Cards that CAN and CANNOT be soaked?!

[ullmandds]

It'd be nice to compile a list of sorts of different types of vintage cards that CAN...and those that CANNOT be successfully soaked.

Can anyone add to such a list?

I have successfully soaked T215-1, e122, t206.

Any and all input is greatly appreciated?!

[vintagetoppsguy]

I have successfully soaked E92 and E95

[Bocabirdman]

I had good luck soaking a C46.

[Tao_Moko]

101802Just got done soaking this one.

[atx840]

T210s soak very well.

[rainier2004]

Both 1914 and 1915 CJs soak - no problems

[poorlydrawncat]

I've soaked the following successfully (distilled water, never more than a couple hours):

-All Topps issues 1952-1970 (including Venezuelan issues)
-1933/1934 Goudey
-T206
-T205
-1934-36 Diamond Stars
-1949 Leaf

The only issue I've ever had with soaking occurred with a 1938 Heads Up Goudey. Some staining appeared on the car that was absent before. Could have just been a one time thing though...

[t206blogcom]

T206s for me. I haven't soaked many, but when I have, I ended up with good results. And I soak them for a couple of days, changing the water every few hours (hot, filtered water).

[tiger8mush]

Both 1914 and 1915 CJs soak - no problems

Will soaking a 1914 help w/the caramel stains? I've always been nervous since they are so thin, fragile, and sometimes brittle.

[conor912]

Great thread. Anyone ever try obaks or T3s?

[Beatles Guy]

I just soaked a '34 Goudey. Came out nicely.

[joeadcock]

I soaked an Old Judge and came out without problem, but only one

[rainier2004]

Will soaking a 1914 help w/the caramel stains? I've always been nervous since they are so thin, fragile, and sometimes brittle.

No it doesn't help. Ive noticed that they can be lightened by additional means involving cotton balls and q-tips but it also removes ink and lightens the card. The biggest danger when soaking the 1914s is creasing the wet card in transport, have yours ducks in a row and don't freak out when its a 4-figure HOFer that's in Ex condition but glued to a scrapbook...he'll look sweet when its done.

[smtjoy]

Exhibits soak fine but be careful with the Red, Yellow and Pink tints as they can bleed off and/or onto other areas of the card.

E93's soak ok but I did have a slight bleed on a red area on one card (check his belt and glove).

http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n182/smtjoy/Vintage%20Cards/E93/e93Pastorious40.jpg (http://s112.photobucket.com/user/smtjoy/media/Vintage%20Cards/E93/e93Pastorious40.jpg.html)

[chaddurbin]

Exhibits soak fine but be careful with the Red, Yellow and Pink tints as they can bleed off and/or onto other areas of the card.

E93's soak ok but I did have a slight bleed on a red area on one card (check his belt and glove).


thanks for the info scott. now i know why i sometimes see e93s with those pink hues. will just assume they've been soaked going forward

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

I have to echo what everyone said and say that soaking is much scarier than it is difficult. It can really enhance the look of a dirty card and remove the paper stuck to the back.

[Theo_450]

Exhibits soak fine but be careful with the Red, Yellow and Pink tints as they can bleed off and/or onto other areas of the card.

E93's soak ok but I did have a slight bleed on a red area on one card (check his belt and glove).

http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n182/smtjoy/Vintage%20Cards/E93/e93Pastorious40.jpg (http://s112.photobucket.com/user/smtjoy/media/Vintage%20Cards/E93/e93Pastorious40.jpg.html)

Do you think this card would have graded lower before a soak? What do you think it would have graded?

[JMANOS]

Pre 1943 glue was water saluable(spelling?) and if u want to remove a pencil mark use a art eraser it doesn't damage the paper...u can buy at any art supply store.

[HRBAKER]

soluble, I think

[eliminator]

Do m101-2 sporting news supplements soak to remove cardboard backing?

[autograf]

Add

N28 A&G
N284 Buchner Gold Coin

To the mix........

[matthew]

successfully soaked several Zeenuts to remove paper on back

[smtjoy]

Do you think this card would have graded lower before a soak? What do you think it would have graded?

The card had something stuck on the back so the soaking worked great as it came off with no residue left, I think they had just used a flour and water based paste. The down side was the bleed on the front, the front was better prior to the soak.

[tbob]

I would NEVER soak an E94 and probably not an E98.
I have had E94s sent to me through the years in rigid holders that literally exploded when I tried to remove them from the holders. Not just from one seller either. They have a tendency to have large color "flecks" come off the cards. I don't know why but that is one of the reason every E94 and E98 I own is in a slab.

[T205 GB]

Koester bread cards soak well

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Awesome thread idea Pete! I have a few I may soak so thanks for your opinions!

[ullmandds]

I know 33/34 goudeys have been mentioned...also...34 WWG's can be soaked!:D

[ullmandds]

I'm wondering about the later 30's goudey premiums?! Has anyone tried to soak these super thin pieces?

[Runscott]

I'm surprised at all the issues that soak well - is anyone compiling a table/list?

T205's were a problem for me - they soaked well, but if you leave them soaking very long, then use you finger to loosen excess glue or paper, lettering can come off quite easily.

National Copper Plates soak great; in fact, the wrinkles come out. This was a very pleasant surprise.

[Jacklitsch]

Ditto zeenuts especially the 1911's.

[Runscott]

Pre 1943 glue was water saluable(spelling?) and if u want to remove a pencil mark use a art eraser it doesn't damage the paper...u can buy at any art supply store.

Jim, solubility varies - even with glue as old as what was used in the 1800's. I've conducted experiments soaking albumens, and because of the various glues used, had varying results.

It's the same for lithographs - when we talk about whether or not a card is 'shakable', we are assuming that the glue is going to be 'friendly'.

[DaveW]

Does anybody know if M101-4 cards are soakable? I have 3 with black paper stuck to the back.
Not baseball, but I've soaked T68 and T218 cards successfully.

[ullmandds]

So far...late 30's goudey premiums are soaking successfully...although they are quite thin and extreme care needs to be exercised to avoid tearing them!

[rainier2004]

Will soaking a 1914 help w/the caramel stains? I've always been nervous since they are so thin, fragile, and sometimes brittle.

Here a f/u - its a 1915, but caramel stains come out equally from both years. The stains that did lighten up significantly I believe were dirt or something else, not caramel stains. The biggest concern is creasing the card when handling it wet but there are ways to safe guard that as well.

[h2oya311]

Okay, am I the only long-time collector who hasn't yet soaked a card??

I have a really beat up 1973 Venezuelan Sticker album (missing cover, back, and it looks like a mouse had a field day on the edges), but the stickers look pretty nice.

Would this be soakable?

http://photos.imageevent.com/derekgranger/derekgrangerfirstalbum/websize/1973%20Rice%20-%20In%20Album.jpg

Obviously, I'm building on the thread about the Caramelo Deportivo album....

[gavvy]

Had no problem soaking a Schutter-Johnson. I was worried about the red being vulnerable so only soaked until I could gently rub album glue off.

[rhettyeakley]

Derek, soaking 101 is finding the most beat up common from the album of cards and trying a soak on it prior to doing anything with the cards of significant value. Doing a test soak should help you decide if it is possible to soak your Jim Rice out of there without destroying the value of the overall piece.

[h2oya311]

Thanks Rhett - that was going to be the plan but I've never soaked before. I hope it works!

I'll give it a try in a few weeks.

[Vintagecatcher]

One issue you never want to soak is the Fatima T222. I have seen examples which have been soaked, and because they are really photographs the "photograph gloss" is dissolved by the soaking in water.


Patrick

[Eric72]

Gentlemen (and the few ladies on this board),

Out of curiosity, why is soaking a card acceptable while other alterations are, according to some members of Net54, verboten?

I considered soaking a card...once. After realizing what it would likely do to a T206 with a back stamp and (let's call it) a sticker, I quickly backed off.

Upon further reflection, I am curious as to why this particular form of, "card doctoring" is OK with some who would cry, "foul" under other circumstances. In the grand scheme of things, it seems about the same as taking an eraser to a pencil mark or ironing out the crease in a silk.

Just curious...although I imagine a Net54 beat-down is coming my way for suggesting that soaking a card is unethical.

Best regards,

Eric

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

Gentlemen (and the few ladies on this board),

Out of curiosity, why is soaking a card acceptable while other alterations are, according to some members of Net54, verboten?

I considered soaking a card...once. After realizing what it would likely do to a T206 with a back stamp and (let's call it) a sticker, I quickly backed off.

Upon further reflection, I am curious as to why this particular form of, "card doctoring" is OK with some who would cry, "foul" under other circumstances. In the grand scheme of things, it seems about the same as taking an eraser to a pencil mark or ironing out the crease in a silk.

Just curious...although I imagine a Net54 beat-down is coming my way for suggesting that soaking a card is unethical.

Best regards,

Eric

No idea why but it is a double standard. Personally, I don't have a problem with altered cards as long as they are sold as such.

[hshrimps]

I soaked two T3 before

[Eric72]

No idea why but it is a double standard. Personally, I don't have a problem with altered cards as long as they are sold as such.

Alex,

I have no problem with people selling, when properly advertised, altered cards, and agree with you regarding them being sold as such. As a matter of fact, I purchased a trimmed T206 earlier today and was quite grateful for the seller following through on the transaction.

In some cases, the restoration makes the particular issue look remarkably better. What I take issue with is the nonchalant soaking of cards by a great many people who do not disclose this when selling the card.

I may be wrong here...however...do not remember many auctions that state, "hey, this used to have XXX on it, but I soaked the card and now it's gone."

Just my two cents...and please know that I am not attacking you, personally.

Best,

Eric

[bbcard1]

[QUOTE=Eric72;1246834]Gentlemen (and the few ladies on this board),

Out of curiosity, why is soaking a card acceptable while other alterations are, according to some members of Net54, verboten?


I don't make the double standards, I just abide by them.

[Eric72]

I don't make the double standards, I just abide by them.

