PDA

View Full Version : One Final Informal Poll on Taking Out Creases


Archive
08-30-2006, 12:27 PM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Is taking a crease out of a card EVER ok to do?<br /><br />1 Yes or 2 No

Archive
08-30-2006, 12:31 PM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Whoop-s--my vote is 2. No

Archive
08-30-2006, 12:32 PM
Posted By: <b>Steve M.</b><p><br />NO

Archive
08-30-2006, 12:35 PM
Posted By: <b>Peter_Spaeth</b><p>No.

Archive
08-30-2006, 12:36 PM
Posted By: <b>David Vargha</b><p><font color=blue>NO</font><br><br>DavidVargha@hotmail.com

Archive
08-30-2006, 12:37 PM
Posted By: <b>Chad</b><p>--Chad

Archive
08-30-2006, 12:39 PM
Posted By: <b>martindl</b><p><br />Nope.

Archive
08-30-2006, 12:40 PM
Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>I believe it is okay to remove scrap and glue from the back of a card using water, drying and pressing.<br /><br />I also believe that this may reduce the impact of a crease on a card.<br /><br />I do not think it is wrong to do 1 when the result may also be 2.<br /><br />I generally think the intentional removal of a crease raises an eyebrow, but I have a hard time distinguishing that from other "permissible" forms of alteration that I agree with, including the above-mentioned soaking, and pencil erasures. <br /><br />I'm going to have to give this some more thought and keep reading the opinions of the Board members.

Archive
08-30-2006, 12:43 PM
Posted By: <b>DJ</b><p>NO

Archive
08-30-2006, 01:03 PM
Posted By: <b>Keith O'Leary</b><p><P>NO</P><P>*</P><P>I will say I've erased light pencil in the past (if theres no indentation in the card) and have soaked cards out of albums with varying success.</P><P>*</P>

Archive
08-30-2006, 01:09 PM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>no<br /><br /><br />btw, I had this poll in the old days when I was contemplating taking the crease out of my most prized card. Not one person said they would do it so i didn't....and am very happy with that decision...

Archive
08-30-2006, 01:12 PM
Posted By: <b>Troy</b><p>No

Archive
08-30-2006, 01:14 PM
Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>Nope.

Archive
08-30-2006, 01:15 PM
Posted By: <b>Jason</b><p>Leon,<br />what is your most prized card???<br /><br />you had to ask (leon)<br /><br /><img src="http://luckeycards.com/pn690fourbasehitskelley.jpg"><br />

Archive
08-30-2006, 01:16 PM
Posted By: <b>Henry Eshelman</b><p>No<br><br>Thanks, Henry Eshelman<br /><br />Website:www.freewebs.com/vintagebaseball

Archive
08-30-2006, 01:24 PM
Posted By: <b>Gary Nuchereno</b><p>2. no

Archive
08-30-2006, 01:24 PM
Posted By: <b>Andrew</b><p>No

Archive
08-30-2006, 01:29 PM
Posted By: <b>Richard</b><p>no

Archive
08-30-2006, 01:32 PM
Posted By: <b>Kenny Cole</b><p>NO

Archive
08-30-2006, 01:35 PM
Posted By: <b>Josh K.</b><p>no

Archive
08-30-2006, 01:43 PM
Posted By: <b>Frank Wakefield</b><p>yes

Archive
08-30-2006, 01:46 PM
Posted By: <b>Griffin's</b><p>No.<br /><br />I wonder if the reason some cards that are cited as overgraded is from creases that were taken out and then reappeared over time, in the slab.

Archive
08-30-2006, 01:50 PM
Posted By: <b>aro13</b><p>No

Archive
08-30-2006, 01:50 PM
Posted By: <b>Dave Seaborn</b><p>no

Archive
08-30-2006, 01:54 PM
Posted By: <b>John</b><p>NO

Archive
08-30-2006, 01:55 PM
Posted By: <b>Ray</b><p>NO

Archive
08-30-2006, 01:56 PM
Posted By: <b>steve f</b><p>no<br />

Archive
08-30-2006, 02:06 PM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>No.

Archive
08-30-2006, 02:17 PM
Posted By: <b>dd</b><p>Yes,<br /><br />If and only if the card will be yours forever(no profit motive).

Archive
08-30-2006, 02:24 PM
Posted By: <b>Brian Weisner</b><p><br /> No

Archive
08-30-2006, 02:26 PM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>dd,<br />Nothing is forever. We are merely temporary custodians of these.<br />JimB

Archive
08-30-2006, 02:31 PM
Posted By: <b>steve f</b><p>dd; You do realize that within a week of your passing, your stuff will be out in the driveway awaiting the earlybirds... Unless you've discovered DeSoto's Fountain of Youth.

Archive
08-30-2006, 02:36 PM
Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>No.

