Do you only collect cards that are older than a certain date?

[Sam Salt]

There is a school of thought that says that the early cards are much more attractive than later cards. The quality of printing certainly seems better in most cases.

Do you have a 'cut off date' for cards that you would add to your collection - i.e. would you not collect anything older than 1920 for example? Or do you think the later cards have an appeal of their own?

[dant melys]

I'd add anything to my colletion that took my eye (if I could affod it that is) .

Age doesn't really come into it for me .

[misterguineagold]

HI,
     I stop at 1910. Edward V11. died and card quality started to decline.

[ozron]

I collect cigarette cards only and only pre 1940.

[Cedric1812]

I focus on Birds and cards are often less attractive (to me) after 1939. Ogden's 'British Birds and their Eggs' is a lovely set for that year but after that the Tetley's 1970 set is the only nice one I've seen. In terms of stunning colours and illustrations, the 1890s were definitely the glory years and for British sets the turn of the century was brilliant - we had the classic Franklyn Davy cards (based on the Church & Dwight issues) and then the Harvey & Davy Birds. After 1918 they were more hit and miss for me.

[lachlan]

I started with pre-WWII, but as I invariably found cards from pre-1920 more attractive (as well as being more expensive I should add), I began to focus more on those.That said, I still pick up the odd set from the pre-adhesive regime (the 1920s usually). Certainly the older the card, the better the quality and generally-speaking the more pleasing to the eye, at least to my eye(s).

[ozron]

I started with pre-WWII, but as I invariably found cards from pre-1920 more attractive (as well as being more expensive I should add), I began to focus more on those.That said, I still pick up the odd set from the pre-adhesive regime (the 1920s usually). Certainly the older the card, the better the quality and generally-speaking the more pleasing to the eye, at least to my eye(s).

Yours is a general statement, I know, but don't you appreciate the eye appeal of Players Butterflies 1932, for example?

[wolfie]

at the moment i am only collecting ww1 cards, i do have a set of reproductions because i havent yet seen a original  set yet. though i do itned to branch out and i was tempted to purchase a set of 200oad cards, i still have a soft spot for this comic of my youth.

[lachlan]

In reply to ozron, yes I agree with you as regards the Butterfly set (the 1932 series), though it is not an adhesive set. Indeed I have virtually all the post WW1 sets of Players and that particular set was one of the most difficult to get at a reasonable price (eventually got it in pristine condition at around 30% of catalogue), the most diificult set being the first series of the motor cars (1935 or 36, off the top of my head) and which I still am looking for in top class condition. The latter is an adhesive set and the cards I've come across have a somewhat mottled effect.