Opinions on Soaking/Pressing

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim Novotny

I read in a post today a comment about PSA 8s being soaked and pressed and I have also recently have had a good discussion about how to do this. My questions are:

How often as collectors do you do this?

Are there any types of cards that you would or wouldnt do this to?

If soaking gives cards a better grade or just a better look, would you stay away from these cards if you knew they were cleaned-up?

In general, is this frowned upon by the collecting community?

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: Joann

I guess I don't have enough spares yet, or whatever. I think I'd have a heart attack if I ever actually submerged any of my cards in water. Do they really stand up to that?

J

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob

I know a guy who soaked aover 1000 T206s years ago to remove the paper attached to the back from a scrapbook. I am sure many of them are in PSA 8 and 9 holders as they were beautiful with sharp corners.
I personally soaked about 20 once on a lark and they all turned out ok and are in my personal collection.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

Tell us about it, Bob.

Do you just drop them in regular water?

How long are they submerged?

Does the extra paper stuck on the back just fall off?

Does pressing them afterwards get rid of wrinkles?

Do they actually get bigger when they get flatter?

Can a trimmed card be "stretched" into regulation size?

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob

The pressing needs to be done to keep the card from curling. 2 limitations with soaking include: 1. Many cards will have a surface coating that which will dull from the water, which makes many issues like T207's unsuitable for soaking for obtaining a high grade. 2. The adhesive also needs to be removed cleanly and without stains or paper loss to get a high grade, that's even more problematic when dealing with old paper. Unlike stamps, you don't know what kind of adhesive you're dealing with.

[Archive]

Posted By: B

I have some t206's that I want to soak press, can anyone give me the step process so i can give this a try to my cards. One is a tinker portrait that has some tape on the back. email me the directions if you are so kind at

josh-hamilton@excite.com

[Archive]

Posted By: John S

I have an issue with cards that have been soaked, especially when this methodology is used to stretch a card that might not be the correct dimensions. Soaking to remove paper is not as objectionable but then you get into the gray area of card restoration, of which I am not a fan. I recently saw some Diamond Stars PSA 8's on ebay that had to be "cleaned" or chemically treated. I have handled hundreds of these cards and have never seen borders even approaching the brightness that these displayed. It could have been the image/scanner but the grouping of cards was too uniform in appearance.

[Archive]

Posted By: Josh K.

How often as collectors do you do this? I have not soaked t206s but have soaked e121s to remove paper/glue on several occasions.

Are there any types of cards that you would or wouldnt do this to? I dont have enough experience to answer.

If soaking gives cards a better grade or just a better look, would you stay away from these cards if you knew they were cleaned-up? I would stay away from a card that was pressed to remove wrinkles or that was stretched and trimmed.

In general, is this frowned upon by the collecting community? I think it would be frowned on to sell a pressed card without disclosure (though its probably done more often that realized). I think soaking to remove glue/paper (s/t that shouldnt be on the card to begin with) is generally accepted.

[Archive]

Posted By: Morrie

I've soaked/pressed a few cards, and actually have one sitting at home that was part of a lot I bought from a fellow board member that I'll probably do this evening. I don't do it to remove wrinkles (that may be a minor side-effect, but most of my cards have enough wrinkles that I could run them over with a steam-roller and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference!), just to get rid of excess junk on their backs.

You can find details on the process elsewhere on the board, but a few key things include:

1. If you're tempted to use something like Goo-Gone for particularly tough and/or tacky adhesives, DON'T. Unless, of course, you want your card to glow under blacklight and have a nice pseudo-lemony scent until the end of time. (I'm still trying to figure out why anyone would use what I guess was rubber cement to stick a t206 Jennings in an album. Sigh.)
2. Only use distilled water. Never tap water that can have weird chemicals that leave residue.
3. Let the card soak in the distilled water for several minutes before lightly - LIGHTLY - rubbing at the adhesive and/or extra paper with something like a q-tip. If possible, wear gloves to keep from getting extra junk in your water. If you don't have gloves, wrap your finger in cling wrap to hold the card in place while you lightly rub the paper/adhesive off the back.
4. Be patient. Rush a miracle man, you get rotten miracles. Same principle here.
5. Related to 4, I never work with a card for more than 2 minutes before I leave it to soak for at least 2 more. Especially if you're cleaning off multiple layers of paper from a scrapbook, you need to let the water soak into the layers you've just exposed.
6. Once the surface is clear, you'll want to make sure you got all the adhesive. Just because you can read "Piedmont" all of a sudden doesn't mean the card won't still stick to things. Remember point 4, and give it another gentle cleaning, being very careful not to abrade the actual surface of the card.
7. When you remove the card from the water, place it between two sheets of heavy (20# or so) bond paper and put it beneath a stack of books. This will start pressing the water out of it, but you're going to need to move the card to either 2 more sheets of paper, or a different spot on the same sheets, about every 15 minutes for the next hour. The water will leech out and saturate the paper around it, and once the paper is saturated, the water that's still in the card has nowhere to go. Once you check the card after 15 minutes and the paper around it isn't wet, switch to yet another set of paper and put the card back under your pile of books for a day or so.

