Dick towle
 

Leon, I developed this solvent 19 years, after 2 years of testing on the cards, all is well. These are oil base solvents, with the proper mixture there is never an issue with the cards. I can put these cards in the solvent for a week, take it out , you would never know. Understand the solvent attacks what is on the card, not the paper. The paper will always be fine and is never an issue with anybody.

As a oil base, the solvents sits on top of the card, once exposed to air, it is gone and that allows me to attack the issue. I even was contacted by a restoration house asking how we did this because they had cards sent to them, I ended up receiving the job.

I enjoy helping people, hearing there stories how they got the cards, few people really enjoy there work, our family does. So I thank you again for the input. There are a lot of happy people around with crap removed from front and back of cards. After all, life should be a smile and not a frown, Thank you and God Bless.

So the only difference between water and hydrogen peroxide is "one little oxygen atom"? Yeah, lets see the line of people willing to drink a glass of hydrogen peroxide.:rolleyes:

Yeah, you are right - bring on the hydrogen peroxide.

Haha. Yeah, you and at least one other forum member.

If only baseball cards were made of living cells, this difference might matter.

So, since they aren't, bleaching them with hydrogen peroxide is the same as soaking them in water? :confused:

I'm picturing two T206 collectors crawling through the desert, dying of thirst. They come upon a huge vat of hydrogen peroxide. The one who studied basket-weaving exclaims: "This is more water than we can possibly drink, and with all the extra oxygen, we should be able to jog out of this desert!!!"


To T206collector: This is all harmless fun. Please do not take offense, as I get what you are saying. I just don't think you chose a great example to support your argument.

Paul how do you feel about a trim that can't be detected by a grading company in their normal review process?

I'm imagining 2 T206 collectors at a estate sale and they find an old album with amazing T206 collection of HOF cards glued in the album. One wants to buy it and remove the cards from the album pages- and the other says "you can't do that! It will destroy the hobby! It's evil & illicit to do that and I will never sleep again!!"
Paul C

As opposed to cut from a sheet, trimmed, and put it into a PSA 8 holder...

Too soon?

I appreciate the effort to find a slippery slope in my reasoning, but this isn't one of them.

A normal grading review that misses a trim is not the same thing. In any hypothetical where the fibers of the card are damaged by the treatment, I am on the side of the fence against the treatment. What I don't understand is why people build a fence between water and a chemical with the same properties of water when applied to a T206 card.

Stated another way, I think it is more intellectually honest to be against water and all chemicals, than to segregate water from the list of unmentionables.

I thought you understood that I was using a hypothetical, not that I was countenancing the use of hydrogen peroxide on a tobacco card. I have no idea what the interaction would be -- and severe damage or bleaching may certainly result.

I take no offense, and I don't mind the fun, but I do think it is critical to get at the heart of what people expect from their 100+ year old cardboard.

I did understand, but you definitely should have an idea as to what the interaction would be; if not, then it's hard to take you seriously when you are talking about chemicals and their effects.

What chemical is being used that has the exact same properties of water? Did I miss something in this thread? :confused:

For me the line is easy the day a glass of tap water can make stains like these disappear, and the day items like this are sold with disclosure about the cleaning undergone be sure to let me know.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=132902

Otherwise you are doing something to alter the appearance of the card found and therefore increasing its value with secrecy which to me is not on the up and up. Also if our hobby was so excepting of this it would be disclosed all the time hmmm I wonder why it's never mentioned in auction write ups?

Just because one may spread icing on a turd doesn’t make it chocolate cake in my book regardless if I can taste the difference or not. :)

Cheers,

John

Just because one may spread icing on a turd doesn’t make it chocolate cake in my book regardless if I can taste the difference or not. :)

Cheers,

John[/QUOTE]

Please do not try this at home! Or anywhere....

Please do not try this at home! Or anywhere....[/QUOTE]

There goes my Net54 cookbook deal...

This is perfect. How does what you said here apply differently when water is used:

Actually, I am pretty sure you got sidetracked by the actual effects of H202 on a piece of cardboard, which is wholly irrelevant to what anyone was saying in this thread.

Towle
 

H2O2 = hydrogen peroxide
H2O = water

Paul read my post...and look at the link. Let me know when tap water makes major stains on a T206 Plank go away.

Not relevant to what I am saying, but thanks anyway. Answer my question first.

You need to give it up. I wasn't the one who incorrectly compared water to hydrogen peroxide. Go take 30 hours of chemistry, then come back and we can continue this discussion.

Okay, where were we?

I need to give what up, exactly? Show me where I said that water and hydrogen peroxide would have the same effect on a T206 card?

What is your first name?

This conversation is over, but if we are going to talk in the future, I would prefer to be able to address you by your name. Thanks, Scott

Wonka,

Are you saying you have cleaned some of your cards with warm H20 in the past and had no issues?

Does not seem right that you are ok with removing stains with water regardless of how much or little of the stain "you think" will be removed... You can not possibly know how much stain would be removed until you are done.