Why? To me, it just seems like card doctoring.

[Leon]

Why? To me, it just seems like card doctoring.

Generally speaking soaking a card removes things that aren't meant to be there and weren't there when the card was made. Most collectors don't have a problem because it isn't altering the original composition of the card (though I guess that could be argued). Also, erasing an errant mark isn't as taboo as it might should be. Same philosophy though.

As someone said, I don't make the double standards, I just go by them (love that saying)....

[sebie43]

If I am going to sell a card, I will not soak it, if Im going to keep it, what the hell its my card.
in most cases it drastically improves the cards aesthetics, but to each his own
Sebastian

[Eric72]

Generally speaking soaking a card removes things that aren't meant to be there and weren't there when the card was made. Most collectors don't have a problem because it isn't altering the original composition of the card (though I guess that could be argued). Also, erasing an errant mark isn't as taboo as it might should be. Same philosophy though.

As someone said, I don't make the double standards, I just go by them (love that saying)....

Leon,

I respectfully disagree with your casual stance regarding taking a card for a soak. In my humble opinion, this practice is as unethical as trimming. Just my two cents.

Best,

Eric

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

Alex,

I have no problem with people selling, when properly advertised, altered cards, and agree with you regarding them being sold as such. As a matter of fact, I purchased a trimmed T206 earlier today and was quite grateful for the seller following through on the transaction.

In some cases, the restoration makes the particular issue look remarkably better. What I take issue with is the nonchalant soaking of cards by a great many people who do not disclose this when selling the card.

I may be wrong here...however...do not remember many auctions that state, "hey, this used to have XXX on it, but I soaked the card and now it's gone."

Just my two cents...and please know that I am not attacking you, personally.

Best,

Eric

No offense taken. I think we have had this conversation before on the board and people seem to have strong opinions on both sides.

[ElCabron]

I have a really beat up 1973 Venezuelan Sticker album (missing cover, back, and it looks like a mouse had a field day on the edges), but the stickers look pretty nice.

Would this be soakable?



Derek,

Unfortunately, the Venezuelan albums from the 70s are some of the most unsoakable that exist. Almost always have the worst glue possible that NEVER comes off. You might as well just tear them out of the album if you want them out. I'm not saying it's impossible or can't happen, I've just never had success. And I've tried. Over and over. Might be worth trying a sample page just to see. Maybe you'll get lucky. Don't even think about doing the page with Rice until you've had success with other pages, though. The good news is they're often only glued on the very top edge.

-Ryan

[rhettyeakley]

Leon,

I respectfully disagree with your casual stance regarding taking a card for a soak. In my humble opinion, this practice is as unethical as trimming. Just my two cents.

Best,

Eric

Good luck trying to determine which cards you have that have been soaked. The reason that it is acceptable is that it alters nothing from the card itself (obviously trimming does this and is thusly not accepted). Many really high grade cards that exist in this hobby likely are the result of a good soaking, the cards being in an album for so long is what preserved the corners from being damaged from years or normal wear. It Is fine to take the hard-line stance but at the end of the day it is 100% imperceptible if done correctly and nothing on the card is destroyed or altered, not sure I get why this would be in any way the same as trimming a card.


FYI, never try to soak Clement Brothers Bread cards as the ink on front is water soluble. Colgan's Chips also aren't good "soakers" as the back ink tends to rub off.

[h2oya311]

Ryan - thanks for the note.

yes, the glue is only on the top upper edge. I could almost tear one of the stickers off, but they are so fragile I was worried I might tear through the sticker. I thought maybe a soak would do the trick, although I've never tried it. I'll give it a try on one of the other sheets. Trust me, I'll be practicing a lot (if there looks to be even a remote chance of success) before attempting to free Mr. Rice from his sheet.

To address other concerns on here, I used to be of the same mind regarding soaking, especially when used to enhance the appearance of a card (dirt removal)...in this case, I'm trying to remove a card from an album. I think they are two different animals. That said, where do you draw the line?

I was surprised to see so many members and long-time collectors using the "soak" method. But I still think it is far different from altering a card (like trimming or coloring the chipped paint on a t205).

[bnorth]

Gentlemen (and the few ladies on this board),

Out of curiosity, why is soaking a card acceptable while other alterations are, according to some members of Net54, verboten?

I considered soaking a card...once. After realizing what it would likely do to a T206 with a back stamp and (let's call it) a sticker, I quickly backed off.

Upon further reflection, I am curious as to why this particular form of, "card doctoring" is OK with some who would cry, "foul" under other circumstances. In the grand scheme of things, it seems about the same as taking an eraser to a pencil mark or ironing out the crease in a silk.

Just curious...although I imagine a Net54 beat-down is coming my way for suggesting that soaking a card is unethical.

Best regards,

Eric

I can only speak for myself. I have no problem with soaking as long as it is to remove dirt/stains/musty smell and not ink.

I recently soaked a few 60's Batman, spook stories, and monster laffs that really smelled bad. The soaking removed some dirt and lessened the wrinkles a little. The big benefit for me was it got rid of the horrible musty smell.

[Cardboard Junkie]

"The reason that it is acceptable is that it alters nothing from the card itself."
Incorrect, soaking changes the ph of the card. Search "Pyrolysis" in 54's search feature to find why soaking a card is detrimental.:)Dave.

[sebie43]

Has anybody ever soaked an E-75?

[rhettyeakley]

"The reason that it is acceptable is that it alters nothing from the card itself."
Incorrect, soaking changes the ph of the card. Search "Pyrolysis" in 54's search feature to find why soaking a card is detrimental.:)Dave.

With pyrolysis you are making the assumption that one is using HOT water or steam to do the deed, that is not necessary.

[the 'stache]

I have to echo what everyone said and say that soaking is much scarier than it is difficult. It can really enhance the look of a dirty card and remove the paper stuck to the back.

+1 to this, Alex. I'm too scared to soak any of my cards. I know a bunch of you guys have done so successfully, but with my luck, I'd be the rare exception, and destroy a piece of history. And even if it was only some $50 card, I'd want to punch myself in the face a few times.

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

+1 to this, Alex. I'm too scared to soak any of my cards. I know a bunch of you guys have done so successfully, but with my luck, I'd be the rare exception, and destroy a piece of history. And even if it was only some $50 card, I'd want to punch myself in the face a few times.


I thought the same thing but luckily it turned out well. My wife doesn't care much about my collection but she loves it when I have a card that gets to soak. We both think it is pretty neat to see the water work it's magic.

[marcdelpercio]

I have soaked thousands of cards, including examples from virtually every major tobacco and caramel set. Most of the bad candidates for soaking have already been mentioned...E94, E98, colored Exhibits, Colgan's. I'd generally also recommend against soaking Old Judges, Fatimas or other similar glossy photographic cards as they can stain and warp in ways that can't be undone.

I do not in any way look at it as an alteration, simply because it is not affecting the card any more than blowing a piece of dust off of it would be. True alterations like trimming, recoloring, rebacking, etc all clearly change the composition of the card by adding, removing, or changing some aspect of the card's original state. Soaking does not do any of these things.

To answer an above comment, soaking in distilled water will not in any way affect the ph of the card and "pyrolysis" will not occur unless you are soaking your cards in a thermal vent at the bottom of the ocean or something. In fact, the temperature of paper would need to get to around 200 degrees before that process would begin to occur as it is basically the first stage of fire oxidation.

[glynparson]

I agree 100% :D

[irishdenny]

Leon,

I respectfully disagree with your casual stance regarding taking a card for a soak. In my humble opinion, this practice is as unethical as trimming. Just my two cents.

Best,

Eric

Hey there Eric ,

I Respect your opinion & belief in every way!

Years ago I have had a many healthy debate/discussions about this ( Off ) topic.
I tend to be a realist and will most often refer to the Common Logic of the issue.
Eric, I do want you to know that there was a time that I thought somewhat as you do now. I didn’t believe that it was unethical, just Somehow Not Right.

Thus, my conclusion has brought me to this answer:

1st… We are Care Takers of an area of America’s most esteemed Past Time. I speaking of those who truly care for these pieces of history.
2nd …There is a difference between “Alteration” and “Restoration”. Altering (ie, Trimming…etc) a Card to get it passed a Part time/Rookie TPG’er for a Higher Grade is definitely Unethical. That’s Logical! Removing a substance that would potentially harm a Card over the Years, Pencil lead, Caramel (Which is basically Sugar, and Sugar deteriorates the hardest of Substances), glue, rust, etc… would be best for the Card, Right?
To my understanding, most Art Relics go thru some sort of periodic Restoration process, on “as needed” basis. Are you in the same frame of mind towards this process, deeming it Unethical?
Wouldn’t you want to protect and preserve these pieces for the future generations to come?

Just to add: Some of us might even pay for someone’s service in this area. I know of a gentleman in Florida who actually performs these tasks for a living.
Rhett mentioned the “101 of Soaking”, some of us might not be willing to even attempt the process.

Eric, if you could explain why soaking a Card would be “Unethical as Trimming”, I would truly listen!
Always willing to learn, maybe I missed something?

In ending, I Hope that the slight off topic, to a Very Good Topic thread, is cheerfully tolerated ; -)

As Always…

[Cardboard Junkie]

With pyrolysis you are making the assumption that one is using HOT water or steam to do the deed, that is not necessary.

No. Heat is just the total amount of kinetic energy in "normal" matter.
Anything above (theoretical) absolute zero is "heat".

[Runscott]

Regarding Old Judges, I haven't ever soaked these, but since they are albumens, and I HAVED soaked albumens , they theoretically should soak okay. But I would never do it, mainly because the backing is thicker and would curl - then you've got to deal drying it, which takes exponentially more time as the thickness of the backing increases - I know this from soaking mounted albumen cabinets. In the end, you are likely to have a slightly more attractive, curled card - I would leave those to professionals if you really have to get it done.