Archive
08-30-2006, 02:58 PM
Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>I'm against removing wrinkes, but won't say it's never okay. <br /><br />I'm against trimming and other alteration to get a higher grade, but I find it interesting that most Pre-War collectors have an aesthetic view based on what a Pre-War card looks like in 1999 not 1909. The T206 with stains and worn corners and a crease is not the way it orignally looked. It originally looked closer to a PSA9 or well restored card. This aesthetic bias is probably because none of us collected the cards when they were new, and only ever remember them being the proverbial 1999 versions. I'm certain that our athestic views, including whether a worn stained card should be restored to new look, would be different if we collected T206s in 1909.

Archive
08-30-2006, 03:12 PM
Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>No

Archive
08-30-2006, 03:57 PM
Posted By: <b>Rick</b><p>I vote NO.<br /><br />there is just no way to tell wether it will show up later on.

Archive
08-30-2006, 05:27 PM
Posted By: <b>Jim Crandell</b><p>Unofficial Tally:<br /><br />Yes 3<br />No 28<br /><br />This helps offset my dismay of the results of Leon's polls.

Archive
08-30-2006, 05:29 PM
Posted By: <b>RayB</b><p>No<br />RayB

Archive
08-30-2006, 05:36 PM
Posted By: <b>Alan Elefson</b><p>No

Archive
08-30-2006, 06:09 PM
Posted By: <b>steve yawitz</b><p>no

Archive
08-30-2006, 06:18 PM
Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>Yes, it is ok for you to remove a crease. But not me.<br />1 = YES<br />

Archive
08-30-2006, 06:26 PM
Posted By: <b>Brian E.</b><p>No

Archive
08-30-2006, 06:36 PM
Posted By: <b>Bob S</b><p>No....it's just as bad as producing the ultimate counterfeit card (with no possibility of detection), by a printing/paper conservator, imo.<br /><br />Bob<br><br>returnaddress

Archive
08-30-2006, 06:50 PM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>Gil,<br />Libertarian politics aside, do you prefer other people not remove creases or are you truly ambivalent?<br />JimB

Archive
08-30-2006, 07:37 PM
Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>Ambivalent? No, I prefer girls. Prefer heck, I insist on 'em. Exclusively.<br /><br />But do I prefer to have creases removed from cards? When I can not detect their removal, I guess. No, I don't.<br /><br />Why would anyone prefer cards which have had creases removed? <br /><br />Maybe if they were cheaper. But why would that be, if you couldn't tell?<br /><br />But none of this is what you asked. Sorry Jim, I do tend to ramble sometimes.<br /><br />"do you prefer other people not remove creases" <br /><br />Is what you asked.<br /><br />Jim if I could prohibit doctoring under any circumstances, I would. But I can not change reality. Where there is motivation to cheat, there will be cheaters. So, you either develop a rational for acceptance or man the guns to fight it. I can not win this fight, and I can tolerate cheating. So the rational I have come to accept is that if it is good enuff to pass the slabbers muster, I sure ain't likely to notice it. (And being an anti-slab guy I hate to admit that) I only buy high priced cards from persons whose opinion I respect as much as the graders, or I buy slabbed cards, then crack them out.<br /><br />Now I recognize that there are restorers out here who can doctor very well. Generally I am not in the market that this level of skill would be brought to bear on a card, but when I am - I sincerely believe that if a correction is undetectable, it does not exist.

Archive
08-30-2006, 07:49 PM
Posted By: <b>dennis</b><p>"I sincerely believe that if a correction is undetectable, it does not exist."<br />truer words were never spoken!

Archive
08-31-2006, 12:03 AM
Posted By: <b>Frank Evanov</b><p>NO<br><br>Frank

Archive
08-31-2006, 08:37 AM
Posted By: <b>Peter_Spaeth</b><p> "I sincerely believe that if a correction is undetectable, it does not exist."<br /><br />By that logic if an athlete takes steroids but also takes a masking agent that prevents its detection, does that mean the athlete did not take steroids? Or, to put it another way, it's ok to be deceptive as long as you can't get caught? I understand the practicalities of this approach, it enables us to buy cards and not worry, but I don't think it answers Jim's question which concerned whether it was right or wrong.<br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 09:03 AM
Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>"I sincerely believe that if a correction is undetectable, it does not exist."<br /><br /><br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 09:09 AM
Posted By: <b>andy becker</b><p>no. never.<br /><br />someone else brought this up in another thread, but to respond to "I sincerely believe that if a correction is undetectable, it does not exist."<br />so, by that thinking....if you commit a crime and don't get caught, then you haven't committed a crime?<br /><br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 09:35 AM
Posted By: <b>Jay</b><p>Yes! It's your card; do what you want with it.