I can recall over the years people posting about (how can I clean) my card and then posting the results as they turned out - then people say great job etc.... I can recall things like distilled water, drop of dawn, wrap in paper towel place in book etc... I do not recall people flipping out about it - instead handing out Kudos....?

Sorry, Paul M. is my name. I thought you knew that. You and I have exchanged several personal emails over the years -- at least five times between 2005 and 2012.

Paul I have stated an answered your question about ten times in this thread perhaps indirectly sorry.

Soaking a card in water doesn’t clean cards to the extent of the example posted above. This is what some of us myself included have issues with in terms of chemicals and solvents used by Dick. Soaking some OJ’s from a scrap book like Jay did with the Cambridge collection still leaves cards that have flaws and would grade likewise. They just won’t be attached too old nasty 8.5x 11 sheets of paper anymore.

However having chemicals applied to remove any trace of residue or brighten a card beyond its dingy dirty state without some sort of disclosure like the example above is not on the up and up. Hence why it’s not mentioned and hidden 99% of the time. This exactly what Paragon did in my example above no mention in print about the cleaning. Once caught hand deep in the cookie jar they quickly changed the online description. Does this seem like something folks do since everyone is so open to this in our hobby and its so harmless and accepted?

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...ages/plank.jpg

So now that I have outlined my simple position once again. Please help me understand how tap water was used to remove the stains from the card above? Or what harmless water like substance was used and why it wasn’t disclosed since it's harmless?

Don't know why this harmless no worse than water cleaning of Plank wasn't disclosed in the write up I'll give you a hint.... :)

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...ding-money.jpg

Cheers,

John

John,

Respectfully, I think your argument boils down to "If water would remove the stain, then it is okay to use and it is not deceptive to hide disclosure." Did I get that correctly? For what it's worth, I agree with this statement.

But, if you are also saying "I would only use water to remove the stain even if a chemical would have the same impact as water would" then I just don't know why you would draw the line at the chemical, as opposed to the impact on the card. To me the impact on the card is paramount, and I do not know how I would ever determine whether water or a chemical would have dissimilar effects on the same stain.

I am not trying to be obtuse here.

Paul M.

I have never cleaned a card. About all I have ever done in terms of using water is to remove some non-sports actress cards from scrap book pages so they can fit into sheets and done this about twice in my life and only recently. In fact I bought a non-sports card from Jay recently and had him soak it off the Cambridge collection page as I was to afraid to try it. :)

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...bsize/Seal.jpg

You can still clearly make out where it was once glued..."gone with the stain" far from it....

Cheers,

John

Added to the "Value" definitely....

99% there Paul, I would expect disclosure if one used any method to remove stains and or clean up a card. If disclosure was made and it was only water.... I guess it would boil down to how much I trusted the person selling me the item and how much I needed that item. Does that make sense?

Cheers,

John

My apologies, Paul - I recognized your handle and knew that I should remember who you were.

Scott my real name in case you forgot...

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/F_8RH2hiqMQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

How could you ever forget a name like that... :) That's better than shorty....

Whew. I thought it was LongJohn von WonkaDonka

Yes, okay. I think disclosure is unrealistic even in the water context because of the profit issue. Also, I think disclosure of water is unfair given how many of our forefathers practiced ritual T206 soakings. I believe many of my SGC 60+ T206 cards have spent some time in the bath, which is why they remain so fresh. And, finally, I think a chemical which leaves the card in the same state as water does is just fine with me.

I think I've now beaten my dead horse enough, but at least I feel better having talked it through.

:D

My mom always cleaned my cards with this. :D:D:D

http://photos.imageevent.com/rgold/ebay/image_8.jpg

Agree depending on folks to come clean wink wink is not going to happen.

However if I bought a 20k card from you and got before images down the road from someone else, and they said you know Paul bought that card like this and then worked some magic on it. To find out you sold it to me with no mention of the cleaning water/chemical whatever it would be the last transaction I would do with you.

To me if this is so innocent and harmless why would anyone choose to omit.

Cheers,

John

That's a question I have avoided (should you disclose soaking?). I personally don't think it's necessary, given the affect of water on cards; however, I do respect the opinions of collectors who don't want a soaked card. If I was selling or trading a card that I knew had been soaked, to someone who either asked that question, or who I knew was adamantly anti-soak, then I would certainly disclose it. I rarely soak cards anymore (and don't own any as far as I know), so it probably will never be an issue. If I were to obtain "a lot" of cards that needed to be soaked, then I probably would put a line in every sale page, mentioning that all the cards in the current group being sold, had been soaked from an album.

As you have mentioned, water doesn't remove everything - I have never had it completely remove a stain, or even have much impact on a stain; however, it does take off old tobacco, most dirt, and paper affixed by water-based glue. And I think that's good.