Also, not sure if I mentioned it elsewhere, but 'National Copper Plate' premiums soak very easily. I had a disaster of one that couldn't be hurt by soaking, and I was surprised to see how easy it was.

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

No. Heat is just the total amount of kinetic energy in "normal" matter.

Anything above (theoretical) absolute zero is "heat".


Holy shit absolute zero. This convo is getting real.

[Runscott]

Thus, my conclusion has brought me to this answer:

1st… We are Care Takers of an area of America’s most esteemed Past Time. I speaking of those who truly care for these pieces of history.
2nd …There is a difference between “Alteration” and “Restoration”. Altering (ie, Trimming…etc) a Card to get it passed a Part time/Rookie TPG’er for a Higher Grade is definitely Unethical. That’s Logical! Removing a substance that would potentially harm a Card over the Years, Pencil lead, Caramel (Which is basically Sugar, and Sugar deteriorates the hardest of Substances), glue, rust, etc… would be best for the Card, Right?
To my understanding, most Art Relics go thru some sort of periodic Restoration process, on “as needed” basis. Are you in the same frame of mind towards this process, deeming it Unethical?
Wouldn’t you want to protect and preserve these pieces for the future generations to come?

Just to add: Some of us might even pay for someone’s service in this area. I know of a gentleman in Florida who actually performs these tasks for a living.
Rhett mentioned the “101 of Soaking”, some of us might not be willing to even attempt the process.

Eric, if you could explain why soaking a Card would be “Unethical as Trimming”, I would truly listen!
Always willing to learn, maybe I missed something?

In ending, I Hope that the slight off topic, to a Very Good Topic thread, is cheerfully tolerated ; -)

As Always…

Nice analysis. I understand Eric's position, as I feel the same way about albumen cards such as Old Judges. But I don't think the word 'unethical' should even be in this conversation. Many of us who feel soaking is okay, are not soaking because of a lack of ethics. And if you decided that it was okay to soak mounted albumen photos, I wouldn't consider you unethical, and I wouldn't feel like you should tell me the photo was soaked (although it would be nice). I just wouldn't do it myself.

If a buyer asked me if a card I was selling them had been soaked, and I knew the answer, I would certainly tell them. I guess the real question becomes: "If you were required to describe a card you were selling, as 'soaked', would you continue to soak cards?"

As far as alterations go, I do feel that the seller has to disclose the fact, or they are being unethical.

[rhettyeakley]

Anything above (theoretical) absolute zero is "heat".

You better start freezing your cards then David to get them to absolute zero, you wouldn't want their pH to change on you if they got above that!


David, I get what you are saying (I am a dentist and took more science classes in college than I wish to remember) but you are really splitting hairs here and it is hard to take what you say seriously, that is if you are actually being serious. It's hard to tell since you seem to be one of those guys that frequently gets in arguments with others on this board.

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

You better start freezing your cards then David to get them to absolute zero, you wouldn't want their pH to change on you if they got above that!

Not just freezing them. We are talking Demolition Man style cryogenic freezing.

[Cardboard Junkie]

absolute zero is just a theoretical point, like a singularity, it doesn't exist.

I don't want to argue with anyone. Soaking a card may improve its appearance but it will certainly change the ph level of the matter and increase its rate of degradation. That's why professional consevators add chemicals to their soaking solutions to stabilize the material, to prevent further and more rapid decay.
But why discuss this subject, it isn't about what you believe, it is about fact. Ask a professional if pencil/pen/marks can be erased without damaging the fibers. Ask if soaking a card is detrimental in the long run, (it is) Many times these marks can be removed without change to the naked eye. Under the proper the magnification and light, there will always be a trace.

[frankbmd]

absolute zero is just a theoretical point, like a singularity, it doesn't exist.

I don't want to argue with anyone. Soaking a card may improve its appearance but it will certainly change the ph level of the matter and increase its rate of degradation. That's why professional consevators add chemicals to their soaking solutions to stabilize the material, to prevent further and more rapid decay.
But why discuss this subject, it isn't about what you believe, it is about fact. Ask a professional if pencil/pen/marks can be erased without damaging the fibers. Ask if soaking a card is detrimental in the long run, (it is) Many times these marks can be removed without change to the naked eye. Under the proper the magnification and light, there will always be a trace.

One could argue that if changing the ph is one direction is harmful, then changing the ph is the other direction would be beneficial:). I foresee an investment opportunity in litmus paper as collector's strive to optimize the ph of their collections:cool:. I have instructed my broker to look into:

Guangzhou Norm Scientific Instrument Co., Ltd
Shenzhen Yahee High Technologies Corp. Limited &
Hangzhou Liandong Import & Export Co., Ltd.

These are the big 3 litmus paper producers. Whatever happened to good old American Litmus?:eek::eek:

I also think TPGs should measure ph and put it on the flip prior to encapsulation.;)

[Cardboard Junkie]

...in a nitrogen charged chamber, I presume.:)

[Runscott]

Not just freezing them. We are talking Demolition Man style cryogenic freezing.

Is that like 'Splendid Splintered head' freezing?!?

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

Is that like 'Splendid Splintered head' freezing?!?

No. It's much more entertaining.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demolition_Man_(film)

[Jim65]

Has anyone soaked Bowmans?

I have a '51 Bowman Otto Graham this is beautiful except has some masking tape on the back.

[ullmandds]

not sure if masking tape's adhesive is water soluble...but I'd guess the card can take it.

[SMPEP]

Can't believe it worked ... but you can add Butterfingers to the list of cards that can be soaked. Just be very careful peeling the backing paper/cardboard off as the butterfingers can rip easily.

Cheers,
Patrick

[JasonD08]

What about E95s?

[ullmandds]

id presume e95's would soak just fine.

[Paul S]

The Black Swamp Find! MY gosh, could you imagine being submerged in a black swamp for a century, and coming out like THAT!:cool: I'm thinking of taking a dip in there myself.;)

[slipk1068]

I read this thread and didn't see anyone mention T207. I have a few T207's with that have a couple spots of glue on the back. The glossy front concerns me. Anyone ever soak a T207?

I am not even sure I would soak them because I am on the fence about whether it is ethical. The long-term affect it will have on cards concerns me. I guess I am leaning towards it being ethical because in some cases, like removing stains, it may preserve the card.

[tuckr1]

Would soaking this card get rid of the splotches?? Not sure what it is, ink? dirt??

Thanks

[ullmandds]

maybe tuckr1...scan is kinda small...hard to see whats going ton there?

[mullinsm]

I'd like to add that T227's may be included on the list of cards that can be soaked.

I was the only bidder on this McDermott in a recent auction, and I bought it specifically to try as my first soak. The card looked terrible, so I figured I didn't have much to lose. The back was completely covered by thick, yellowed, heavy lined paper, and the text underneath was completely unreadable:

http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn299/michaelamullins/Slide1.jpg

As per your suggestions, I used warm, soft tap water, a bowl, a pair of tweezers, and a q-tip. I gently slipped the card into the water and watched it sink.

After only a few minutes, the edges of the glued on paper began to curl up. After 15 minutes of soaking, I was able to easily lift most of the paper off the card. It would have all come up in one piece, if not for the white spot on the right center of the card. It was another kind of glue, or gum, or who knows what, but I had to pull with gentle-but-firm steady pressure for it to slowly let go.

http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn299/michaelamullins/Slide2.jpg

After removing the paper, I replaced the dirty water and let the card soak for another 30 min. I wanted to ensure that any glue residue remaining would be gone before I placed the card on paper towels to dry.

I dried the card overnight using paper towels and a stack of books. I changed out the towels a few times before retiring, then checked on my progress today:

http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn299/michaelamullins/Slide3.jpg

I'm thrilled with how it turned out. It's still a card in poor condition, but now at least it's one I can read and enjoy. For the $10 bid, it was well worth it.

Thanks so much to everyone for their suggestions!

[deadballfreaK]

Maybe 10 years ago I bought about 90 Sporting News M-101-2s glued on loose album pages. one on each side of most sheets. There were about 80 diff, including almost every superstar. Missing Joe Jackson. A couple were damaged by insects. I was gambling that they could be removed. First try didn't work because I chickened out and did not let soak long enough. So they sat around for years. Finally I got the nerve up and tried again. Took one of the least valuable and put it in the kitchen sink and let it go. After about 30 minutes it floated clear. Eventually I was able to remove all but 3 or 4 with no damage whatsoever. They just have discoloration on the back from the 9 globs of glue used. Let me tell you I was almost shaking trying to dip some of them out of the water so as not to tear them in their softened state. The hardest one to take swimming had the Wagner-Cobb pose on one side and Matty on the other. You really have to be careful so as not to tear . I took a sheet of firm plastic and slipped under each one in order to get it out of the water. Then put between 2 paper towels and stacked a ton of books on top. Changed the paper towels about 3 times and let dry overnight with the books still pressing them. Worked fantastic. Not bad for less than ten bucks apiece!

http://i1278.photobucket.com/albums/y520/kdmadden/matty_zps1c012194.jpg (http://s1278.photobucket.com/user/kdmadden/media/matty_zps1c012194.jpg.html)http://i1278.photobucket.com/albums/y520/kdmadden/mattyback_zps07c69dcd.jpg (http://s1278.photobucket.com/user/kdmadden/media/mattyback_zps07c69dcd.jpg.html)

[Tao_Moko]

I read this thread and didn't see anyone mention T207. I have a few T207's with that have a couple spots of glue on the back. The glossy front concerns me. Anyone ever soak a T207?

I am not even sure I would soak them because I am on the fence about whether it is ethical. The long-term affect it will have on cards concerns me. I guess I am leaning towards it being ethical because in some cases, like removing stains, it may preserve the card.

I second this. Anyone have results from soaking T207's?

[leaflover]

I soaked Salmon and Trout and they liked it!

[Paul S]

Mike, a braisen move on your part.

[1952boyntoncollector]

No offense taken. I think we have had this conversation before on the board and people seem to have strong opinions on both sides.