Archive
08-31-2006, 10:56 AM
Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>"if you commit a crime and don't get caught, then you haven't committed a crime"<br /><br />Let's be a bit careful with our analogies, okay? Undetectable alterations in baseball cards are not like a murder that you got away with. "Well, Paul, if you can press a card without guilt, I bet you could kill without remorse if you could get away with it." If you want to stick with analogies, how about "apples and oranges" for this one?<br /><br />Many of the Board members happen to believe, for whatever reason, that crease removal is wrong. What I think this means is that people are unlikely to bid on a card from which a crease has been removed, if they know that the crease has been removed. My question for them is simply -- if the card was graded a 7 by PSA, SGC and GAI, why the heck would you care if the card once had a wrinkle in it ASSUMING THAT THE WRINKLE WOULD NEVER EVER COME BACK and there was no trace of whatever was used to press the wrinkle?<br /><br />If you would treat that card differently than a PSA 7 that you did not know the history behind, then I believe that you are being a bit naive about the history of cardboard in America over the past 100 years. Again, if your card has a crease in it, and it has been flattened in a toploader or screwdown for any period of time, odds are that the crease has been ameliorated some. MOREOVER, IF YOU DON'T SEE A CREASE IN YOUR BEAUTIFUL PSA 7'S, THAT CERTAINLY DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOUR CARD NEVER HAD ONE. My only point is, so what if it did ...cuz it don't now and won't in the future.<br /><br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 11:26 AM
Posted By: <b>andy becker</b><p>paul,<br />i think your putting words in my mouth. i didn't use the analogy of murder. i said a crime. if you steal a pack of bubble gum from the dime store and don't get caught, then did you not commit a crime? <br /><br />also, i find it pretty ironic that you have come out and said that most higher grade cards are altered and that's why you collect mid grade cards. i can respect that opinion. BUT, you are now saying that it's ok to alter cards as long as said alterations are undetectable. i don't think you can have it both ways.

Archive
08-31-2006, 11:42 AM
Posted By: <b>Peter_Spaeth</b><p>Paul would you hold to the same view if other forms of restoration (stain removal, corner flattening, corner buildup, and trimming and regraining, to name a few) could not be detected? And by the way "cannot be detected" is an imprecise term. I would bet with enough money and resources someone could detect things you say are undetectable, so do you mean to say "cannot be detected" by the grading services using their normal practices?

Archive
08-31-2006, 12:26 PM
Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>**"if you steal a pack of bubble gum from the dime store and don't get caught, then did you not commit a crime?"**<br /><br />Of course it is a crime. But what does that have to do with pressing a card under a heavy pile of books? Absolutely nothing. Just because you have identifed two fact patterns where the results of which are "no one knows" does not mean they are related or should be treated the same. <br /><br />**"i find it pretty ironic that you have come out and said that most higher grade cards are altered and that's why you collect mid grade cards. i can respect that opinion. BUT, you are now saying that it's ok to alter cards as long as said alterations are undetectable. i don't think you can have it both ways."**<br /><br />I have explained this on a different thread. I do not believe that soaking and pressing is an "alteration" in the sense that you do. I have a problem with high grade PSA 7's because I suspect trimming has taken place. Not soaking and pressing. I feel as strongly about trimming as you do about fat men sitting on wet cards. <br /><br />**"Paul would you hold to the same view if other forms of restoration (stain removal, corner flattening, corner buildup, and trimming and regraining, to name a few) could not be detected?"**<br /><br />This is a hypothetical world you've created. If stain removal, trimming, corner buildup and regraining could not be detected, our concept of collecting baseball cards and what grades are and what grading companies are would be entirely different. One of the reasons I returned to baseball card collecting after a long absence was the emergence of reliable third party grading that could detect the kinds of alterations that they do. I probably wouldn't collect cards if these phenomena were undetectable. I don't collect autographs because you just never know. I'd probably feel the same way about cards.<br /><br />**"And by the way "cannot be detected" is an imprecise term. I would bet with enough money and resources someone could detect things you say are undetectable, so do you mean to say "cannot be detected" by the grading services using their normal practices?"**<br /><br />Yes. That is what I mean. But I have also been applying hypothetical future grading services, too. The dialogue to me is different if we are talking about a crease that may reappear in the future or if a grading company can detect paste removal with water -- then it is about being duped now and learning about it later when the seller is outta here.

Archive
08-31-2006, 12:46 PM
Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>Does it really matter if someone removes a crease? Does it matter if you never knew the crease existed? It's kind of like a bear farting in the woods... if no one heard it, did the bear fart? Does anyone care if a bear farts in the woods? I've got better things to do than to go to the woods and find a farting bear. <br /><br />Somebody back in the 80s somebody showed me a card with a minor crease and then showed me the card again after the crease was removed. You couldn't tell the crease ever existed. It made me think a little bit about purchasing cards from that person but then again, if he didn't show me the before and after on the card I wouldn't have been able to tell the difference anyway. <br /><br />Just because I don't care about crease removal doesn't mean I employ the methods of removing the crease(s). I have cards with creases and I like those cards as much as the creaseless cards.<br /><br />Removing a crase isn't like rstoring a card by adding color and paper, it's getting rid of a wrinkle. IMO, there's no difference to removing a crease than erasing a light pencil mark that has left no indentations. <br /><br />Just my opinion. Everyones entitled to them. It's like they say, "opinions are like a$$holes"... I have one or is it that I'm an a$$hole... wait, no that's not it... it's because "everybody has one"... that's it...