As an aside, I have a few great baseball albumen images with horribly disfigured mounts - I'm looking for similar mounts in better condition with uninteresting pictures and plan to do a transplant.

I would disclose the transplant when sold.

+1

I once heard about this secret mud that would be dug from a river bank by umpires and they would rub onto baseball cards as a protective coating... I have nothing to back this up though...

Ron, I guess it beats the other brand.... :D

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...9617958519.jpg

I found these instruction for using Hydrogen Peroxide, and thought I would share.

http://rocketbelts.americanrocketman...DE_WARNING.gif

Also note - if you are using this product to clean vintage baseball cards, please be sure to remove one Oxygen molecule for each two Hydrogens. If you get confused and instead accidentally remove one Hydrogen for each Oxygen, the result will be Hydroperoxyl, which is responsible for the destruction of ozone in the stratosphere. Don't get confused and end up accidentally destroying ozone in the stratosphere.

addressing a single issue
 

it's so much a personal call as to where the line gets drawn. The "hobby" seems most accepting of soaking - the rest not so much.

It's not OK to do anything to a card.
It's OK to soak a card in water to remove it from something.
It's OK to soak a card in another solution to accomplish the task.
It's OK to soak a card in water to remove surface glue or paper remains.
It's OK to soak a card in another solution to do the same thing.
It's OK to soak a card in water to remove a stain.
It's OK to soak a card in another solution that will do the same thing.

Water contains "chemicals". Water can also leave a stain and react with inks and fibers. How it will impact the future of the card is unknown but everything degrades with time. Without soaking most cards would still be in albums. Some people might think that isn't a bad thing. We are temporary keepers of this "stuff". I try and leave everything as I found it unless it's rapidly degrading or the problem is such that it prevents my enjoyment of the aesthetic elements. Everything degrades over time - I'm on "the back nine" and showing some stains myself but I wouldn't want to wittingly be the root cause of accelerating the decline of myself or stuff. I have soaked cards in distilled water and that's about as far as I am comfortable going. I haven't seen evidence 20 years later that the few cards I still have from then are any different. I have restored/conserved 2/3 posters and a tin sign. Restoration of such items is accepted and often encouraged - cards not so much.....
While the issues surrounding disclosure are thought provoking (personal responsibility) as are the "if you can't see it how do you know it's there?" arguements - I assume most of my cards have been soaked in some solution and rely on my experience to foster the self preserving belief that nearly all are unaltered otherwise. I'm fine with that.
Mostly these days I find myself grappling with the issues of personal freedom and the moral and ethical implications of making something available in the marketplace that likely will be used in a deceptive manner (recent threads on flips and empty slabs comes to mind). I have to rely on my core belief that there's no reason Dick can't offer such a service that enables others to enjoy their cards in whatever form and condition they want? I have a friend who is a board member here. He collects early base ball and he loves his cards. He took a marker and colored all the edges of his Mayo's becuse he liked the uniformity. It kills me - but they're his cards. That others have and likely will continue to use the service and not disclose what was done to enhance a particular card is troublesome but out of our control. I can only be responsible for myself and that's enough of a struggle.
I like that DT has come here (albeit with an expected outcome that he will do more business) and explained his position. Like the subject of TPG this is a divisive topic. I appreciate when threads like this come up as it helps me to define and redefine how I feel........

I may be repeating something already said, but water is a chemical. It's also the most widely used solvent there is. If you look up water in a chemistry book it will tell you water is called the universal solvent because more substances dissolve in water than in any other chemical. So to say I would never soak my card in a chemical, but soaking a card off a page in water is ok, is a contradiction. Your just taking a less aggressive approach.

So if we drop the semantics, as I'm sure you've never referred to drinking a glass of water as 'drinking a glass of chemicals', so you do realize that water and [other] chemicals are generally, using the English language, typically differentiated in conversation...your point is that water is less aggressive than chemicals?

Okay, Thanks.

+1, or at least hypocritical. To focus on the solvent (water or otherwise) as opposed to the impact on the collectible, is misguided, in my view.

+2

Scott,

I actually agree with his stance on water being the universal solvent. Having said that, I understand that water is delivered (or collected, plumbed, etc.) differently by people, depending where they are. This likely presents in a fashion most varied when discussing "tap" water.

It appears that you know more about chemistry than some of us. Please explain why the "chemical" water I drink when in Philadelphia is different than the distilled water I buy at the grocery store.

I truly do respect you (and always have) and sincerely want your opinion on this.

Best regards,

Eric

Sure thing guys, what type of plain old water removes these stains again and makes whites pop like an oxy clean ad? :rolleyes: :)

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...huge/plank.jpg

Sure I guess one could say a pocket knife is a self defense weapon...but I don't think it would be hypocritical stance to say a gun has a bit more punch compared to grandpa's Swiss Army with a can opener. To me that's difference here from a little water to Billy Mays Towle.

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...mimages/i2.jpg

P.S. Eric maybe it is our Philadelphia water. :)

I agree with this statement.