If you are doing something to the card that you do not disclose to the buyer than you are doing something wrong...

to me soaking worse than 'schilling' that everyone is angry about...

fine to soak if you disclose it to the buyer.....if not a big deal then the buyer will pay the same no?

You can do it to your own cards but eventually they will reach the secondary market....

[1880nonsports]

have been soaked from something. The cards look better without paper glued on the back that wasn't originally there. If you ever buy a card from me please assume it was at one time soaked - something I will freely disclose if asked............
the double standard quote was quite good.

[1880nonsports]

leaves me nearly speechless.....................

[Kzoo]

leaves me nearly speechless.....................

+1

[1952boyntoncollector]

You don't have to buy a card if its priced to high......plus whoever is shilling..if they 'win' the item they will pay 10% etc..so I don't think it can be that common.... if a card you want to sell for 250..and its at 200..you going to shill for 220? if win you just lost 22 dollars..makes no sense

there are enough ebay auctions and auctions out there we can come up with what we want to offer for a card..if a card is bid too high, we don't buy it..

a reserve is almost the same thing as a schill bid or a starting price at the amount the seller wants...it all comes down to what the buyer wants to pay for the card....a card is worth what someone wants to pay for it..

but at least the buyer knows exactly what the card is.... a soaked card that is not disclosed is assumed to be not soaked........why not tell the buyers on ebay that a card is soaked if no big deal? I haven't seen one listing that says that..

however I see lots of starting prices and reserves on cards...so buyers know how much the seller wants for the card, shilled or not.....at least the buyer knows what the card is..

when cards are won , they we know what someone was willing to pay for the card..whether there were prior shill bids or not.......the card is the card.....

if put 'card was soaked'...will the prices go down from a same listing in which saying the card wasn't soaked?..... if the value is the same..then i a wrong soaking doesn't matter...


but if someone is willing to pay $500 for a card whether there was a shilling to get there or a reserve price...was the problem...to the buyer its worth $500........if put 'buy it now' for $500...or shilling..the outcome is the same....with the soaking ..its not...or lets see at least one ebay listing saying card was soaked...

if a seller of a 1952 Mantle psa tells you on an auction yesterday, that he shilled up to $30,000..cause he didn't want it go for less than that..and he risked paying $3,000 if he
'won' and the card ultimately sold for $35,000...would you subtract value for that? how about if he told you in soaked the card? ...which one hurts the value more..thoughts?

[1952boyntoncollector]

+1

leaves me speechless..that you are left speechless

[1952boyntoncollector]

have been soaked from something. The cards look better without paper glued on the back that wasn't originally there. If you ever buy a card from me please assume it was at one time soaked - something I will freely disclose if asked............
the double standard quote was quite good.

I am fine with that soaking to restore etc..as long as it is assumed or known to the buyer... I wouldn't assume that on a 1952 topps card for example....

[Peter_Spaeth]

The overwhelming majority of collectors do not oppose soaking. You are free to believe what you want, of course. But huge numbers of prewar cards have been soaked to remove them safely from scrapbooks, just a fact of life. And I very much doubt you can tell.

[1952boyntoncollector]

The overwhelming majority of collectors do not oppose soaking. You are free to believe what you want, of course. But huge numbers of prewar cards have been soaked to remove them safely from scrapbooks, just a fact of life. And I very much doubt you can tell.

How about postwar..i think my issue is more with postwar...

[Tao_Moko]

How about postwar..i think my issue is more with postwar...

You should share your thoughts of Post-War soaking in that section.

[1952boyntoncollector]

You should share your thoughts of Post-War soaking in that section.


Well I talking about both pre and post war..so thought it would be better to take care of in one thread instead of two separate threads....

[Kzoo]

You should share your thoughts of Post-War soaking in that section.

+1 (again) :)

[xplainer]

What about T206 Polar Bears? The front has several tobacco stains (scrap tobacco), but I'm concerned about the black/blue ink on the back. Anyone soaked a Polar bear?

(Yeah, I set the pins up so someone can knock them down.) :D

Note: This is my PC. Not to be sold at a later date. My Jimmy Lavender collection.

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

If you are doing something to the card that you do not disclose to the buyer than you are doing something wrong...

to me soaking worse than 'schilling' that everyone is angry about...

fine to soak if you disclose it to the buyer.....if not a big deal then the buyer will pay the same no?

You can do it to your own cards but eventually they will reach the secondary market....
I'll respond since I was quoted. Soaking happens and is usually not disclosed. Right or wrong it happens. I would wager that virtually all crisp pre-war cards were glued into a book at one time.

[1952boyntoncollector]

I'll respond since I was quoted. Soaking happens and is usually not disclosed. Right or wrong it happens. I would wager that virtually all crisp pre-war cards were glued into a book at one time.

shilling happens too......so its fine as well with that logic..

[Mikehealer]

You don't have to buy a card if its priced to high......plus whoever is shilling..if they 'win' the item they will pay 10% etc..so I don't think it can be that common.... if a card you want to sell for 250..and its at 200..you going to shill for 220? if win you just lost 22 dollars..makes no sense

there are enough ebay auctions and auctions out there we can come up with what we want to offer for a card..if a card is bid too high, we don't buy it..

a reserve is almost the same thing as a schill bid or a starting price at the amount the seller wants...it all comes down to what the buyer wants to pay for the card....a card is worth what someone wants to pay for it..

but at least the buyer knows exactly what the card is.... a soaked card that is not disclosed is assumed to be not soaked........why not tell the buyers on ebay that a card is soaked if no big deal? I haven't seen one listing that says that..

however I see lots of starting prices and reserves on cards...so buyers know how much the seller wants for the card, shilled or not.....at least the buyer knows what the card is..

when cards are won , they we know what someone was willing to pay for the card..whether there were prior shill bids or not.......the card is the card.....

if put 'card was soaked'...will the prices go down from a same listing in which saying the card wasn't soaked?..... if the value is the same..then i a wrong soaking doesn't matter...


but if someone is willing to pay $500 for a card whether there was a shilling to get there or a reserve price...was the problem...to the buyer its worth $500........if put 'buy it now' for $500...or shilling..the outcome is the same....with the soaking ..its not...or lets see at least one ebay listing saying card was soaked...

if a seller of a 1952 Mantle psa tells you on an auction yesterday, that he shilled up to $30,000..cause he didn't want it go for less than that..and he risked paying $3,000 if he
'won' and the card ultimately sold for $35,000...would you subtract value for that? how about if he told you in soaked the card? ...which one hurts the value more..thoughts?

You asked for thoughts, so here are mine. Try proofreading your posts before hitting the submit button. Also to suggest soaking a card in water is worse than shilling is ridiculous.

[1952boyntoncollector]

You asked for thoughts, so here are mine. Try proofreading your posts before hitting the submit button. Also to suggest soaking a card in water is worse than shilling is ridiculous.

I glad you discussed the content of the post....talking about proofreading etc seems like you are avoiding the actual discussion....

if you think a card is bid too high due to shilling you can choose not to buy the card..or can choose to buy the card at your price......... to say 'is ridiculous' with no content of an argument is ridiculous......

so basically anything you say after this post..ill just post that what you say is ridiculous..........(if your post actually has content and doesn't just address proofreading)......

[Mikehealer]

I glad you discussed the content of the post....talking about proofreading etc seems like you are avoiding the actual discussion....

if you think a card is bid too high due to shilling you can choose not to buy the card..or can choose to buy the card at your price......... to say 'is ridiculous' with no content of an argument is ridiculous......

so basically anything you say after this post..ill just post that what you say is ridiculous..........(if your post actually has content and doesn't just address proofreading)......

Well spoken.
Shilling is stealing and is against the law. It doesn't matter what a person is willing to pay for an item, when if not shilled that person would have gotten the item for less. Shilling also creates a false market value. Did I mention that shilling is stealing!
I'm not saying soaking is an accepted practice by all. Some think it is altering a card and some don't. I understand both sides.
I'll bet that if you ask anyone that has soaked a card, if they have soaked they would tell you yes. On the other hand if you asked someone that has shilled if they have shilled, you will not get such a truthful answer.
So I will stick to my earlier statement, to even suggest soaking is worse than shilling is ridiculous.
Merry Christmas to all.

[jbsports33]

Any R cards can be tough like Goudeys - but anything earlier is a bit easier - I think it was the glue in the 30s and 40s that make it hard – but we have had no issues with T206 type cards and even 19the Century - lots of non-sports are in scrap books, make good practice

[Tao_Moko]

I think there are mixed results on T209-2 but mine was not a success. Lost several pieces of the image and text on the back. May have been an isolated incidence but scared me away from future attempts.

Still haven't heard much on T207's. How does the gloss handle a soak?

[1952boyntoncollector]

Well spoken.
Shilling is stealing and is against the law. It doesn't matter what a person is willing to pay for an item, when if not shilled that person would have gotten the item for less. Shilling also creates a false market value. Did I mention that shilling is stealing!
I'm not saying soaking is an accepted practice by all. Some think it is altering a card and some don't. I understand both sides.
I'll bet that if you ask anyone that has soaked a card, if they have soaked they would tell you yes. On the other hand if you asked someone that has shilled if they have shilled, you will not get such a truthful answer.
So I will stick to my earlier statement, to even suggest soaking is worse than shilling is ridiculous.
Merry Christmas to all.


I like this post much better than you made...I like the discussion and thanks for the good response...


I think a reserve is the same thing as shilling..the item doesn't sell if it doesn't go over the reserve......I know there are problems with shilling...I can tell you when I have bid on used cars and I have felt I was bidding against the soda machine in the back of the auction

the issue why I think shilling is not so bad is I cant see it being prevalent...let the seller keep eating a buyers premium every time he 'wins' a card....I would never want to risk losing 10%..i know there are some extreme examples out there where it could make sense in theory but time after time I just do see it taking place in the real auction houses..