Archive
08-31-2006, 12:50 PM
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Paul,<br /><br />Your whole argument seems to be that card alteration/restoration is great if you can't tell(what you don't know won't hurt you).<br /><br />My view is altering these great treasures is just plain wrong. These are treasured items that should stay in exactly the shape that they are in once they are found. In fact, it is the moral duty of true vintage collectors to leave the card in the state in which it was given or sold to them.<br /><br />I couldn't look at my cards if I knew that they were soaked, cleaned and even heavan forbid trimmed. <br /><br />I feel the same way about this as I feel about Upper Deck or Topps taking a historic bat and chopping it up into pieces to put in packs of cards.<br /><br />Jim

Archive
08-31-2006, 12:58 PM
Posted By: <b>andy becker</b><p>well put, jim.<br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 12:59 PM
Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>...what Judge Dred said. He articulated it better than I have been able to.<br /><br />But Jim, just because you have different standards from me doesn't mean you're more "moral" or more of a "true" vintage card collector.

Archive
08-31-2006, 01:53 PM
Posted By: <b>John</b><p>Enough!<br /><br />People, who trim cards, add color, soak cards, remove creases/wrinkles, build up corners, erase marks etc. Are card doctors period. You can argue semantics all you want; spin it to make it seem ok etc. I donít care if itís an art eraser, a glass of water and an ironing board or a razor blade. <br /><br />Regardless of your intentions innocent or evil, you are changing the characteristics of an item for the better not the worse, thereby you are increasing the items value period! You changed the card from the state in which it was found and more importantly purchased! <br /><br />Are you going to tell anyone that PSA 5 Cobb was at best a PSA 2, before a night in the lab with that gallon of distilled water and your copy of ďWar & PeaceĒ when you go to sell? <br /><br />ďI have explained this on a different thread. I do not believe that soaking and pressing is an "alteration" in the sense that you do. I have a problem with high grade PSA 7's because I suspect trimming has taken place. Not soaking and pressing. I feel as strongly about trimming as you do about fat men sitting on wet cards.Ē<br /><br />Are you kidding me Paul? So its ok to bump your 2ís and 3ís to 5ís and 5.5ís by using card altering methods, but its not ok to trim a card. The only difference I see here is the guys who a working cards to 7ís and 8ís have a much more lucrative operation than that of you and your glass of water. <br /><br />The card had a crease, you removed the crease therefore you changed the card! <br /><br />Now hit me with theÖIím not removing anything or taking away from the card follow up. You know youíre right in fact every freaking card ever issued that we own in some small way was not meant to be that way from the factory. Lets start cleaning all those Polar Bear stains. How about all those candy stained Cracker Jacks? Man and those wax stains on those 52 Bowmanís, wow Iím going to need a lot of water and case of art erasers. <br /><br />Iím not naÔve either I know there are worked cards out there, and they came from people with the same attitude towards working cards as you, the only difference is the methods and intentions.<br /><br />The point of nice cards is they were FOUND that wayÖit kind of ruins the point if we all start making them doesnít it? <br /><br />Donít you see the issue with that? If soaking were so ok, then we would have a 5th of August Recently Soaked Thread, and we all would be showing our latest works. <br /><br />In fact why would any Major Auction house ever sell cards with glue or creases, seems they would have a fulltime operation dedicated to this. Mastro wouldnít need a Classic Collector auction all those items could be bumped to the main auctions. <br /><br />I also bet you all would be less inclined to buy or deal with someone who practiced this method with such caviler tone, as to say ďhey if you cant tell, it never happenedĒ<br /><br />The fact of the matter is, it's altering, maybe not as obtrusive as a razor blade and bleach but it is altering. Anytime the end result looks different than the beginning thatís altering in my book. <br /><br />Iíve said it before and I will say it again; soak em if you got em. But unless you adding back that glue, and you plan on bending that card in half before you sell it youíre no different than the guy with the razor blade, you just have a different toolbox and for sale price.<br /><br />John<br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 02:02 PM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Those are your opinions. As long as you realize that, for the erasing and soaking part, you are in the minority, and most folks disagree with you...then all is good. Just as long as you know that....then everything you said is fine..Most folks do agree however, according to the latest survey, that there are actually differences between erasing an errant pencil mark and taking a crease out..I know I do..but then again I can rationalize between the differences...some folks can't or don't want to..again, that's their call......best regards

Archive
08-31-2006, 02:24 PM
Posted By: <b>John</b><p>Leon,<br /><br />Iím fine with anyone who disagrees. Thatís kind of the whole point of a discussion forum right? <br /><br />As for pencil erase, thatís the least offensive of the above. But Leon Iíll ask you the same question. If soaking is so accepted why do major auction houses sell creased cards, why not soak them and sell them for higher profits??? In fact why wouldnít dealers offer to soak the card for a fee and pretty it up before sending it out? <br /><br />Should I be starting my own soaking company sort of like PSA? Send them in and have creases/wrinkles removed along with stains and glue for a fee per card?<br /><br />It just seems to me like everyone is saying, ďif I canít tell itís okĒ Yet these are the same people who air out every ebay scammer auction, talk for 200+ post about two homeboys with a reprint. Make constant accusations about the PSA 8 Wagner and Harris collection cards being altered. Yet when done typing these same people go and alter and or improve their cards using various methods. These same cards which they will ultimately sell for a raise in profit from that which it was. <br /><br />Itís like taking a hundred dollars out of the cash drawer and damming the Enron executives to hell at the same time.<br /><br />If Iím the only guy who sees hypocrisy in that here, then Iím fine being in the minority.<br /><br />Regards,<br /><br />John

Archive
08-31-2006, 02:28 PM
Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>You are not the only one who sees the hypocrisy, and your points are well taken. In my view, the don't ask, don't tell philosophy is in full swing.

