I guess I don't think of that as pressing, to me pressing is pressing OUT something by running something across the card like a spoon. May be misusing the term.

Let me clarify: I wasn't referring to the known card doctors, but third oarty paper restorers who are not actively involved in the hobby. I realize that nobody cares enough to do anything, and would prefer the status quo. But I just wanted to make a suggestion.

This idea makes the most sense to me.

Nice "Reviewing The Situation" reference. This has been an interested read for me.

It is what it has always been - a hobby that requires no education or licensing, has no regulations, no professional associations, and little risk of ever getting prosecuted for misdeeds.

It certainly can be frustrating, but maybe a little perspective is required.

Messrs. Mastro and Allen might disagree with you about the prosecuted part.

Tap water, but very little. Basically used a damp q-tip doing one small section at a time, and absorbing any excess with the dry end. Very similar to how conservators work on old paintings to remove years of airborne crud and "protective" varnish that's yellowed.


Not something I'd do often, It made me really nervous. There's two areas on the neck that came out cleaner than the rest. I figured I'd botched it, and was pretty much expecting an A when I sent it in. It's a 350-460 /25, and at least when I sent it in, was the highest SC 350-460 on the pop report. I'm a bit fussy about gunk, and was really surprised at the grade.

Any thoughts on how this one posted on Blowout was done and if it's legit?

Looking at the front borders of the 5 they look a little less white. My guess is a soaking did it. Regardless, as long as a solvent wasn't used then I am not sure I have a problem with it. Just taking gunk off of a card doesn't bother me.

If that's all it required, and I have no issue with soaking off gunk with water either, I am surprised nobody encouraged the original consignor to HA to do that. Lot of $$$ left on the table.

Whoa, here's some interesting reading on PWCC. Pretty good read from start to finish. It seems that easily proven trimmed cards are getting PWCC stickers and there's some question if in fact PWCC owns these cards.

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1290614

Lots of seriously incriminating info in that thread!

Yeah, it's pretty ugly. Brent might not be able to trot out Betsy for this one. This one is going to eventually require an attorney.

Warren Zevon time, eh? He MUST have lawyers already though.

No doubt. I wonder who the best criminal lawyer in Oregon is?

Good thing they have a vault to hide in.

Speaking of the vault, maybe Brady can come back on and let us know his thoughts on that Blowout thread. If Brent makes the hobby any better he's going to end up in jail.

Haha...i was thinking the same thing!

I wonder if PSA will wait until the auction closes then take action to zap the card as it apparently did with the WWG DiMaggio. That would be more their style than stopping an ongoing auction.

What does PSA do with the cards like that? Reslab as Altered with the difference paid to the owner?

It seems silly to do anything else, hopefully they don't destroy them.

I have no idea.

Pwcc
 

Simply stated, PWCC’s stance on altered vs. conserved card’s is virtually meaningless. They are an eBay based auction house that effectively sells cards. They are NOT graders and authenticators. They are now walking a fine line because they should not be selling cards AND authenticating them. Seems like a possible “conflict of interest”. Leave the grading issues to PSA, SGC & Beckett. You cannot have it both ways.

Joe T.

Hey Leon, I'm curious cause I really don't know, but what is card "pressing"? Can you give me an example so I'll know what to look for? Thanks.

My estimation of pressing as a nefarious act would be to soak a card then apply a lot of pressure to a corner (pressing) to make it thinner and longer. I have never done it or seen it done, but read what is said just like everyone else does.
Other pressing would be merely drying a card after it was soaked to prevent a curl to it. I don't have an issue with someone doing that (drying the card). But I do with the heavy pressing of corners because it can easily lead to trimming. As far as detection I would guess a loupe and holding it up to light would be useful. I don't study this crap like some others so maybe I am mistaking. If any card doctors want to come forward and let us know it would be most appreciated.

I found this online.

For cards, I think that there are three variations of this, and pressing in general is not accepted.

(1) Soaking - this is usually fairly common especially in prewar cards where you usually soak the card in water to remove it from a scrapbook, etc. It is also sometimes used to remove excess dirt or other residue that has accumulated on the card. After the water soak, the card is usually dried and then placed under some heavy objects such as books to ensure that it dries flat. This process may also remove some warping in the card. I believe this is usually acceptable in the card community as long as NO CHEMICALS ARE USED. Only water or distilled water is acceptable. Anything else is considered altering the card.

(2) Pressing - this is the process to remove wrinkles or creases in the card. This is not acceptable as sometimes over time, the wrinkles or creases may come back. A card may look to be crease-free when it is originally submitted to a TPG. However, at a later time, the creases re-appear, and observers wonder how such a card with creases got such as high grade and got past the graders.

(3) Pressing to trim - one of the reasons that there is a minimum size requirements to cards is to prevent unscrupulous sellers from trimming a card with soft corners so that the end product is a card with sharp corners. They then submit this card for a grade, but it will often fail due to minimum size requirement. However, one way to get around this is to press the card so strongly that the size of the card increases (but it becomes thinner). Then the card is trimmed, so that the corners are now sharp and it is still within the minimum size requirements. Obviously, this is not acceptable to the collecting community. >>

The pressing(#2 above) aspect reminds me of what many did in the 80's/90's with a process called "spooning". Where one rolled a spoon,the bottom/curved part of the part of the spoon that holds the liquid, back/forth over a crease/bubble to flatten it. Also the pressing to trim(#3 above) was accomplished via pressing a card under a certain tonage (PSI) in a mechanical press of sorts to "stretch" the cardboard thereby allowing more material to be trimmed from the edges. This does in fact result in a thinner stock card.

An issue is you don't know what pressing will do to a card later, and don't know that what the pressing does is permanent. There have been instances of wrinkles re-appearing after being holdered.

Clearly, a collector or dealer removing wax stain or pencil mark isn't like trimming and recoloring, and many would argue those are okay and reasonable things to do. However, I wouldn't catalog that as 'conservation,' with conservation be done by a trained professional, or expert amateur, who is considering and is educated in the longterm health and preservation of the item.

I don't want eBay sellers to be able to get away with saying "No, no, I wasn't altering it. I was conserving it."

Unless it's been professionally, or otherwise expertly, conserved, do not use the term conserve.

I do know a collector and board member who is a self-trained expert in conservation (does more than paper items), and I would consider what he does as conservation (deacification of documents, etc). He's also very ethical and transparent about what he does, and, for items such as antique prints and paintings, real conservation is considered a selling point.

Didn't read the whole thread, but there's a difference in card pressing and card stretching. Card pressing is usually used to remove a crease. Card stretching is used to make it slightly larger than it's normal size so that it can be trimmed back down to size. Both are wrong IMO.

Conservation is a complete misnomer here. That, to me, implies as David says something necessary to protect the item from further decay. PWCC, if anything, is talking about restoration, that is, returning the item closer to its original state. It just further betrays the ignorance.

It comes back in an SGC 7 holder.

Hahaha.

I got the "relatively" in the Einstein remark, Peter!