I do see old threads on the soaking that I had not seen till today. They make the same points about if you don't disclose it for fear the item will go down then there is something wrong with that..

can we agree that if there are two identical cards in every way (except whatever happens to the paper if one of them was soaked ) and if one was soaked and the other wasn't and they are being sold raw, that you will prefer the unsoaked card?

however on the 1952 topps mickey mantle psa 5 was sold for for $30,000 last week to a real buyer..but we are told that there were some shill bids that were under the final price, would that really impact the value?

[4815162342]

the issue why I think shilling is not so bad is I cant see it being prevalent...let the seller keep eating a buyers premium every time he 'wins' a card....I would never want to risk losing 10%..i know there are some extreme examples out there where it could make sense in theory but time after time I just do see it taking place in the real auction houses..

What if the auction house is doing the shilling? All shilling is illegal, unethical, and downright evil. It makes me sick to my stomach to think of how much collectors have overpaid because of it.

can we agree that if there are two identical cards in every way (except whatever happens to the paper if one of them was soaked ) and if one was soaked and the other wasn't and they are being sold raw, that you will prefer the unsoaked card?

I would, but I'm one of the few who is against all altering: soaking, erasing, etc.

however on the 1952 topps mickey mantle psa 5 was sold for for $30,000 last week to a real buyer..but we are told that there were some shill bids that were under the final price, would that really impact the value?

Are you really asking this? :rolleyes:

[bnorth]

I like this post much better than you made...I like the discussion and thanks for the good response...


I think a reserve is the same thing as shilling..the item doesn't sell if it doesn't go over the reserve......I know there are problems with shilling...I can tell you when I have bid on used cars and I have felt I was bidding against the soda machine in the back of the auction

the issue why I think shilling is not so bad is I cant see it being prevalent...let the seller keep eating a buyers premium every time he 'wins' a card....I would never want to risk losing 10%..i know there are some extreme examples out there where it could make sense in theory but time after time I just do see it taking place in the real auction houses..

I do see old threads on the soaking that I had not seen till today. They make the same points about if you don't disclose it for fear the item will go down then there is something wrong with that..

can we agree that if there are two identical cards in every way (except whatever happens to the paper if one of them was soaked ) and if one was soaked and the other wasn't and they are being sold raw, that you will prefer the unsoaked card?

however on the 1952 topps mickey mantle psa 5 was sold for for $30,000 last week to a real buyer..but we are told that there were some shill bids that were under the final price, would that really impact the value?

A few more points on shilling and soaking.

Why do you think that a shiller is paying 10%? Most just cancel the transaction so there are no fees.

Shilling is stealing even if the shill bidder was not the under bidder. More bids bring more interest to a card.

Card soaking. I would pay the exact same price for 2 cards that look exactly the same even if I knew 1 was soaked. Now if they done a bad job of soaking that is a different story. I personally see nothing wrong with soaking if done properly.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Are you really asking this? :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]


I assume there is always puffed out prices up there..thats why I don't care what the winning bid is..i just look for price points where there were many unique bidders involved.

If an auction was a 'silent' auction..they just go by the highest bid right? no matter how much higher the winning bidder is....maybe auctions should just do that to avoid shilling ....

shilling is also not so black and white...a friend of a friend knows you have an item on ebay and bids to an amount that he would buy if no one else buys the item but if he was not your friend he would not of bid on the item at all.......if that friend of a friend ended up winning the item he would absolutely pay.is that shilling?

[1952boyntoncollector]

[QUOTE=bnorth;1358365]A few more points on shilling and soaking.

Why do you think that a shiller is paying 10%? Most just cancel the transaction so there are no fees.


--I don't thinks its a quick easy way out all the time if you 'win' your own item for a lot of reasons....

if you win an item on mile high they let you just cancel the transaction if you win..that easy? no headaches at all?


ebay I thought chargeds you a final value fee, if you keep canceling a transaction among the same bidder I would think you will get charged a final value fee eventually...

if you yourself or your friend on your behest won your item at mile high, heritage etc. ..you lose 20% don't you as buyers premium? how do you cancel a transaction at heritage, mile high etc...I just don't think its as easy as 'canceling the transaction'..if you win....

now if you own the auction house and its your item...now that's a real problem.....

[Eric72]

however on the 1952 topps mickey mantle psa 5 was sold for for $30,000 last week to a real buyer..but we are told that there were some shill bids that were under the final price, would that really impact the value?

Yes, shill bidding impacts the value of cards.

Leaving aside the particular auction you cite, please allow me to explain.

- Card X (could be a '52 Mantle, could be something different) is up for auction
- There are a number of bids on the card, all of which are legitimate
- Bidder Y is currently winning the auction at $10,000
- Bidder Y has placed a max bid of $12,500
- Bidder Z (who actually owns the card and is selling it in this auction) places a shill bid of $12,000
- Bidder Y wins the auction at $12,100

In the example above, Bidder Z stole $2,100 from Bidder Y. Additionally, to answer your question, Bidder Z has impacted the entire market for Card X.

Because of his unethical shill bidding, the card's market value is now perceived to be $12,100. Had he not placed the shill bid, the market value would have been perceived to be $10,000.

So, Bidder Z has not only robbed someone, he also caused future buyers (in the short term, at least) of Card X to overpay.

Hope this makes sense. And please know this isn't an attack.

Best regards,

Eric

[1952boyntoncollector]

understood but the underbidder was willing to pay $12,500 for it so the card is worth as much as someone is willing to pay $12,500 so its still market value..

also on big auction houses there are big gaps in bidding slots...especially once you get to $12,000

20% on 12,000 is $2400..i don't think a shiller would want to win the card at $12,000 to 'win' an extra $500......there could be shilling at $8000 but to me its more like a reserve..especially when there are people willing to pay over $11,000.....

as long as theres a 10-20% penalty of loss for shilling and 'winning' can we agree that the problem isn't that big of a deal...its when they don't have to pay a penalty would be the problem.....the penalty polices itself..now of course there will be extreme examples..like in everything....

...if you set a reserve to $12,500 and its bid to $12,000....the bidder will be forced to big against themselves to get it to $12,500..same outcome...

[nolemmings]

There are times when shilling is used to form an undisclosed reserve, and while I find it irksome, I don't lose sleep over it. If that Mantle card mentioned typically sells in the $25-30K range and people are prop bidding (shilling) it to 15-16K, I'm not all that bothered. Yes it shows an artificial interest in the card that may spur activity, and I wish it didn't happen, but I don't get all bent when I know there are 3-4 guys that are going to be there in the end making legit bids in the FMV range.

I am among the minority that doesn't soak and would prefer to not have soaked cards. That being said I don't look so negatively at soaking that if it is a card I really want and is seldom found, I would turn my back if the Seller told me it had been soaked. Don't know how I'd feel if they developed a soak-o-meter that could tell me which of my cards had been soaked--I think I would try and replace them but can't say for sure.

[Runscott]

I wonder how many soaked cards anti-soakers have bought that they love, unaware of the soaking, but that they would have considered to be too ugly prior to soaking.

[Runscott]

Until we see Todd's soak-o-meter, it is as irrelevent as wiping a booger off a card, which I hope no one would object to.

[rhettyeakley]

Scott, what happens when the booger-o-meter comes to market? Are all cards immediately worthless? ;)

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

shilling happens too......so its fine as well with that logic..
That's exactly what I was getting at. Thanks!

[Runscott]

Rhett - if we are ever able to date the added material on a card, what will be the accepted removsl age? e.g- 100 yr old boogers cannot be removed but you can wipe off yesterday's sneeze?

[BlueBlood]

here's an example, and both sold through Probstein recently...


http://www.ebay.com/itm/1950-Bowman-22-Jackie-Robinson-HOF-Dodgers-PSA-6-5-034-High-End-034-034-Looks-Nicer-034-/361146942451?pt=US_Baseball&hash=item54160903f3&nma=true&si=zWtt9l%252Fwdq88Lmc%252FiWML3z19F%252F8%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557



http://www.ebay.com/itm/1950-Bowman-22-Jackie-Robinson-HOF-Brooklyn-Dodgers-PSA-6-EX-MT-034-Looks-Nicer-034-/371144660645?pt=US_Baseball&hash=item5669f216a5&nma=true&si=zWtt9l%252Fwdq88Lmc%252FiWML3z19F%252F8%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

[Runscott]

That Robinson was soaked?

[BlueBlood]

That Robinson was soaked?


Yes it is a lot whiter, and the stain on back is gone..

[sb1]

Um.......they are not even the same card.

[BlueBlood]

Um.......they are not even the same card.

Haha you are very mistaken, look again..Even look at the black mark on back of card in the very center, now look at the other card..

[sb1]

Ok. I saw the first ones that popped up on the ebay page without scrolling down. So, you are talking about the 6.5 which is the same identical card, and still has the mark on the back, however the wax stain is gone, soaking won't take it out, that would have been chemical work.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Ok. I saw the first ones that popped up on the ebay page without scrolling down. So, you are talking about the 6.5 which is the same identical card, and still has the mark on the back, however the wax stain is gone, soaking won't take it out, that would have been chemical work.


so chemical work is soaking or not..

[Runscott]

deleted due to lack of interest. I realize that the photo-restoration and soaking posts are only of interest to a limited number of members. I have a mailing list of such members and in the future will only send this type of information to that group.

[1952boyntoncollector]

No. When we say "soaking" we are talking about water only.

if water takes off ink that came from a pen and the water removes the ink..its ok correct..

[Runscott]

if water takes off ink that came from a pen and the water removes the ink..its ok correct..

Good question. My personal opinion is that soaking with water is fine, regardless of what it removes (if it's a card type we have identified as 'soakable';e.g-T206). For soakable cards it's not going to remove anything original to the card. T205's are the exception in my opinion - if you aren't careful, bits of print lettering will come off the back.

But if you soaked a T206 that had ink writing on it, and the ink became faded or blurred, it could be obvious that it had been soaked. I've never run into an example like that, and not sure how PSA or SGC would react to it, but to me it would then just be a matter of aesthetics. Also, if it's water-soluble ink, you could run into more problems when you try to dry it and the ink is wet.