Archive
08-31-2006, 02:34 PM
Posted By: <b>Peter_Spaeth</b><p>A recap of my views which for the most part echo Jim and John.<br />1. Whether or not something can be detected is not an appropriate test for the propriety of alteration. As Jim put it, it's a matter of what is right or wrong. Plus, Paul's position has yet another flaw that I don't think has been mentioned before -- detection is not a binary one or zero thing, it's a matter of opinion, two people could look at the same card and one could say yeah it's tampered with and one could say no it isn't. So how the heck can that be the test. <br /><br />2. I stop one step short of Jim and John as to what constitutes unacceptable restoration. To me, removing excess material, so long as it does not alter anything about the card itself to which this excess material is adhering, is not really alteration. It is just extrication of an intact card from another medium. But beyond that, I cannot think of any form of alteration that I would deem acceptable, and certainly not to improve any wear a card has been subject to during its natural life. EDITED TO IMPROVE LOUSY GRAMMAR<br /><br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 02:35 PM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Your argument is valid just not what the populus (sp?) believes. Honestly, you are lumping two different things together. As I just posted the final results on the other survey, and Jim C's survey is proof positive, that overwhelmingly folks view the soaking and erasing differently than taking creases out. Since you brought it up ....how many cards do you see in major auctions with pencil writing on them? How many with glue residue? How many with creases? The answers to those questions are exactly as our polls have shown...taboo on creases but not on erasing and soaking of residue and glue.....That's the reason you don't see pencil writing or paper remnants on auction house cards too much but you do see creases..They are smart enough to erase a mark or soak off a paper remnant (I have never ever been told they do that but would hope they do)..BTW, I for one, always appreciate opposing views.....with kind regards..

Archive
08-31-2006, 02:41 PM
Posted By: <b>John</b><p>Leon, <br /><br />Point taken, Iím sure it goes on, I know it goes on. But that in my mind doesnít make it right. And if everyone feels its no big deal why the black ops routine?<br /><br />Also isnít soaking a card to remove paper or residue the same method in which you would go about attempting to remove a crease??<br /><br />Once your hands in the cookie jarÖÖ..<br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 02:48 PM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Again, I respectfully disagree. The once in the cookie jar analogy is wrong. I have erased marks and soaked a few cards. I have never ever taken a crease out of a card. My hand was there....and I wasn't tempted...and as the polls show it seems there is a difference in the majority of this boards minds....

Archive
08-31-2006, 02:48 PM
Posted By: <b>andy becker</b><p>john and others, <br />you are not alone. altering cards is a bad thing and a slippery slope imo. <br />i'd say to each his own, but i know damn well the cards will resurface again at some point.<br />this type of attitude could become very, very detrimental to the hobby.<br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 03:05 PM
Posted By: <b>John</b><p>Leon,<br /><br />Not pointing the finger at you per say, but I can't depend on everyone to be as honest as you. Thatís my problem with this.<br /><br />Also Leon if you sell these cards you soaked, will you disclose that they were soaked? Just curious.<br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 03:17 PM
Posted By: <b>MikeU</b><p>1. Absolutely NO.

Archive
08-31-2006, 03:22 PM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Since I don't think it's a big deal then no I probably wouldn't disclose it if I sold a card that I had erased a mark from. If someone asked I would tell them though (if I remembered). This card was in a PSA 6 MK holder. It had a tiny tiny pencil mark, very light, on the back....I can assure you that no one in the world, with their naked eye or a regular loop, could tell that I erased it....(it's not for sale)<br /><br /><img src="http://www.luckeycards.com/personaln172comisky.jpg">

Archive
08-31-2006, 03:28 PM
Posted By: <b>John</b><p>Leon,<br /><br />Fair, and nice card. What about the soaked cards? The pencil as I stated above is the least offensive. Just curious if you would disclose any soaking? Since it could easily and rightfully assumed by any potential buyer that the card could have been creased as well prior to soaking to remove residue or whatever.<br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 03:29 PM
Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>Leon, how much do you want for that card? wow, it's nice...<br /><br />The funny part about this is that there are cards in holders that have perncil marks that have been overlooked by the grading services. If the grading service misses it does that mean the mark doesn't exist? <br /><br />Wonderful specimen. If I bought it and I couldn't tell that there was a pencil mark on it then no big deal. Now on the other hand if I bought it and I could see obvious indentations from the pencil mark (after the penil mark was removed) then that's a different story. The marking wouldn't bother me but I'd be ticked off if I bought it as a ExMt card without the indentation being disclosed.<br /><br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 03:44 PM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Honestly, same answer to soaking. I know that might outrage you or some others but unless asked I probably wouldn't say anything. FWIW the grading companies will give numerical grades to previously soaked cards too...as long as there are no chemical stains etc....but I have only ever used water and would never use anything else. If a piece of paper gets wet and then dries I just don't see that as an issue, even if glue or paper remnants fell off...but again, if someone asked I would tell them.....

