It is very interesting to see Steven tell David he is wrong. David, of course, is right.
Also would like to note that I agreed with Glyn on something - it might be the first or second time ever, so it's worth mentioning.
Peter - some of the missed alterations are unforgivable while I'm sure some are accidental. Others exist because, while the technology to detect the alteration exists, it is too expensive to be practical;i.e-we couldn't afford to pay the TPA to do such checks. Numerous examples have been discussed here in the past, such as dryness of the item (water content). There are also some very nifty alterations that can currently be done to 19th century items without detection - I wrote an unpublished paper about these and ran it by some of the 19th century cardboard collectors here and they were almost unanimous in agreement that I should keep it unpublished. The tests were super-fun to run and I'm sure that if I have thought of them, others with financial incentive have not only thought about them, but have implemented them to the tune of many thousands of dollars. (don't think too much about it).
__________________
$co++ Forre$+
|