’s nuts...

[NNGESPORTS]

Originally Posted by marterburn

You missed my point. There have been movements in art history that are only art because the artist said it is, for instance Dadaism. It's the meaning behind said art that makes it art. Look up "Fountain" by Marcel Duchamp.

And again, just look up Malevich. He took Cubism to it's very basic form, calling it suprematism. Instead of using geometric shapes to stir portray action or emotion in a subject, which is the point of Cubism, his work used geometric shapes to create emotion, without subject. A prime example of this is "White on White". It's hanging a MOMA in NYC.

My point it this. There's a reason artists create in the way that they do. They know what they're doing. That doesn't make them bad artists. There's a purpose to every element of their work whether you think there is or not. There's a purpose whether it works for you visually or not. There's a purpose if the artist says there is.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

And the "purpose" of most of these "artists" was to steal a paycheck while churning out garbage in the shortest amount of time possible.

[marterburn]

Originally Posted by NNGESPORTS

And the "purpose" of most of these "artists" was to steal a paycheck while churning out garbage in the shortest amount of time possible.

Literally no.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[marterburn]

Originally Posted by 80pc

I don't think I did. You said anybody can create something and call it art. I disagree with this. Society decides what is art or not otherwise everything is art. It doesn't mean an artist cant create new forms of art as you showed, but unless it's accepted as art by a portion of society, it's just a thing someone made.



Let my say it another way. When I was in English class we were instructed to write poems. I wrote a bunch of semi gibberish that sounded good and argued to my instructor you have to give me an A on all my poems because they make sense to me and you are not interpreting them correctly.



Needless to say, she did not agree. It had to convey a message or serve a purpose to matter and as much as you want it to be up to the artist, from what I can gather, that's not the case.



I don't think we'll agree here based on your prior statement. With that, I would agree to not tell you what is not art as long as you don't tell me what is.

Yeah, that's fair.

I'll just add one more thing though. These artists purposes don't come from nowhere, they have influences -- they come from an evolution of philosophy of how to apply visual media.

We wouldn't have Picasso without Impressionism, for instance.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[thebrett]

Originally Posted by Joliet Jake

I have a running Google Sheet with all the information for the standard cards. Feel free to view at your leisure.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing

Thanks for making this, will be cool to see how these evolve.

[TarjetasBéisbol]

It doesn't matter what we all think, the art world will look down on us and say "you just don't understand". Watch the documentary "Exit through the gift shop" to get an idea of how the so called art world can be manipulated.

[BigRhino]

Originally Posted by marterburn

Yeah, that's fair.

I'll just add one more thing though. These artists purposes don't come from nowhere, they have influences -- they come from an evolution of philosophy of how to apply visual media.

We wouldn't have Picasso without Impressionism, for instance.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Agree with you except for with oldmanalan. He is not an artist and is not submitting art. He submitted a stock photo with captions for his first card

[SupermanBrandon]

Originally Posted by BigRhino

Agree with you except for with oldmanalan. He is not an artist and is not submitting art. He submitted a stock photo with captions for his first card

Did someone buy it?
Do they see it as art?
Does the creator call themselves an artist?
Does the artists see it as art?
Whether you like it or not...it’s still art! Even if you don’t perceive it that way.

[BlowoutBuzz]

Originally Posted by Turd Ferguson

I've been scouring Topps' site for awhile - is there a particular page on their site where all of the cards and print runs can be viewed?

https://www.blowoutcards.com/blog/ar...t-2020-series/

[ATLOTP]

Originally Posted by NNGESPORTS

And the "purpose" of most of these "artists" was to steal a paycheck while churning out garbage in the shortest amount of time possible.

This is straight ignorant. Why don't you look into the creative processes for these artists? You gonna tell me digital art isn't art? Design work isn't art? It isn't music if they don't play an instrument? I swear to God some of you old heads are insufferable.

[yrocks2001]

Today's cards are Derek Jeter by King and Nolan Ryan by Siff.

[yrocks2001]

Originally Posted by NNGESPORTS

And the "purpose" of most of these "artists" was to steal a paycheck while churning out garbage in the shortest amount of time possible.

Most of these artists are being hit hard by COVID as well as fewer people are leaving their house to go out to art galleries and most depend on their art for a living. What these guys get paid from Topps in order to pump out 20 pieces in less than a year is probably not even all that worth it but they expand their fan base and expand their portfolio.