Erasing errant marks and......caramel vs tobacco

[Leon]

I don't want to get into too deep of debates in the pick up threads so am posting this new thread to discuss erasing errant marks from cards. Also if a card is stamped by a tobacco company, but has always been categorized as a caramel card, should it be now be classified as a caramel or tobacco issue?

As previously stated I have no issue with removing an errant mark that wasn't put there at time of mfg. Many times I will leave them if they provide some kind of informational value. As for the categorizing of an Old Put E98, I would still put it in the caramel category. I am not dead set on that so maybe some responses will change my mind?

[edhans]

Agreed on both counts. I have erased light pencil marks on occasion. If there's no trace of erasure marks, it improves the appearance of the card.

The e98 overprints began life as a caramel card and should remain there despite the stamp.

[esd10]

maybe there should be some sort of sub section for both instead of just saying its a caramel or tobacco. I dont know if those where packaged in tobacco or a company bought the overstock and gave them away as a promotion in a store but would be cool to find out.

[usernamealreadytaken]

I don't believe that anything post-production changes the category of the card. For example, we have seen some T206s stamped by journalists to hand out (presumably) as business cards. This act obviously does not change the t206 from a tobacco issue into a business card . . . does it?

[Cardboard Junkie]

I think removing marks of any kind is altering the card. I realized comic collectors and vintage collectors of many things...vintage cars, clothes...whatever do this all the time. A serious coin collector would never alter a coin. A mark on a card may be removeable but I doubt that it could be done without disturbing the paper fibers. Comic books are cleaned and restored all the time...this is wrong to me. I also (IMO) think that autographed or signed cards are ruined I don't care if its babe ruth or joe shmoo. I (if I collected sigs) would prefer them on a baseball or index card or anything but a baseball card. Aloha, Dave. Since when did cleaning and pressing creases out of a comic become ok and cleaning or pressing a card not. Cleaning pressing restoring is a BIG no no for me. Aloha, dave.

[barrysloate]

Light pencil marks that don't disturb the paper can be erased. No problem with that.

Regarding E98 Old Put, how were they distributed- with tobacco or with candy? I voted tobacco but it really depends on how people acquired them.

[Cardboard Junkie]

Aloha Barry....as much as I respect your expertise on many old issues. You are mistaken about light pencil marks. They do destroy the paper fibers/sheen and graphite being primarily a grease (why it is used as a lubricant) will leave telltale signs, (maybe not to the naked eye) but definitely damages the paper..under certain lights and magnification the alteration can be detected. Granted the card was already defaced when originally marked but trying to erase may improve the visual aspect of the card it will definitely destroy it furthur. It is detectable with the right equipment which a "good TPG company" will have. Unfortunately I don't think there are any good TPG companys out there. My humble opinion about tpgs but fact about pencil marks. aloha, dave.

[Leon]

Aloha Barry....as much as I respect your expertise on many old issues. You are mistaken about light pencil marks. They do destroy the paper fibers/sheen and graphite being primarily a grease (why it is used as a lubricant) will leave telltale signs, (maybe not to the naked eye) but definitely damages the paper..under certain lights and magnification the alteration can be detected. Granted the card was already defaced when originally marked but trying to erase may improve the visual aspect of the card it will definitely destroy it furthur. It is detectable with the right equipment which a "good TPG company" will have. Unfortunately I don't think there are any good TPG companys out there. My humble opinion about tpgs but fact about pencil marks. aloha, dave.

Aloha Dave. I politely disagree with your statements. I think very light pencil marks can be taken off with no remnants of vestiges of a mark being left. As a matter of fact they can be taken off and not be able to be seen under high magnification. This is a fact but we can debate it all we want to. I will agree that technically erasing is altering the card as something is coming off. It is an acceptable alteration to me and most others. BTW, I consider SGC, BVG and PSA to be reputable companies and none of them have seen marks taken off, even when specifically looking for them. I know the graders at 2 of those 3 companies very well and have spent countless hours with them asking these questions. I assume you have to?

[pcoz]

The Mars eraser extracted the pencil marks that weren't on my card originally. So, if there are a couple of missing fibers seen under TPG lights, but it aesthetically improves the card, it works for me. In my situation it took a SGC 20 to a SGC 40. For tobacco vs. caramel, I voted caramel, but am open to change on it as well. Barry you have a great point on how they were distributed being the way they should be classified. In looking closely at the ones I have, it appears on a couple there are caramel stains. Leon, don't know if you see any on yours, but the couple I've posted here have stains. If Old Put bought a block of cards from Briggs(allegedly the maker of E98's) in the color they chose(15 known are red/5 are blue), then you wouldn't think they were already distributed in caramels. But, the stains tell me they could've been in caramel packages before they were stamped. Interesting debate on their classification and how they were distributed.

[barrysloate]

First off...this is my 5000th post!:)

That out of the way, the residue left by a light erasure is too small for me to be concerned that the card is altered. technically speaking, if you hold a card between your fingers the natural you're probably adding an infinitesimal layer of oil to it, thus altering it. But no one would actually consider that an alteration. Likewise, a pencil erasure is a virtually undetactable change to the surface.

And if nobody sees it, including TPG, then I don't really care.

[ValKehl]

I'm all for erasing pencil marks on a card, because it improves the eye appeal of the card, which is very important to me. I would not be doing this to deceive a TPG or to anyone I might look to sell/trade the card to, as I would disclose to them what I had done.