[tiger8mush]

sorry if I missed it, but what about E121s? Has anyone successfully soaked one without issue?

Thanks!

[pencil1974]

Anyone ever attempt to soak a Donut of America card. I have one that has glue and extra paper (scrapbook) on the back but never have attempted on anything other than a "real" type of card before.

[obcbobd]

sorry if I missed it, but what about E121s? Has anyone successfully soaked one without issue?

Thanks!

Hi

I just bought a group of 27 cards that were glued into a 1922 bankbook (same as notebook paper). 20 E121s and 7 E220s. They all soaked fine. Using some of the previous posts as a guide, here's a step by step rundown of what I did;

I started with paper pages with cards glued, at about 5pm.

186496

I filled some pans with luke-warm water, and put individual sheets, each having two cards per side into the water.

186497

The pages floated, every now and then I pushed them down to the bottom. I left them in for about 15 minutes. I then picked up the sheets and it was quite easy to pull the cards, very slowly, off the sheets, except for one sheet, that one I soaked for another 20 minutes. The backs of the cards still had glue residue on them. I gently rubbed that off with a paper towel and put the individual cards back in the pan, after refilling with clean water.

186500

I left the cards in water for another 15, took them out, put them in between paper towels and topped with books.

186501

I changed paper towels after an hour, and again around 9pm. The next morning they looked and felt pretty good, but I still changed the paper towels and let sit for another day.

Below are the end results

186498

186499

Thanks

Bob

[atx840]

Nicely done Bob!

[Harford20]

I have seen some soaking experience comments on Old Judge, Mayo, etc.,
but not much on the 19th Century Trade cards. I have seen a few "really beat-up" folios/albums that are falling apart, yet there are some trade cards I would love to salvage and add to my collection.

Does anyone have experience soaking the really flimsy trade cards (i.e. Baby Talk, Brownies, Tobin Lithos, Cosack & Co or Sporting Life) from older album pages?
Some of these safe to soak? None of them?

Thanks
Dave

[trdcrdkid]

Dave --

Most of my soaking experience over the last 20 years has been with trade cards, and a pretty large percentage of the trade cards around today were soaked out of albums, much more so than with tobacco cards. I generally haven't had any problems with any of the standard types of trade cards, which would include the baseball trade cards you mention. My first soaking experiences, 20+ years ago, was with an album of trade cards and other ephemera where the pages were brittle and falling apart, but the cards were fine; I didn't have any problems soaking them, and most of those cards are still in my collection today. I posted this description of how I do it in one of the recent soaking threads:

http://www.net54baseball.com/showpost.php?p=1390170&postcount=7

[Harford20]

trdcrdkid,
Thanks for the information, as well as the Instructions. Now I just have to get over my "fear of drowning" and get one underwater.

Dave

[rdixon1208]

I tried to soak a V61 Neilson's Chocolate and the results were not good. It had paper on the back which came off nicely, but most of the ink also came off the front.

[Leon]

Anyone ever attempt to soak a Donut of America card. I have one that has glue and extra paper (scrapbook) on the back but never have attempted on anything other than a "real" type of card before.

I am curious if you ever did this? Since the backs are blank I am not sure what good soaking is going to do? Plus they are all hand cut from boxes so the grade or appearance won't be helped too much.

[Hot Springs Bathers]

Has anyone had any success with 1948 Bowman baseball or football. It seems that a high percentage of them have a brownish, dirty tint?

[ZachS]

Had a good soak yesterday. I picked up some T121 Sweet Caporal WWI Scenes cards and one of them had a glob of some sort of adhesive. I soaked it overnight and the next morning it started flaking off so I left it to soak all day yesterday. When I got home the glob popped off fairly easily. It left a slight stain where the adhesive was but it looks much better than it did. Total soak time was around 24 hours.

Before and after (the after pic was taken with my phone and doesn't look that great... the actual card looks much nicer):

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p212/zguinness/t121_zpsujferfh5.jpg

[Harford20]

Well, using trdcrdkid's soaking thread, only varying a bit with warmer water, finally sent some of my 19th century trade cards to the depths. Was amazed at how well things went. Most of my soaking times were near 20 minutes before the old album just peeled off.

I did run into some "newer" attachment techniques on one set of cards that had paper on the back. OK, new question: has anyone ever found a "safe" way to remove double-stick tape without removing the back of the trade card? Is double-stick tape completely non-water soluble? I did try very hot water for as much as 30 minutes without any visible change in the tape. The cards still look 20x better without the thick paper on the back, but if I could the tape off it would be a total coup. Any ideas would be great.

Dave

[Stonepony]

I'd not soak a T213. I recently couldn't resist soaking a T213 Matty which had glued paper covering entire back. I'm not patient and it took 2 hrs of soaking and teasing the paper off with difficulty. The back came off ok, but that T213 sheen/gloss was totally lost giving the card a bland, washed out appearance. Lesson learned.

[TipTopBread]

Has anyone soaked a D322? With what result?

[Chris Counts]

Here are a few 1941 Play Balls I soaked. They came out pretty nice. I'm not sure it was because the paper was high quality or the glue was water-soluble.

[caramelcard]

Has anyone soaked a D322? With what result?


Yes, i have soaked a D322. It held up fine. But, it always depends on what it's attached to or what is attached to the card.

Cards glued in albums with a card directly on the other side of the page don't soak off well.

And I'm not a big fan of partial soaking or using water on one spot of the card to remove something. It hasn't worked that well and can leave uneven color.

As I'm sure you know, D322s commonly have back damage. I haven't figured out why, but maybe you can shed some light on this. Might just be that a lot of collectors placed them in scrap books over the years?

Good luck.

Rob

[kmac32]

Add W572 strip cards to the list of soakable cards. Just did 18 today with no injuries or fatalities on the card front. Was a fun project and would do it again. Found old clippings of players from the era glued on black paper and then the W572 cards were glued on top of the clippings.

[Joshchisox08]

Has anyone successfully soaked their SO ??? :D:D:D

[Stonepony]

Ignore list population now at 1

[kmac32]

There is a lot of 8 T207 cards on eBay with pin holes and if they weren't $106.00, iI would buy them to see if T207 cards would soak okay. Would ne an interesting experiment and who knows what the outcome would be. With that said, I have enough respect for my money that buying T07 cards with pinholes is not a good way to spend money but these would be the perfect cards to experiment on.

Kmac

[kmac32]

Did a T205 this afternoon to remove scrapbook paper. Card soaked quite well and paper came off the back in about 2 minutes. Went to dry card and there was a small spot of glue that stuck to the paper towel that I was using so I took a wet qtip to remove the fragment of towel. Came off pretty easy but so did a couple of the red ink letters so decided to leave well enough alone. As mentioned earlier, T205 cards can be soaked but the ink on the back is fairly fragile so you have to be careful in drying the card and nit too much rubbing or you can lose ink. I echo Runscott's comments with respect to T205 cards.

[xplainer]

1914 Polo Gounds - No.
Tested one and it split in half. I guess two halves are glued together on this issue.

[Leon]

If you are doing something to the card that you do not disclose to the buyer than you are doing something wrong...

to me soaking worse than 'schilling' that everyone is angry about...

fine to soak if you disclose it to the buyer.....if not a big deal then the buyer will pay the same no?

You can do it to your own cards but eventually they will reach the secondary market....

If you are a pre-war baseball card collector, and have lots of cards, you have some that have been soaked. Saying soaking is worse than shill bidding is crazy to me.

Back to topic, T207s soak fine!!

[jburl]

If you are a pre-war baseball card collector, and have lots of cards, you have some that have been soaked. Saying soaking is worse than shill bidding is crazy to me.

Back to topic, T207s soak fine!!
I didn't see T211s listed, but they soak fine, too.

[trdcrdkid]

I didn't see T211s listed, but they soak fine, too.

I soaked a T217 and had no problems.

[Mikehealer]

Saying soaking is worse than shill bidding is crazy to me.

I agree Leon, that is a ridiculous statement.

[PowderedH2O]

Has anyone tried a glossy photo type card? I have some R311's with major scrapbook pages attached that I would love to get off of there.

[begsu1013]

quick question:

i have a 62 venezuelan herb score that has some album left on it.

can this issue be done?



i know nothing about soaking* and would normally consider it taboo for post war cards.

prewar, i totally get and i think the venezuelans fall into the prewar category considering many of them were affixed to albums as well.

anyways, any helps and/or tips are appreciated.


* i have read a few threads on the actual process but have never attempted one.

[kevinlenane]

Soaking Wheaties hand cuts is an absolute disaster.

[Hot Springs Bathers]

Sam & Mike - I have great luck with everything from cards to old programs that have been glued in scrapbooks by using a stack of Q-tips and a bowl of water.

I slowly soak the paper or glue with a little water on the Q-tip and then let it sit for a minute or two. I then check the paper with tweezers or my fingernail to see if it is loose or softened. If not I add a little more moisture and continue to do so until it comes off.

If it is simply glue spots I dab them with a paper towel. I once did an entire 1953/54 Parkhurst hockey set that way and they honestly looked like they had never been glued.

Of course some glues just can not be dissolved by water.

[JT1962]

shilling happens too......so its fine as well with that logic..

Shilling is actually against the law, it is consider a form of fraud. 15 years ago or so the FBI arrested a couple guys on EBay for shilling. They raised prices for 2-4 years 3-8 million dollars, if I remember correctly. To say shilling is not any worse than soaking. That is only based on your own personal logic, which is idiotic.

[ejharrington]

Shilling is actually against the law, it is consider a form of fraud. 15 years ago or so the FBI arrested a couple guys on EBay for shilling. They raised prices for 2-4 years 3-8 million dollars, if I remember correctly. To say shilling is not any worse than soaking. That is only based on your own personal logic, which is idiotic.