Other folks may have other advice. This is what has worked for me cleaning t206s and a couple of t205s for my personal collection, and I think is consistent with what I've seen on the board.

Morrie

[Archive]

Posted By: Keith O'Leary

Tape is a different animal altogether Josh. Try heating the tape up with a hair drier. After its heated up, take something like a knife's edge to work the corner of the tape up. If it gives you any trouble, keep heating until the adhesive on the tape becomes guier (sp...but had to get a computer term in LOL) and more plyable.

I wanted to add...More heat is better than not enough. You want the adhesive to become so soft that none is left on the card when pulling the tape off.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

about 600-700 baseball and non-sports cards from an album and I'd agree with basically everything above. I usually used about 10-20 sheets of white copy paper as a couple didn't soak up enough of the water. I'd pat them dry with a dish towel or something. The bottom line about soaking is it is entirely up to the type of glue that was used. If the flour type glue was used, it is relatively easy. If the dark-colored horse-type glue was used, you don't want to try it anyway cause they look like hell....

I pulled (10) N162's out of there, two of which were baseball, both of which now reside in someone else's collection in SGC70 EX+ holders. Also about 60-70 Old Judges that had been skinned but not trimmed and a S.F. Hess Newsboy. Definitely be careful of cards like OJ's if they have not been skinned as the upper albumen photo layer may soak away from the actual cardboard layer.

The advice about the back still having some glue on it is a good one. Be sure all the adhesive is worked off. You might use a q-tip to help this process. Also the advice about patience is a good one. I am not a patient person and the cards that turned out the worst from the ones I soaked were the ones I hurried on.

I understand that some of the same process have been used to remove wrinkles from a card. I have not tried that but I can see how softening the paper up and then pressing it could achieve those effects.

[Archive]

Posted By: Brett

I baught these 8 t206s. Could someone tell me how to remove these properly ?

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

Soaking and pressing obviously works for T206 cards...

but someone said that it does not work for T207 cards...

nor would it be wise to do on a real photograph card where the photo is glued to the backing (N172).


What about 1933 Goudeys?

What about 1952 Topps?

At what point did the cards start getting some sort of gloss that gets messed up from soaking?

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

Any hope for this fellow before I send it off? I had a previous post about it, but did not include these pictures. Tape appears to rap around slightly to the front on the right side. Any help is appreciated!

[Archive]

Posted By: joe

I know two collectors who did this soaking back in the 1970's with T206 cards. I never tried it, they just put the cards in a bathtub full of water and it worked for them. I guess I should get some glue and paper on back cards and try it.


sort of like golfing with someone who is too serious on the golf course. I always suggest trying different shots, tell them we are not playing for our lives.

Joe

[Archive]

Posted By: Dennis W.

I've emailed a couple of board members privately on this topic but I wanted to bump this thread and get some members views concerning one of Jim's original questions:

"In general, is this frowned upon by the collecting community?"

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

I don't see how using ONLY PURE WATER to clean a card can be considered wrong.

They clean the Mona Lisa that way, don't they? (They certainly use something to clean it)

If I accidentally spilled a drop of glue on a card, I would quickly try to wipe it off with water... so I can't see anything wrong with doing the same thing AFTER the glue has dried.

If a "crinkle" or two gets flattened out in the process, I am not really bothered by that fact... as long as the card is still untrimmed and in the same dimensions.


Do "soaked and pressed" cards end up THINNER??

Do they end up with the same "stiffness"??

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

It may or may not work to remove cards from albums with distilled water. I am leery of any chemical treatments.

I personally do not have a problem with soaking a card in distilled water to remove paper. Looks much better than having some crappy paper on the back.

Your state might have a law about disclosing alterations if you resell the card.

[Archive]

Posted By: T206Collector

...soaking T206 cards. But I have also had some pretty sorry outcomes. It all depends on the type of glue involved. My best work now resides in holders as high as SGC 70.