Archive
08-31-2006, 03:45 PM
Posted By: <b>Jim Crandell</b><p>Sorry Paul--we are more moral.<br /><br />John--well articulated points in all your threads<br /><br />Leon--you are correct in that the majority do not consider soaking and removing pencil marks alteration but at least there is a substantial number who do....and an overwhelming majority who see removing creases as wrong.<br /><br />It was an interesting debate--I just cannot believe how the majority can support card doctoring like they do----<br /><br />At some point we will be in the majority......but by that time Paul might have soaked all the T206s. He nwon't get any of my unsoaked untrimmed cards however.<br /><br />Jim

Archive
08-31-2006, 03:48 PM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>It was a good debate and poll and I think we have all learned from it...and there was no spitting, biting, kicking, or name calling.... I consider that, in itself, a win.....btw, it was nice meeting you at the National though we only spoke for a few minutes...<br /><br />edited to add...Jim- we don't see it (erasing or soaking) as card doctoring that's why the majority supports it and not the crease removal....

Archive
08-31-2006, 03:49 PM
Posted By: <b>John</b><p>ďI know that might outrage you or some othersĒ<br /><br />Leon, <br /><br />I hope you think more of me than that? It would take a lot more than something like baseball cards to outrage me. I asked and you answered thatís I all wanted. Thanks for your honest response to my question.<br /><br />John<br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 03:52 PM
Posted By: <b>Brian Weisner</b><p><br /> Hi Leon,<br /> Nice card, I hope you got a bargain due to the MK qualifier. Most people forget that most Antique dealers and a lot of baseball card dealers in the 70's and 80's wrote the prices of there cards in light pencil on the back. I have 6-7 cards from the 50's and 60's that I had graded a few years ago, and all had light pencil marks, 4 came back with qualifiers and the other 3 without. It had been so long since I actually looked at the backs(15-20 years) that I never even gave it a second thought. I'm sure other "Old Timers" have just as many. Be well Brian<br /><br /><br />PS Hi Ted, as king of the Old Timers, I bet you have a few cards with pencil on the back...... and you might have been the one writing on them... I'm holding my extra Latham 42 for you. Talk to you soon Brian <br /><br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 03:53 PM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>You're right....me using "outraged" was a little too strong... kind regards

Archive
08-31-2006, 03:57 PM
Posted By: <b>Jim Crandell</b><p>Leon,<br /><br />Thanks--it was nice to meet you too.<br /><br />Jim

Archive
08-31-2006, 04:01 PM
Posted By: <b>John</b><p>Brian, <br /><br />Good point, and for the record I say we create a new hobby rule, once marked the card should always sell for that price. Anyone have any T3ís for .75 cents each? <img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/smileys/143.gif"><br /><br /><br /><img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/websize/back1.jpg"><br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 04:06 PM
Posted By: <b>Greg</b><p>I'm pretty new to card collecting and, in an attempt to learn as much about the hobby as I can, I'm trying to soak in as much of this topic as I can. (I guess "soak in" isn't the best term I should have used, now that I think about it).<br /><br />From what I gather, it appears that soaking cards to remove a crease or glue residue/dirt seems to be taboo among the purists. From this discussion, the general concensus appears to be that a card should never be touched in any way, shape or form. <br /><br />Although I can truly appreciate this sentiment, I guess my question is two fold. <br /><br />First, who's to say that the high end cards out there were never touched by water before they entered the collecting market? I guess I don't understand why a card can't be cleaned, or pressed to remove a crease or warp if there is no alteration of the card beyond it's original state, especially if it can't be detected. Did rain ever hit it? Did someone clean some dirt off it 50 years ago? There's no way of absolutely knowing the true history of these century old pieces of cardboard.<br /><br />Second, if water, the most basic cleaner out there, is such a taboo substance to touch the surface of a card, why then is sticking these little pieces of history in a plastic slab with a cheesy computer generated sticker on it, thus permanently altering it's historic appearance for all of eternity, so widely accepted? If anything alters the overall appearance of a card, these slabs seem to be the most blatant. From an esthetic standpoint, they leave a lot to be desired. From a historic standpoint, nothing says early 20th century than plastic.<br /><br />While I'm pretty new to collecting cards, I have, for the past thiry some years collected late 19th and early 20th century Brewery advertising. The good portion of our collection is composed of paper/lithography, most of which are the only known examples of their kind. I have never felt it inappropriate to "conserve" our items through restoration...stabilize water marks by having them reduced, repair tears or creases if possible (which is not always possible), and, finally, having these historic treasures mounted in archival, historically appropriate frames. Has it ruined their original state? In my opinion, no. It has stabilized them from further deterioration for future generations to enjoy and it has made them more pleasant to view overall. None have been returned to a "like new" appearance, but now that they have been conserved, they are less likely to deteriorate over time. I know most museums conserve items when appropriate. Just look at what the Smithsonian has done with the Flag that flew in Baltimore. If it wasn't for conservation, this national treasure would probably be gone in a century.<br /><br />I know cards are different from what I've been talking about, and I appreciate fully those who want their cards untouched, but I thought I would just give another perspective. <br /><br />As far as what cards generate monetarily based on a grade scale in a slab (when there seem to be hundreds of the same card out there), I'm still trying to figure that one out....that's going to take more time I suppose.<br /><br />OK, I'm ready to be slammed now....<br /><br />Greg<br /><br /><br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 04:07 PM
Posted By: <b>Brian Weisner</b><p><br /> Hi John,<br /> I agree, I bought a Southern Leaguer at an antique market a few weeks ago for 45.00, but the back said 2.50. I asked the cashier as a joke, but she looked it up in the dealers book and offered to call and ask. I paid the 45 for a nice EX+ card and laughed all the way out of the door. <br /><br /> Be well Brian<br /><br /><br /><br />PS I bought a nice T206 of Lajoie in the late 80's for 10.00, and the price is still on the back.........

