Legit altering

[conor912]

I know the subject of altering is the dead horse that has been beaten to a pulp on this board and I'm not looking for a debate on morality, but I was wondering anyone's thoughts on professional cleaning. I have a few T3's with some light to moderate dirt/smudges on them. I sent scans to a professional art restorer and he said he can get them off no problem. I assume that if this cleaning was detected by PSA there would be an argumant for calling them altered. Can anyone explain to me why professional cleaning is totally legit for a painting but not for a card? Or should we start slabbing paintings....

... 1937 Picasso Guerinca A (authentic)

[Exhibitman]

This is an old debate that has never been resolved and probably never will be.

Let me throw this out there: some cards I've seen--mostly cabinets--are made with cardboard that is in desperate need of stabilizing and de-acidifying or it simply won't last. What do we do with them? Is it better to let them crumble into dust rather than have a conservation specialist stabilize them?

[conor912]

Well said Adam. I have often thought that TPGs should offer that as a service.

[Cardboard Junkie]

I think the key words here are professional conservation.......NOT somebody with a bowl of water and/or an eraser. As in comic books that are cleaned and slabbed...restoration is noted on the label. As far as our cardboard disintegrating over time, that is inevitable. One can slow the process down and of course improve appearance, but not halt the process completely. dave

[conor912]

I think the key words here are professional conservation.......NOT somebody with a bowl of water and/or an eraser. As in comic books that are cleaned and slabbed...restoration is noted on the label. As far as our cardboard disintegrating over time, that is inevitable. One can slow the process down and of course improve appearance, but not halt the process completely. dave

Dave, if you get a chance, can you post a link to a comic with a restoration note? I'm curious to see how they word it.

[oaks1912]

Nothing wrong with professional restoration at all, provided that the knowledge is included with each future transaction of the piece(s) in question. Professional conservators generally provide a detailed, written report of all services performed on the piece, so this eliminates any miscommunications. Whether paper or textiles, all will age differently, but by design will not last forever. I'm still waiting for a qualified scientist to describe the effect of aging paper encapsulated in a petroleum based , airtight holder, and whether this accelerates the aging process of various paper stocks. Petroleum and paper generally do not fare well together over time....:eek:

[atx840]

John started a good thread on this Plank

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/junkforumimages/plank.jpg

Thread (http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=132902)

[mr.t206]

Conor, I'm new to this board and still trying to figure out how to post a link, but if you go to ebay and type in cgc comics restored you will see how they label a restored comic. They (cgc) put it in their cert/label on top. It would be really nice if tpg's would get on board with this. Hope it helped:)

[Runscott]

I think the key words here are professional conservation.......NOT somebody with a bowl of water and/or an eraser. As in comic books that are cleaned and slabbed...restoration is noted on the label. As far as our cardboard disintegrating over time, that is inevitable. One can slow the process down and of course improve appearance, but not halt the process completely. dave

Funny. Do you know what people do with the "bowl of water" or the "eraser"? Do you know the difference in results? I ask seriously, since your response doesn't make a lot of sense to me unless you think that soaking cards is an amateurish thing that ruins cards. I know that one board member claimed that faded cards had the same appearance as a card that had been soaked, which is total rubbish. I asked him about it, but did not get a response.

Also, as far as I know soaking cards doesn't cause any issues with the TPA's. Adding chemicals is something different altogether; however, I agree with those who feel like cards sometimes need professional conservation - completely different from removing paper and glue with water.

[Runscott]

John started a good thread on this Plank


Chemically-restored T206 Plank Discussion (http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=132902)

Great discussion - thanks for posting. It also gives some insight into 'chemicals vs water', for those who aren't aware of the different effects that the two have on paper.

I once owned an E95 Cobb that was significantly altered by adding at least glue, some coloring and almost certainly chemicals. It was then sent raw to at least two different TPA's. Since then I've reached the conclusion that it was done as a test, since it didn't significantly change the value of the card, and since the same owner got it slabbed by one TPA and then sent it to another (perhaps even a third?)

The point it - at least three different substances were added that were foreign to the original card, and at least two TPA's didn't notice, and assigned numerical grades.

[KCRfan1]

John started a good thread on this Plank

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/junkforumimages/plank.jpg

Thread (http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=132902)

The Plank with PSA certainly cleaned up, but the color looks washed out compared to the " before " in the SGC holder. You did get a half grade bump though.:D Still a nice looking card.

[Runscott]

Probably just the scanner. Even working off of the washed-out image, I can pump it up a little. Water-soaking does not affect the look of the image, and I doubt this particular card was completely soaked in chemicals.