There is no law against doctoring baseball cards either. It doesn't make it right.

I don't know how anyone can justify soaking baseball cards in water or any other chemical (yes, water is a chemical).

[toledo_mudhen]

+1 to this, Alex. I'm too scared to soak any of my cards. I know a bunch of you guys have done so successfully, but with my luck, I'd be the rare exception, and destroy a piece of history. And even if it was only some $50 card, I'd want to punch myself in the face a few times.

I had the same fears regarding q 1955 Topps card that I was considering soaking. I went to ebay and found a 2 low cost 55s with glue stains that were perfect candidates for soak.

My experiments resulted in not so great results as the glue/stain removal resulted in paper loss on both of my attempts.

So I'm not sure if 55s overall are not good candidates in general or if I really didnt do it correctly - I have stopped "experimenting"

[h2oya311]

I love when threads from 3-1/2 years ago get bumped! I still have yet to soak any of the cards in my collection. But I still have some old albums and a few cards that have significant paper/glue residue. I might give it a go soon enough, but still feel uneasy about the idea of soaking. It still feels like an alteration in my opinion.

[OldOriole]

I don't know how anyone can justify soaking baseball cards in water or any other chemical (yes, water is a chemical).

Quite a few people on this thread clearly approve of soaking and some even give helpful suggestions to avoid damaging the cards. To me, soaking is completely fine...you are removing material that was not there at the time of production and was not intended to be on the card. The cards were mean to be held and enjoyed. Clearly, the backs were meant to be read, hence the advertising. Thank goodness for soaking or else many of us would not have a significant portion of the cards in our collections to enjoy.

[Goudey77]

If soaking is acceptable practice then so should cleaning via other methods?
Not challenging the stance here. I just think its a simple yes or no for cleaning (without chemicals). If people want to argue the technicalities then I disagree since it's over complicating the situation. It should be a general rule of thumb if a stance is taken here.

Quite a few people on this thread clearly approve of soaking and some even give helpful suggestions to avoid damaging the cards. To me, soaking is completely fine...you are removing material that was not there at the time of production and was not intended to be on the card. The cards were mean to be held and enjoyed. Clearly, the backs were meant to be read, hence the advertising. Thank goodness for soaking or else many of us would not have a significant portion of the cards in our collections to enjoy.

[brianp-beme]

A decent percentage of PreWW2 cards we own at one time came from a scrapbook. I have no problem with soaking them out with water, and have done so in the past.

The one set of cards that I had extra poor results from the soaking process was the V61 Neilson's Chocolates. The glossy coating on the front got very hazy after the soak, and pretty much ruined the look of the cards.

Brian

[Kzoo]

I bought a 55 Topps Clemente a couple years ago that had a weird, wavy warp in the cardboard. There was not any glue or anything stuck to the back of the card. It almost looked like it got wet at some point years ago, like maybe in an old shoebox of cards in a basement (that's how I envisioned it) and then dried funky.

I hadn't soaked any of the 50's topps cards before, so I tried a common 55T 'beater'. It survived the process, so I gave Roberto a bath for 15-20 minutes and it dried perfect, without any of the warping problems it previously had. It now resides in a PSA 4.5 holder and looks great.

[Luke]

1948 Leaf?

[Goudey77]

Does anyone know if 1914 CJ's have issues with soaking? I know it was mentioned earlier but i'm curious since i've seen quite a few of these 1914's that have a wave in the stock. They arent completely flat. Likely attributed to the thin stock. But i'm curious if that's an indicator for soaking as well.

[ullmandds]

Does anyone know if 1914 CJ's have issues with soaking? I know it was mentioned earlier but i'm curious since i've seen quite a few of these 1914's that have a wave in the stock. They arent completely flat. Likely attributed to the thin stock. But i'm curious if that's an indicator for soaking as well.

i've soaked 15's. I think the key with 14's as with any soak is to make sure you are pressing the card while drying properly.

[irishdenny]

Until we see Todd's soak-o-meter, it is as irrelevent as wiping a booger off a card, which I hope no one would object to.

Unless it was Mr. Christy Mathewson's Booger ~

[Goudey77]

Unless it was Mr. Christy Mathewson's Booger ~

Wiping booger’s is evidence of alteration. Or better known as N-b00G under PSA guidelines. The DNA sample left from snot cannot be removed without foreign substances.

[brianp-beme]

A decent percentage of PreWW2 cards we own at one time came from a scrapbook. I have no problem with soaking them out with water, and have done so in the past.

The one set of cards that I had extra poor results from the soaking process was the V61 Neilson's Chocolates. The glossy coating on the front got very hazy after the soak, and pretty much ruined the look of the cards.

No 'Before' scan, but did find an 'After' scan...Ouch!

Brian

[irishdenny]

i wouldn't soak a Mello Mint!

[plastic.dog]

Has anyone ever soaked an Ogden’s Tabs or Guinea Gold? (British tobacco cards from around 1900.) If so, what was your experience? Thanks.

[Leon]

Has anyone ever soaked an Ogden’s Tabs or Guinea Gold? (British tobacco cards from around 1900.) If so, what was your experience? Thanks.

The 1901 Guinea Gold looks to be a photographic card. I don't think I would be soaking those. I might use a wet Q tip to remove a blob of dirt otherwise. Others might know more as I haven't soaked any. They are blank backed. This is a pic from ebay. Biot sure about the others you asked aboiut.
And welcome to the forum.
ps...this is a 6 yrs old thread :)
.
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2334524.m570.l1313.TR1.TRC0.A0.H0.Xguinea +gold+card.TRS0&_nkw=guinea+gold+card&_sacat=0&LH_TitleDesc=0&_osacat=0&_odkw=guinea+gold
.

[insidethewrapper]

Could someone post or PM me the step by step process of soaking ? Time involved, type of water, time to dry, pressure on card, etc. I have no idea at this time how to do it, I have never tried it. Thanks

[brianp-beme]

Here is a pretty detailed account of the process posted previously on this site by David K.

Brian


I've soaked many trade cards over the last 20 years, including full and partial scrapbook pages, as well as a smaller number of T206s and other tobacco cards. How successful a soaking is depends largely on what type of glue was used, and you never really know that until the soaking is under way; however, the skill of the soaker also plays a part. Here's how I do it:

* I generally use a wide, shallow baking pan, though this partly has to do with the fact that most trade cards are bigger than tobacco cards, so putting them in a glass, as the original poster showed, won't really work. That's especially true for full scrapbook pages, which is how I got my start soaking more than 20 years ago.

* I fill it at least half an inch to an inch deep with warm-to-hot tap water. I've found that water from my kitchen faucet at its hottest setting is fine for soaking, and will not damage cards.

* I put the card or cards flat in the water with the paper/glue side up. You may see bubbling when the glue hits the hot water, but that's not necessary for a successful soak. If a card keeps floating to the surface rather than staying completely underwater, I may use a spoon to hold it down, leaning the spoon handle on the side of the pan.

* I generally let the cards soak for at least 5 or 10 minutes, unless the paper starts separating from the card all by itself. I'll try at this point, using my fingers or a Q-tip, to see if the paper is starting to come off. If it is, I'll do what I can to separate it from the card, carefully, always watching to make sure there's no paper being lost from the back of the card. If there is, I'll stop and let it soak some more.

* If the paper isn't coming off after 5 or 10 minutes, I'll let the card soak for another 15 or 20 minutes and try again as above. If the paper is coming off, great; if not, I let it soak some more. Once the water has cooled down to room temperature, I'll take the cards out, put them on a paper towel, refill the pan with warm-to-hot water as above, and put the cards back in to soak. I've sometimes had to do this multiple times and soak cards for over an hour. If that's what it takes, that's what you need to do.

* If the paper doesn't come completely off in one piece, I may need to try getting it off gradually, using my finger or (usually better) a Q-tip. This is where skill and experience comes in. You don't want to scrape it too hard, thus making the chance of paper loss much greater, but sometimes you need to rub at the paper and glue repeatedly until it starts to come off bit by bit. I always watch carefully for signs of paper loss at this point, and stop if I see any. I'll try soaking some more before trying again, but sometimes you encounter a glue that's not going to come off without some damage.

* After all the paper is off, I rub the back of the card with my finger or a Q-tip to get all the glue off. You can usually tell when it's off, because the back of the card stops being slippery or sticky (as it is when there's still glue). If you don't get the glue off before drying the card, you'll have problems.

* I press the cards between two paper towels in order to soak up as much of the water as possible.

* I then put a fresh paper towel on a book or other flat surface, put the cards on it, put another fresh paper towel on top of them, and then put a stack of books (or another flat, heavy object) on top of that.

* I let the cards dry for at least three or four days, changing the paper towels after the first day. When they're done drying, I remove the paper towels carefully, making sure none of the paper is sticking to the cards (which may mean there was some glue left on the cards).

[yanks87]

I am going to preface my statement by saying that I understand the difference between the card scandals running rampant in the high grade cards currently and this, but I still have an issue how this thread is so openly accepted and people who trim, recolor, or alter cards are blasted. If the card is staying in your collection, you can do whatever you want to it, the gray area comes in when the intent is to resell the card. Soaking cards compromises the genuine integrity of the card for one benefit, to remove part of it's story to increase the value. Apples to apples with pressing, trimming and recoloring. In a truly benign question, can someone explain how this is any different than a non-acceptable method of card alteration?

[conor912]

If the card is staying in your collection, you can do whatever you want to it, the gray area comes in when the intent is to resell the card.

Many would argue that the latter (the card finding it's way back on to the open market) is inevitable. None of us really "own" anything. The cards belong to the hobby, and each of us is just a shepherd of our respective collections, therefore none of us have the right to alter anything for next "owner", regardless of how far in the future that is.

There is also the argument that undoing something that was done (removing glue, paper, writing, etc) is not as looked down on as, say, trimming.

It gets pretty mind-f*cky. I think that political leanings also have something to do with it.

That was a joke, people. Lighten up.

