Quote:
Originally Posted by drcy
Real, useful conservation of trading cards, especially old ones, would involve them being deacidified by putting them in a solution. That's actually something good that could be done conservation-wise, and might be wise for photos and other items.
I've never stated that restoration and conservation are bad. And grading card companies labelling this work (if they can identify it) seems perfectly reasonable philosophy. It should be done right now if it could. If that's what Goudey is talking about, I agree. But the key is any work on the card has to be disclosed.
"Absolutely no incentive to try and get alterations “past” the TPG. As they sell for less."
I work in philosophy (logic), have a published peer-reviewed university philosophy textbook and am a lifetime member of the international philosophy society at Oxford, and I just have to note for the logic-record that that quoted line makes absolutely no sense. It makes anti-sense.
|
DRCY,
I do appreciate your comments so far. Very useful examples that you provided.
As for the comment about having no incentive for card doctors. If we keep it the way it is today the incentive to get a altered card past the TPG is profitable. If the TPG moves to a CGC model and can recognize restorations/conservations and place them in a separate "restored" label then the profit is marginal.
Bottom line though. TPG's in our card hobby need to step up their services.
Change is needed regardless.