That myth about soaking in water washing out the color, is just that - a myth. It would be best to forget it, if for no other reason than because believing something that's not true can't be beneficial.

[Cardboard Junkie]

Funny. Do you know what people do with the "bowl of water" or the "eraser"? Do you know the difference in results? I ask seriously, since your response doesn't make a lot of sense to me unless you think that soaking cards is an amateurish thing that ruins cards. I know that one board member claimed that faded cards had the same appearance as a card that had been soaked, which is total rubbish. I asked him about it, but did not get a response.

Also, as far as I know soaking cards doesn't cause any issues with the TPA's. Adding chemicals is something different altogether; however, I agree with those who feel like cards sometimes need professional conservation - completely different from removing paper and glue with water.
Yes I know, (from reading previous threads) what people do with bowls of water and erasers. I know the results can improve a cards appearance. And YES I think it is an amateurish thing to do. I know erasers can ruin cards, but I don't know if the effects of "having a bath" are detrimental on a microscopic or even a molecular level. I do know that a "professional conservator" would not do either, so I suspect it is "bad" for the substances that comprise our treasures. I suggest that someone here, ( 6 degrees of separation) knows a professional or can contact a conservator and get their input. In other words, before we get into a conflict...let's consult a pro. :) Dave.

[conor912]

Yes I know, (from reading previous threads) what people do with bowls of water and erasers. I know the results can improve a cards appearance. And YES I think it is an amateurish thing to do. I know erasers can ruin cards, but I don't know if the effects of "having a bath" are detrimental on a microscopic or even a molecular level. I do know that a "professional conservator" would not do either, so I suspect it is "bad" for the substances that comprise our treasures. I suggest that someone here, ( 6 degrees of separation) knows a professional or can contact a conservator and get their input. In other words, before we get into a conflict...let's consult a pro. :) Dave.

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that the soaking/pressing method is in a pro restorer's bag of tricks.

[Cardboard Junkie]

Perhaps it is, but it is not a "trick" it is a science. Someone should find out for sure. (but not me):D dave.

[Runscott]

...
I know erasers can ruin cards, but I don't know if the effects of "having a bath" are detrimental on a microscopic or even a molecular level.

I just told you in the previous post. If you choose not to believe that it does the card (or other items such as National Copper Plate premiums or even albumen photographs) no harm, then consult someone whose opinion you trust more - telling us that you believe the process "amateurish" and that someone other than yourself should consult a professional to determine the truth, is ludicrous.

[Cardboard Junkie]

Here is an interesting video I found on utube. It's interesting to watch and hear these professionals talk about molecular bonding and the scientific principles involved. Way beyond my complete understanding.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKEfOXNYzr8 :) Dave

[deadballfreaK]

I have recently been experimenting with a group of low grade T206s that had ink stains on the back. I thought I would try a certain very common solvent and see what happened with a $15 card. It worked. Tried three or four more. Black fountain pin ink disappears in minutes. Just dissolves. The card comes out much cleaner, but there might be a little fading. Hard to tell. I'm not selling these cards. Not out to defraud anyone, but I'll bet I'm not the first to figure this out. Very mild common chemical. I did a card with what looked like old typewriter writing. Under magnification you can see the typewriter marks, but the ink vanished. As I say I'm not going to screw anyone, but I'll bet there are others doing it.

[T205 GB]

You can always contact Dick Towle for a professional opinion about cleaning cards. Has a secret solvent he made that removes stuff and won't fail a TPG test. He doesn't restore cards. He removes the extra stuff left by time just like soaking.

[buymycards]

This is my second experiment with the bowl of water method. I bought it for $7.57 to experiment with. Can't wait to try it on a Plank.

[steve B]

I gave this card a light surface cleaning. It was almost twice as dark as it is now. Just a light brushing with a q-tip and water, doing a small area at a time then drying. I didn't go farther since the surface coating is a bit crazed (A network of tiny cracks from the coating shrinking) and the dirt is into the cracks in many places. It might have cleaned better by soaking, but I was chicken.

http://www.net54baseball.com/picture.php?albumid=123&pictureid=9887

It's sc350-460 f25 by the way.

A couple notes that apply specifically to T206s and somewhat generally to many other cards.

The surface of the color side is coated stock and won't absorb water well enough to be damaged. The coating is also water resistant and holds to the paper and ink well. Other series may have different paper or a gloss coat that can be damaged by water.