Removing stuff that was added to the card after it came from the factory is not an alteration. Also, although you are technically restoring the card to its factory condition, this is not restoration as you are not adding pieces that are missing.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dennis W.

Actually rehydrating vintage paper is good for it. Document/book restorers do it all the time. The Conservation Services at the South Carolina Department of Archives and History call their water-based treatment "aqueous buffering". Their treatment consists of a distilled/deionized water soultion with a dash of other chemicals they use to deacidify. I certainly don't condone using any chemicals on cards. I also want to add that essentially any chemical used other than water will glow under the blacklight.

To answer your question Hal - I have not noticed any increase or decrease in the thickness of a card after the soaking process. One might assume it to be thicker as it absorbs water but I believe the pressing process neutralizes it.

The card will warp if not left between the books to dry long enough but does maintain it's rigidity. I wanted to add that I use linen paper as opposed to regular printer paper. I find that it absorbs faster.

I've had many cards graded over the years after going through this process and all have graded.

edited to correct typo

[Archive]

Posted By: identify7

I do not frown upon any alteration which can not be detected. Because if it can not be detected, it does not exist.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dennis W.

Times must be changing. It wasn't long ago that "card washing" was a dirty word (sorry for the pun).

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

Washing with ANYTHING other than water would be a "no-no" to me for sure.

No bleach or chemicals or power-erasers allowed.

But I don't see how washing a card with water is any different than opening a pack of cards in the rain or accidentally dropping one in the bathtub.

Surely a very large percentage of old cards have gotten WET one way or another... whether on purpose or by accident...

so I can't see anything wrong with WATER ONLY.

[Archive]

Posted By: Al

Does anyone have before/after photos they could post using just water. I'm wondering how well this works.

Thanks

[Archive]

Posted By: Dean H

I have to say that right now I'm against it. To me it's the intent to enhance a cards appearance that I don't like. I know some do it for their own personal collection but it seems to be a gray area. Will this lead us to accepting other methods later? I think I would shy away from a card that I know has been soaked.

Dean

[Archive]

Posted By: RayB

Jim,
I would stand firmly against this practice and do not engage in it, and frankly am disappointed when I here about other collectors participating in this. As a member of the collecting community I hold the opinion that any "operation" performed on a card with water or otherwise is doctoring, and doctoring is wrong.
It is a shame that the practice has indeed reached conversational status, and that it is no longer a dirty word in the hobby. Just the fact that when the conversation comes up, if it encourages just one more person to give it a try, that's sad.
I would much prefer a dirty old well traveled card than one that has been "tuned" up.
RayB

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

I have to agree with what Ray just said, and I too am quite surprised at the ho-hum attitude when in recent times this Board has just trashed sellers whose "alterations" were at worst comparable and in some cases even more minor. EDITED TO ADD Hal, I am frankly surprised to hear your opinions, I had thought you were a passionate opponent of restoration and I frankly don't understand the technical distinctions you are drawing, what's the difference if water or something else is used for the purpose of removing glue or a crease?

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

guess it's semantics. I didn't, nor wouldn't, add to a card or use anything other than water. In many cases, these aren't 'well travelled' cards. They might be EXMT to NRMT cards that have a piece of paper--something that wasn't intended to be on the card to begin with. If it is removed, without incident and without using anything other than water, I can almost surely guarantee that a grading company will grade it and I believe they should.

Someone adding rice paper to corners to build them back up or bleaching dirty borders to whiten them or incoloring something in an effort to make it brighter I would have a problem with. Frankly, however, that's readily accepted in the comic book world and factored into pricing. CGC will grade altered comic books generally noting what has been altered.

I can tell you we have had MANY threads where MAJOR auction houses admitted to much worse than this in an effort to spruce up a 'well travelled' card, photo, or otherwise. This included using restoration specialists who use chemical agents to otherwise alter a lot. Often without full disclosure on what was done because they don't believe it's material to the bidding process. Do some searching on here and you'll get more details than soaking a small piece of paper from a T206..........

Check out the thread at:
http://www.network54.com/Forum/153652/message/1102513863/WHAT+IS+THE+KEELER+ROOKIE>
For some interesting restoration revelations......

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

Peter:

To me, the difference is that nothing unnatural is being added to the card.

There is some degree of WATER vapor in the air that touches our cards every minute of every day.

If a card gets wet and then dries completely... the card is biologically the exact same card that it was before it got wet.

ASSUMING... that we are talking about these types of cards that are NOT "messed up" by getting wet.


I buy only GRADED cards... so I am NOT going to be doing any such soaking myself.