Archive
08-31-2006, 04:26 PM
Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>Greg, I for one will not slam you. Your points are all similar to the points I've been trying to make. So far, you and Judge Dred have done an admirable job of explaining a philosophy of card collecting.<br /><br /><br /><br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 04:29 PM
Posted By: <b>Peter_Spaeth</b><p>I would be interested in your thoughts on my point that detectable or not is not an objective, binary inquiry and therefore is not a valid test for whether an alteration is acceptable.

Archive
08-31-2006, 04:53 PM
Posted By: <b>John</b><p>Greg,<br /><br />You raise some great questions, and in no way would I slam you on those. I will try to answer your questions the best I can. <br /><br />The problem with restoration is for the most part (I said most part) were not really talking about one-of-a-kind items here. Were talking about mass distributed lithography and cardboard premiums. Much like in the toy market a painted antique fire truck is worth less than an untouched one. Books as well, super clean copies of first editions are worth more than used first editions. <br /><br />As for being touched by water, cleaned spit shined etc. in the past. Iím sure it happened these cards were meant to be held in the hand and have been doing just that for over 100yrs. <br /><br />What I think Jim, Peter, Todd, Andy and all the others are pointing too. Is the modern collector such as Paul and others who are practicing using modern methods of card restoration/cleaning etc. what every you call it. These very methods can be innocent and evil, and there is fine line between those. Itís that fine line in which we are debating over and all sides have valid points and passion on their side.<br /><br />As for me, as a buyer of vintage cards I would be very upset to find out that I paid for an EX+ or NM card to find out that it only achieved that grade due to someoneís tampering with its original state. Not only would I be upset due to the extra money wasted, but also for me when I look at my cards itís neat to know they have survived in their current condition all these years, and in a fact havenít been juiced or undergone major cleaning jobs to get where they are today.<br /><br />The best analogy I can think of isÖ<br /><br />Itís like replica cars there are people who would love to have a Shelby Cobra 427 replica kit car. And thereís nothing wrong with that, in fact canít drop 250k+ on a real one it's the next best thing. That works fine for some, me I would only want the real thing, if I cant afford it I find something I can afford and love it equally as much. <br /><br />And for the record I am in no way an ultra high-end card collector. Not because I think itís a world conspiracy and all are trimmed. The most deciding factor in my choice to not collect ultra high-end cards (7ís, 8ís, 9ís) is a monetary one, I canít afford too! <img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/smileys/143.gif"> <br /><br />So I stick to my 4ís, 5ís and 6ís.<br /><br />Think of it as Americaís Semi Average to Tougher Wantlist for now. <img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/smileys/3.gif"><br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 06:38 PM
Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>"I would be interested in your thoughts on my point that detectable or not is not an objective, binary inquiry and therefore is not a valid test for whether an alteration is acceptable."<br /><br />Definitely agree. My point was that the hardline purists do not care, even if the world was a binary inquiry. Thus, to make my point, it was unnecessary to look into the real world shades of gray. Even if non-detection was forever certain, the purists would still balk.<br /><br />"As for me, as a buyer of vintage cards I would be very upset to find out that I paid for an EX+ or NM card to find out that it only achieved that grade due to someoneís tampering with its original state. Not only would I be upset due to the extra money wasted, but also for me when I look at my cards itís neat to know they have survived in their current condition all these years, and in a fact havenít been juiced or undergone major cleaning jobs to get where they are today."<br /><br />But the fact is that, in a binary detection/non-detection world, no money would be "wasted" and Wonka would never know that cards had or had not "surviced in their current condition all these years." Even in the real world, with detection a theoretical possibility, it may never be known.<br /><br />"Itís like replica cars there are people who would love to have a Shelby Cobra 427 replica kit car. And thereís nothing wrong with that, in fact canít drop 250k+ on a real one it's the next best thing. That works fine for some, me I would only want the real thing, if I cant afford it I find something I can afford and love it equally as much."<br /><br />This analogy would apply only if we were doctoring up old Honus reprints, which, of course, we're not.<br /><br /><br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 10:22 PM