I am in the minority (so far) that voted "T card." I voted this way because I assume that the company that mfd. Old Put Cigars used these over-stamped cards somehow in the sale/distribution of their tobacco product. Furthermore, E98s are often termed "ananymous" because their is no indication of the issuer of these cards. To my way of thinking, this situation is similar the M101/4-5 situation; each company that put their ad (whether stamped or printed) on the back of the M101 cards should receive a separate ACC designation, whether it be a "D card", "H card," etc. Some day, after I win the lottery, I will be able to add an Old Put card to my type-card collection! :)
Val

[Cardboard Junkie]

Hi Leon....I just checked out a site called "The Straight Dope" (fighting ignorance since 1973.) I know of no TPG company that employs x-rays in their evaluation. Do you? There will always be a trace of tampering when trying to erase pencil marks. TPGs just don't look hard enough, heck they can't even catch trimmed and rebacked cards? How would you expect a bunch of bumbleducks to see a lightly erased pencil mark. They are only in it for the money and they suck at evaluating cards. It is unethical and downright deceiving if trying to hide or eliminate them. What is your take on "creases" ? If a crease is pressed out with a press, and then undetectable with the naked eye...does that seem ok with you? How about "dry cleaning"? to brighten up a dirty and dull card? Is there no end to it...people should stop effing around with our beloved cards! Aloha, dave. ps Hey leon nothing personal cause you know i respect and love the work you do here.

[Leon]

Hi Leon....I just checked out a site called "The Straight Dope" (fighting ignorance since 1973.) I know of no TPG company that employs x-rays in their evaluation. Do you? There will always be a trace of tampering when trying to erase pencil marks. TPGs just don't look hard enough, heck they can't even catch trimmed and rebacked cards? How would you expect a bunch of bumbleducks to see a lightly erased pencil mark. They are only in it for the money and they suck at evaluating cards. It is unethical and downright deceiving if trying to hide or eliminate them. What is your take on "creases" ? If a crease is pressed out with a press, and then undetectable with the naked eye...does that seem ok with you? How about "dry cleaning"? to brighten up a dirty and dull card? Is there no end to it...people should stop effing around with our beloved cards! Aloha, dave. ps Hey leon nothing personal cause you know i respect and love the work you do here.

Nothing personal at all Dave. Folks can have meaningful debates, completely disagree, and still be friends. In that respect this is all a good debate and I respect your opinions, even if not in agreement with them. My line stops at taking things off cards that weren't supposed to be there to start with (including soaking in water which I am ok with too). I doubt there is an advanced collector on this board that hasn't pushed down a flipped up corner. No harm at all. However, all of that other stuff you talked about, I am against. There is an end, it is not endless.

[pcoz]

We're talking about removing pencil that was added to a card haphazardly by someone, that can only be possibly detected with the Hubble telescope. I don't see how that's defacing or altering a card. It's like removing dirt that was on a card. If you're recoloring, rebacking, etc..that's certainly altering a card. I recently had SGC pop my card out, sit with me while I gently got off the light pencil mark, then had them regrade it. It wasn't done to deceive or I wouldn't have done it, or made them part of the process. They see a million more cards than any of us, so I'll go with their view of pencil removal as not altering in any way.

[Matthew H]

I don't think a very light mark that can be easily erased should down grade a card to poor in the first place.

Erasing a mark is fine; however, the story about SGC opening a slab so a mark can be erased and a card upgraded is really strange to me. Seems like movie star treatment.

[Cardboard Junkie]

Aloha Pete! Sooo let me understand this correctly...SGC graders witnessed you erase a light pencil mark....then graded the card as "unaltered?" WTF? dave.

[esd10]

how i was saying about a subset something similar with the 1909 d355 niagara baking cards but they are e101's with a stamp on the back so they could do the same with these cards.

[chaddurbin]

I recently had SGC pop my card out, sit with me while I gently got off the light pencil mark, then had them regrade it. It wasn't done to deceive or I wouldn't have done it, or made them part of the process.

people can erase or don't erase...piss on it i don't care not my cards, but sgc went down a notch in my book after reading this statement. will they sit with me while i crack out my sgc40 with a crease and soak/smooth that sucker out too for a regrade to sgc60? since some in the hobby consider soaking and erasing on the par.

[pcoz]

Aloha Pete! Sooo let me understand this correctly...SGC graders witnessed you erase a light pencil mark....then graded the card as "unaltered?" WTF? dave.

Aloha Dave! The card was an E98 Old Put Mack SGC 20. I called them to schedule a walk thru and explained the faint pencil on the back. I spoke to Scott & Earl, who both agreed removing pencil that wasn't on the card in its distribution was not altering the card in any way. So, I went down on Friday, and it came off in less than a minute. They regraded it and gave me a SGC 40. It's a really sharp card, and was downgraded 2 levels by a faint pencil that wasn't there originally. IMO, they were fair with the original grade having the pencil on it, and fair with the grade after it was back in its original condition. We all have our thoughts on this topic, and I guess we can all agree to disagree.

[Cardboard Junkie]

All I can say is HOLY SHITE! And SHAME on them!

[Mikehealer]

First off...this is my 5000th post!:)



Congratulations Barry, that's a lot of typing.

[barrysloate]

A lot of typing indeed.:)

[E93]

I put Tobacco for Old Puts, but it was a tough decision. Given that they are our only hard evidence of association with a product for the otherwise anonymous set, it seems to make sense. I'm sure E98s were categorized as early candy because many are almost identical with cards from other E sets and those that are unique still fit the basic motif of E90-1-E106 sets (especially E93, E94, and E97). And they do have a lot of apparent caramel staining. My guess is they were mostly distributed with caramel or candy, but the Old Puts should probably be categorized separately. My guess is they were a group of cards produced and distributed with a lot of different products, mostly candy, but obviously at least one tobacco product.
JimB
Edited to add: If they above is nonsensical ramblings, know that I just got back from 26 hours on airplanes and in airports from Asia.

[Matthew H]

how i was saying about a subset something similar with the 1909 d355 niagara baking cards but they are e101's with a stamp on the back so they could do the same with these cards.

+1