I personally think it's dangerous to subscribe to an all or nothing approach for anything. I'm generally a "don't touch it" guy, but concede there are instances where action might be prudent.

[yanks87]

It gets pretty mind-f*cky.

Well put, that is why I had to lob it out there. All that said, I buy cards that look like they were not only chewed on by the dog, but fully processed, if you catch my meaning. It is one of the posts that when it comes back to the surface doesn't sit super well with me in a hypocritical sense. But again, what the hell do I know, just had to ask the question.

[marcdelpercio]

I am going to preface my statement by saying that I understand the difference between the card scandals running rampant in the high grade cards currently and this, but I still have an issue how this thread is so openly accepted and people who trim, recolor, or alter cards are blasted. If the card is staying in your collection, you can do whatever you want to it, the gray area comes in when the intent is to resell the card. Soaking cards compromises the genuine integrity of the card for one benefit, to remove part of it's story to increase the value. Apples to apples with pressing, trimming and recoloring. In a truly benign question, can someone explain how this is any different than a non-acceptable method of card alteration?

Here's the analogy I would give on this one. Imagine that you had a 1963 Corvette that you are going to sell as completely factory original. On the way to the auction, a bird poops on the hood of the car. What do you do? Clearly, most people would say that they would take a wet cloth and wipe it off. Is the car altered or any less original at that point? Certainly not.

Now imagine instead that before you took it to the auction, you touched up some paint scratches and replaced some small pieces of bumper trim that were damaged. Is the car less original then? Yes, obviously it is as you have added/altered original parts of the car with substances that were NOT part of the original composition.

To me, that is the simple difference between soaking a card and altering it otherwise.

[yanks87]

OK, I kinda get that analogy, but at the same time I think it only holds up for something like rubber cement which can in most cases be rubbed off (hey now!), but when the card as a whole has to be dipped to remove glue, I think it gets in the gray area of doing overall damage to the integrity of the card.

So using your analogy, you would clean the bird poop off the '63 by submerging the entire car in water to remove it. Though you have removed the blemish, you have compromised the card as a whole in the process.

Splitting hairs I guess, but I feel it is a bigger deal than just a surface removal, and either way, the card is altered in my opinion.

[marcdelpercio]

Well, actually I would cover the car in water to clean it quite often. I mean, that's basically the definition of washing a car, right? If you were to purchase the car in my analogy, would you expect that the seller should disclose every time the car was washed in the past 60 years? Do you consider that "compromising" the car?

[conor912]

OK, I kinda get that analogy, but at the same time I think it only holds up for something like rubber cement which can in most cases be rubbed off (hey now!), but when the card as a whole has to be dipped to remove glue, I think it gets in the gray area of doing overall damage to the integrity of the card.

So using your analogy, you would clean the bird poop off the '63 by submerging the entire car in water to remove it. Though you have removed the blemish, you have compromised the card as a whole in the process.

Splitting hairs I guess, but I feel it is a bigger deal than just a surface removal, and either way, the card is altered in my opinion.

What would you say to do about a card that had water-based paint spilled on it? The aesthetic value is ruined. You now have 3 options: 1) throw it away 2) keep it as-is or 3) soak it in water and get back its aesthetic value. Then what about oil-based paint that would require solvent? I'm not saying there's a right or wrong, necessarily, though I think that's where most would probably (at least claim to) draw the line.

Everyone falls on a different place on the ethical spectrum for everything, so I try not to judge, but I think it's safe to say that the majority of people want the things they own (and/or are trying to sell) to be as nice and presentable as possible.

[yanks87]

Well, actually I would cover the car in water to clean it quite often. I mean, that's basically the definition of washing a car, right? If you were to purchase the car in my analogy, would you expect that the seller should disclose every time the car was washed in the past 60 years? Do you consider that "compromising" the car?

That's where the analogy falls apart to a certain degree. Because a car is sheet metal, covered in paint and layers of clear coat to protect against the elements, "cleaning it" is really not as intrusive as it would be if the body was made out of a substance that was not water resistant.

I get what you are saying though, but I still see it as a level of compromise when you go through the post and see how many cards cannot be soaked. They are made from paper, pressed pulp that when gets wet, can begin to degrade even if the slightest bit.

In my book, that is something that should be disclosed if the intent is to improve the appearance and value of the card. Similar to the way that comic books, when restored and graded have a different designation/value. It is done in fine arts all the time, during the restoration/cleaning processes on old pieces of art in the name of preservation. So I don't have a problem with the practice as much as I do with the venom thrown at other practices, when soaking in my book, is another tool of improving/altering cards and profiting from the result. Again, all my opinion, just wanted to hear from other folks so I do appreciate you chiming in!

[yanks87]

What would you say to do about a card that had water-based paint spilled on it? The aesthetic value is ruined. You now have 3 options: 1) throw it away 2) keep it as-is or 3) soak it in water and get back its aesthetic value. Then what about oil-based paint that would require solvent? I'm not saying there's a right or wrong, necessarily, though I think that's where most would probably (at least claim to) draw the line.

Everyone falls on a different place on the ethical spectrum for everything, so I try not to judge, but I think it's safe to say that the majority of people want the things they own (and/or are trying to sell) to be as nice and presentable as possible.

That sounds like my kind of card! I am definitely on the spectrum, or at least I have been told as such. If a card had something dropped on it, it is up to the owner what to do with it. Does that ruin the aesthetic to me, no, but to others it may. Tobacco Stains, Caramel Stains, hell kid's writing positions on cards provides more validation than any grading could ever to me, but that is to me. I would NEVER take a solvent to a card, or for that matter soak a card to remove glue, for fear what it would do to the actual card. I have a feeling I am in the minority, but there is an aura of hypocrisy that this post exists at the same time as the other post about buffing newer card surfaces to get better grades. Apples to apples in my book. But again, my opinion and thank you for the reply!

[marcdelpercio]

That's where the analogy falls apart to a certain degree. Because a car is sheet metal, covered in paint and layers of clear coat to protect against the elements, "cleaning it" is really not as intrusive as it would be if the body was made out of a substance that was not water resistant.

That's a fair point, but I feel that the purpose of this thread is to determine what cards can be soaked WITHOUT intrusively degrading the composition. When I soak a card, my goal is to simply remove things that HAVE degraded it and were not a part of the card to begin with. That is where I draw the line with alterations. To add color or trim away a part of the card that was initially there is fundamentally changing the original integrity of the card. Soaking dirt or added paper off of it is not. It is possible pretty close to 100% of the time with enough scrutiny and technology to detect trimming/rebuilding/recoloring. It is not possible at all to detect a card that has been soaked in water. And the reason for that is because that card has NOT been altered from its original state.

[conor912]

I guess when you think about, cardboard is essentially wood pounded into a slurry with water, then pressed and dried. Is temporarily reintroducing water back into it really changing it? If you wash and dry a dirty shirt, have you changed the shirt?

Now we’re back to the mind-f*cky part :)

[yanks87]

I guess when you think about, cardboard is essentially wood pounded into a slurry with water, then pressed and dried. Is temporarily reintroducing water back into it really changing it? If you wash and dry a dirty shirt, have you changed the shirt?

Now we’re back to the mind-f*cky part :)

EXACTLY. And yes you have changed the shirt, fibers break down during every wash, but that might be going down a rabbit hole it's best to stay out of!!

[yanks87]

That's a fair point, but I feel that the purpose of this thread is to determine what cards can be soaked WITHOUT intrusively degrading the composition. When I soak a card, my goal is to simply remove things that HAVE degraded it and were not a part of the card to begin with. That is where I draw the line with alterations. To add color or trim away a part of the card that was initially there is fundamentally changing the original integrity of the card. Soaking dirt or added paper off of it is not. It is possible pretty close to 100% of the time with enough scrutiny and technology to detect trimming/rebuilding/recoloring. It is not possible at all to detect a card that has been soaked in water. And the reason for that is because that card has NOT been altered from its original state.

True, but I did see a lot of W551's recently that were very obviously soaked as the inks bled all over the place, it was a mess of blue and red, great in modern art, not so good in this case. They were slabbed and sold. So I will agree, soaking is the one of the least of the nefarious things that can be done to cards, if it is nondestructive, in order to restore or preserve the original card, but in my book (very thin with a lot of pictures), it is still "meddling."

[Leon]

I think going with what the hobby deems acceptable (most think soaking in water is ok) is the best way to go. I do think soaking can change composition a little bit because the few times I have done it I could tell it was done afterwards. The cards with white borders look a tiny bit less white to me. Also, I have seen cards change a shade of color too.

True, but I did see a lot of W551's recently that were very obviously soaked as the inks bled all over the place, it was a mess of blue and red, great in modern art, not so good in this case. They were slabbed and sold. So I will agree, soaking is the one of the least of the nefarious things that can be done to cards, if it is nondestructive, in order to restore or preserve the original card, but in my book (very thin with a lot of pictures), it is still "meddling."

[ahumes13]

Has anyone ever tried to soak an E98? I understand the general concern with the color/sheen/fragility of the cards, but curious if anyone has ever tried?

[ullmandds]

Has anyone ever tried to soak an E98? I understand the general concern with the color/sheen/fragility of the cards, but curious if anyone has ever tried?

i wouldnt think there'd be any problem soaking an e98...they're sturdy.

[ahumes13]

I think the (potential) issue is the color on the front can flake off generally or when encased, etc., am curious if it survives a soak.

[tiger8mush]

Soaked this M101-5 for about 10 mins in tap water. The two bits of paper were loose and slid off when i pulled the card out of the water. Was slightly nervous about harming the front so I didn't leave it long in the water. Front looks the same, back no longer has the 2 bits of scrapbook paper attached.

[Kzoo]

Has anyone ever tried to soak a card with scrapbook adheasive/paper stuck to the back that is normally 'soakable'.... that is also signed on the front in ballpoint pen?

Did the ballpoint pen autograph survive the soaking?

I've been tempted.