Posted By: <b>John</b><p>ďBut the fact is that, in a binary detection/non-detection world, no money would be "wasted" and Wonka would never know that cards had or had not "surviced in their current condition all these years." Even in the real world, with detection a theoretical possibility, it may never be known.Ē<br /><br />HmmmÖmaybe and maybe not Paul. Many of my T206ís came from a large find when I was a young collector. I would hope the old bird that had them had better things to do rather than soak and press his baseball cards. Also many of my cards were bought before the hype of grades and grading companies, when it was a lot less profitable to be pressing wrinkles and minor creases out. Heck back then a wrinkle equaled EX or better still. LOL<br /><br />If your point is in my collection I might have a worked card and not know it? <br /><br />Ok, I might have card that I have bought out of the hundreds I have bought in the past years. So whatís your point because I didnít catch it its ok, because someone pulled one over on me we all should be doing it? <br /><br />Iíll say it again if soaking is such an acceptable routine in the collecting world and Iím some rabid purist! Why donít auction houses, dealers, and other collectors fully disclose this info on a daily basis? Heck why not soak your cards in front of SGC or PSA after all as Leon said they will assign a grade to soaked cards as long as thereís not trace of chemicals. When you dropped off your SGC 70 below did you chat with the graders on how you salvaged the card from half a back of paper? If not why didnít you mention it? Iím sure they would be amazed. Why donít they offer this service, after all a grading company is in the service business right? When you sell the card below are you going to bring it up? <br /><br />When you found the card below as is would it have received the grade below before your night of work? Itís not so much the soaking Paul I really donít care if you have swimming pool full of T206ís as we speak. Itís the fact that none of these cards will have any of this past history disclosed to future buyers. Compound that with how I'm also to believe that your removing paper and you arenít also getting rid of those crease's too? <br /><br /><img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/small/PfeisterThrowingSGC70.jpg"><br /><br />ďI respectfully disagree. Buying a baseball card is like buying a used car. Caveat emptor -- let the buyer beware.Ē<br /><br />If I ever bought a card from you no doubt I should.<br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 10:51 PM
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I think you are lumping soaking to take out creases or wrinkles with soaking to remove paper remnants or glue. One is considered taboo by almost everyone on this board and the other isn't, by the majority. This card had a big blotch of paper on the back of it. It covered maybe half of a dime size in the lettering.... Would it make a difference if you were buying this from me, as to what you would pay for it, if I told you I got a piece of paper off of the back, with some water? Would you pay less if you knew it up front? You can still see a little residue on the back even after the bath.... (it's not for sale and is the 3rd Weaver I have from the Trucker Boy find)....best regards<br /><br />Also, I know some of the graders at SGC. Their stance is sort of common sense...if they can't detect something they can't ding the grade for it...and I am not saying it's ok to do anything other than what we have been debating or it's ok as long as they can't tell...anything other than what I stated in the poll I started and I would feel it's altering..<br /><br /><br /><img src="http://luckeycards.com/pt2123weaver.jpg">

Archive
08-31-2006, 11:09 PM
Posted By: <b>John</b><p>Leon,<br /><br />As said before I really donít have a problem with removing paper from cards, as long as itís disclosed. That goes for pencil marks too. The issues I have is that many people arenít as honest as we would like them to be. So for some stopping at just removing paper may not be so easy, and whoís to say your not removing wrinkles or creases in the process deliberately or by pure innocent accident. I hope you can understand my concern with that. <br /><br />I also understand it goes on, it happens etc. But as you stated regarding auction houses doing it, why the big secret if so mainstream and no big deal? Why not disclose as in the art world professionally restored etc. Hell in that world sometimes the restoration increases the value. <br /><br />As for youíre wonderful Weaver, no it wouldnít stop me from purchasing it, in fact I think its accurately graded due to the residue. I would however like it disclosed if there was no trace of residue on the card, and I thought I was buying that EX+ Weaver. To find out the card had been worked on and it was not disclosed, would bother me. It may seem silly to you guys but thatís just how I feel. <br /><br />As for the minority perhaps Leon, but no disrespect to you or the forum and its members, good folks here including you. But the recent sample I donít think covers the entire hobby; in fact I had been collecting for 20+years and had never heard of this place up until a few years ago. I think soaking is not mentioned in auction houses because Iím not in the minority, I think there are many folks out there who would find it hard to swallow that the card just had paper or residue removed and nothing else done.<br /><br />Best Regards,<br /><br />John <br />

Archive
08-31-2006, 11:24 PM
Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>I do not believe that what the good people on this board consider taboo matters at all to the rest of the world. If there is the capability for undetectable alterations and financial advantage associated with it, an increasing percentage of cards will be affected by it. And it typically will not be revealed, just slabbed.