The inks used in lithography are all oil based and will not be affected by water. The colorants might be, but it's nearly impossible to know what exact colorants were used. Assuming the typical ones for the era most of them are totally unaffected by water.
Inks used for other processes may not be oil based. That's part of why knowing the process matters. (Some old british stamps are printed with what are called fugitive inks that dissolve in water. One series is "doubly fugitive" meaning it dissolves in both water and solvents.)

A gloss coat may be oil based, or alcohol based like shellac. Most oil based glosses aren't bothered by water at all, Shellac is and will absorb water and get cloudy- Like rings left on old furniture, which is why we use coasters.

The papers all begin as a slurry of stuff in water. The machine then scoops it up on a screen, spreads it evenly and dries it. Some papers will absorb a lot of water and expand, like 70's Topps many of those have a high wood pulp content. The paper used for T206s probably has a high rag content, and is far less absorbent. (And may actually be nearly acid free. I just don't have a sample I'm willing to test since I'd have to destroy a portion of it.)

And that's an "amateur" take on the technical aspects of cleaning/soaking.


Steve B

[frankbmd]

Car Wash = Professional Automobile Restoration Facility ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Em8mbWbvvM

[novakjr]

Dave, if you get a chance, can you post a link to a comic with a restoration note? I'm curious to see how they word it.

CGC slabs restored comics with a "purple flip", instead of the "blue flip" that they use for un-altered comics. They also note, all the restorations that are detected, and give them an "Apparent" grade.

There's a CGC restored issue of Fantastic 4 #3 in this forum link...

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=4362103

[steve B]

Now if that's the sort of work done at professional conservation places I think I'll start sending some stuff in. :D if they include videos of the work being done I might even find more cards that need work.

Steve B
(Currently looking in fridge for ketchup with a bunch of 88 Topps....)

Car Wash = Professional Automobile Restoration Facility ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Em8mbWbvvM

[howard38]

.

[drc]

It's legally okay to restore or alter a card as long as you disclose what was done at sale. I think if you serially alter cards without disclosure, including to get them into PSA, SGC or Beckett holders you could get into legal trouble down the road. The Mastrp case has shown that, at least with major offenses, the Feds can be willing to prosecute for that.

Otherwise, restoration is a matter of taste. Clearly, there are many people in the hobby entirely against restoration of baseball cards. I'm one who usually believes in leaving a card as it is-- but understand why someone would want to fix up a card that has an unsightly ink blotch on front, major staining or has been badly torn. As has been pointed out numerous times on this board, a fountain pen ink blotch or album glue residue wasn't an original part of the card.

[arc2q]

This is a fascinating and multi-sided issue. Clearly I am a Johnny-Come-Lately to the discussion as I am sure the issue of restoration has been discussed many times before. It does seem, though, that the hobby often conflates restoration with alteration; which are entirely separate concepts in my mind. Alteration, I think we would all agree, violates the principle of collecting what are essentially valuable historic artifacts. In any field, intentionally altering an artifact to improve its value is a violation of trust.

But restoration is commonplace in art, historic preservation, etc. Would you go to the National Archives and want to see the original Declaration of Independence in its decayed state with 200+ years or dust on it? Or would you want to see it restored and preserved to ensure it lasts for 200 years more? Some element of restoration is involved in preserving historic artifacts...treating and protecting the materials to guarantee they last. I would imagine most of us would be fine with the dust and grime being cleaned off a painting or other historic artifact prior to display. In fact, a restored Renoir properly cleaned and preserved would likely command a premium over one found in a dank basement and allowed to decay via normal manner.

So why then would cleaning a historic baseball card be considered a violation of the hobby or an act decreasing the value of the card? We want these cards to last hundreds of years more (or at least our lifetimes) so preserving them and doing what is necessary to keep them clean ought to be, at a minimum, acceptable practice. Slabbing may be enough for some. But if a very valuable and rare item can be cleaned and preserved to prevent further deterioration of the ink or cardboard, it should be done. At least, I imagine, this is one argument that could be made.

At a minimum, I think collectors should distinguish between altering and restoring. Restoring makes total sense to me if done properly. In fact, I don't even necessarily think it always needs to be disclosed other than to say the card has been professionally preserved. It should be a good thing.

[egbeachley]

Rick, did you notice you added a new crease through the first "T" in Pittsburg?

What is the solvent to remove ink?

[buymycards]

Eric, I didn't notice the new crease on the front. Looks like I turned my $7.57 card into a $6.57 card.

Rick

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

I have absolutely no issues with your decision to professionally restore a card. Unfortunately cards break down over time and need to be restored to stay in existence. I think it happens all the time anyway.