BUT... if soaking a card in pure water is something that even the grading companies cannot detect...

then I assume that some of my old graded cards may very well have been soaked.

That doesn't bother me NEAR AS MUCH as those stupid "Cy" Young cards that don't even picture Cy Young!

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

Peter:

If this afternoon I drop a T206 in the sink and it gets wet...

but I lay it on the counter and it dries completely without any change whatsoever...

is the card ruined and tainted forever??

I say "not at all."



Is your real problem with the potential removal of "crinkles" by the PRESSING process??



If we could "rub out" a wrinkle with our bare hands on a dry card, I am sure all of us would do it.

I just can't understand the problem therefore in doing it with a wet card... as long as pure water is used.



Are my shirts "altered" when the dry cleaners presses them?

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

Hal, how do you know soaking and pressing a card doesn't ALTER the fibers in some way? I would imagine it does, indeed by definition it must as it takes out the crease. As for being "natural" there are plenty of natural substances on earth besides water, are you really implying anything used to alter a card would be OK as long as it is "natural"?

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

No, I am saying that it is "natural" for a baseball card to get WET from WATER at some point during the lifespan of the card.

Just like it is "natural" for a card to get hot or cold during the life of a card, depending on where it was stored.

If heating a card up to 100 degrees Farenheit (or some other "naturally" occurring temperature) could remove the wrinkles...

then I would have no problem with that either.



To me, the "crinkle" is the alteration to the card, since it did not come from the factory with such a defect.

Pressing the card (again, using the force of gravity that is "naturally" occurring from a heavy book and not some nuclear-powered press machine) is "removing" the "alteration."

If a Topps card came out of the pack with a piece of GUM sticking to it...

could I not use water and/or my fingers to remove this defect?

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

I am also still wanting to know from someone which cards out there are possible "soakers"...

as opposed to which cards are "ruined" when they get wet.


I just want to know which of my graded cards MAY have been soaked and which ones were definitely NOT soaked.


So far... it sounds like ONLY the T206 cards can be soaked in water and get past the grading companies.

Any others that you guys know about??

[Archive]

Posted By: Adam Smith

I am shocked that so many people consider soaking and pressing an acceptable form of alteration.

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

Hal if it's perfectly fine why do you want to know which of your cards may have been soaked?

[Archive]

Posted By: Josh K.

Hal,

E121s and similar cards from the 20s will not be damaged by soaking.

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

Interesting choice of words in Hal's post, "get past" the grading companies. Are their ethical standards higher than this Board's? That sure is turning the world on its head given all the trash talking about grading companies.

[Archive]

Posted By: Morrie

If you don't like it, don't do it. I don't view it as altering a card to, as a number of people have put it, remove excess paper that was never supposed to be there. The implication that those of us who have soaked cards to remove paper that was not factory-applied -- in a manner that's consistent with other preservation and restoration methods -- might be behaving unethically is, to me, a little bizarre. If I tear them out of a scrapbook and lose part of the back, am I being more ethical? Or am I supposed to collect ephemera attached to ephemera? I'd rather just stick to baseball cards, thanks.

Cards that have been soaked don't bother me; I'd buy a card I knew had been soaked, if it looked nice. I might feel differently if I were investing in PSA 8-9 level cards and wanted to be confident that these really were the cards as they were produced 95 years ago, virtually untouched by time. But I'm not. Maybe that's where the difference lies.

Morrie "I (heart) my low-grade t206s" Mullin s

(I will add the caveat that I understand that soaking can be used to temporarily press out surface wrinkles from cards in order to improve the appearance prior to grading, and that some slabbed cards have had tiny wrinkles that had been soaked/pressed re-appear and functionally drop the grade multiple points below what the slab identified the card as being. Please do not interpret my advocacy of soaking to remove paper as advocacy of soaking to bump a card's grade in a manner that has been demonstrated to be temporary. Once the paper's gone, it ain't comin' back, and to me that's a key distinction. It wasn't part of the card, while the wrinkle was.)

[Archive]

Posted By: Dennis W.

Hal seems to be taking some heat for a practice many of us here engage in. I personally see no harm in it. I just can't accept the fact that some kid 100 years ago glued a card in a scrapbook and now that card is destined to carry that paper around on it's back forever. If you shouldn't remove the scrapbook residue then why is it ok to remove it from the book at all? Has not the book become as much a piece of the card as the residue?

Like it or not this practice will continue as long as t206 commons in NrMt or better are bringing the kind of money they do. Money is a serious motivator.

I believe the grading companies have established, through their grading criteria, what most collectors consider ethical. This holds true even if you don't have your cards graded. The vast majority of collectors and dealers believe if a card grades or would grade then it's ok - no matter what. I don't necessarily think this is a bad thing. There has to be a line drawn somewhere.

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

Dennis I think two distinct things are being collapsed in the discussion, one is scrapbook removal, two is the process of soaking and pressing a card with the intent to remove a crease and obtain a higher grade. My comments, and I think Hal's for the most part, have been addressed more to the latter.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

are dirty old men

I think we need to be very careful not to hijack the question. I read the initial inquiry as a more or less philosophical question. I can see reasonable people differing philosophically on whether a card "should" be soaked to remove paper or paste. Some want cards to remain as they are found by collectors and never altered. Others figure that if the card is found stuck to an album page it has already been altered and removing the paper isn't "wrong" because you can't mess it up any worse. I don't think there is a "right" answer to the philosophical question, just opinions.

I think what is rubbing some folks the wrong way is that the philosophical question naturally leads to an ethical and possibly legal question as to whether it is ethical/legal to soak a card off the sheet, have it slabbed, and offer it as such without disclosing the bath it took. While I personally may be fine with the practice of soaking and pressing a card to remove paper stuck to it and would like to see conservation of cards treated the same way as conservation of artwork, in the current climate, ethically and legally it raises many problems. It is just too easy and too lucrative to buy a damaged card, remove the extraneous material, and have it slabbed, thereby certifying to the world that it is unaltered (I know, I know, the slabbing emperor has no clothes, so to speak, but that is for another thread).

Perhaps the solution we are ultimately working towards is for the slabbers to agree that when a card is slabbed it means that it may have been conserved (properly cleaned) but isn't altered (added to).

[Archive]

Posted By: Dennis W.

Nicely spoken Adam and I agree. The only thing I want to add, and I realize I may be beating a dead horse, is that by soaking and pressing a card with scrapbook residue you will end up cleaning it and maybe remove wrinkles. It's a byproduct of the process. What's the difference when it comes to removing dirt? Is it only ethical to clean a card with paper residue on it?

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

people don't post under their real names (unless they are famous for writing economic theory).........

[Archive]

Posted By: Rick

Is there a possibility that after rolling a wrinkle it could resurface again if not done properly?

It could turn a high grade card into a "5"

Especially dealing with graded cards this could turn ugly both for sellers and grading companies

[Archive]

Posted By: scott brockelman

While i did not read each and every thread, MOST pertain to soaking and drying a card between paper and a heavy object. THIS IS NOT PRESSING a card, cards which are soaked and press rolled to lengthen the card and then trim it are what are meant by "pressing" a card. the fellows above are merely removing glue and paper remnants, no harm or damage to the card at all, true occasionally a minor wrinkle might come out, but nothing heavy. the cards that everyone is scared of in high grade holders were not soaked in a bathtub and put in between a phone book to dry, they were soaked, press rolled, dried and trimmed, an entirely different and advanced method.

Scott

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

--

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim Crandell

I am stunned that so many collectors would find soaking and pressing cards acceptable.

I agree 100% with RayB, Peter and Adam that this is totally unacceptable.

The card alteration people soak, press and trim down to size--

This is just plain wrong.

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: Daniel Bretta

I soaked this Comiskey Scrapps off just last week using regular tap water with no problem...The backing did not completely come off, but it looks a whole lot better off of the page than it did on. I cut off the other scraps on the page to test them before I tried the Comiskey and of course they came off of the paper with ease....Comiskey on the other hand must have been glued in with a different type of glue.

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

I agree 100% with Scott B.

If a card was power-pressed and then trimmed... it is a terrible practice and the card is worthless.

If am merely talking about the soaking of a card and then pressing it in a book to dry.

Nothing more than I did as a kid with my cards that got rained on.

[Archive]

Posted By: Todd Schultz

Seems to me, as I mentioned in another thread a week or two ago, that it's cheating, especially with ersatz high grade cards. A card should have nice edges and corners if it lived nearly all of its life pasted in an album. I realize that any high grade pre-war card somehow escaped heavy handling for years, whether in between pages of a book, carefully placed in an envelope or drawer, cigar box, etc. Still, the reward (read price) for surviving unscathed seems cheapened if you can accomplish the same thing by removing cards from albums and soaking off the glue. Just my two cents.

Different philosophy for beater cards whose value will not change much if the back is enhanced. As for cards in the middle, I'd lean toward disfavoring soaking--again the card looks better than it should from what might be perceived as an unfair advantage (sitting nicely out of handling range in an album), and is increasing in value from that advantage.