I know for a fact that one of these T206s below was attached in a scrapbook and took a bath in 2009.

For the record, I knew the T206 was removed from a scrapbook and who I was buying it from.

Anyone want to take a guess which T206 went for a swim?

Jantz

I can see that Wonka is hung up on Brite White Borders... Ok Wonka, lets say you have a card that already has Brite White Borders but also has a streak of something running horizontally across the card and unfortunately right across the players face - you cannot tell me for a fact that you know what soaking this card in water or anything else is going to do... Would you have a problem if using the water removed all the evidence of the stain? But do not forget this card has Brite White Borders before and after the soak - no change in that regard.

I see your stance (wonka) as a double standard - its convenient for you as water is something you have dealt with. This reminds of some arguments that my wife will often pose in that "I do not do it anywhere near as much as she does".

I think you are telling me as well, that you would be ok with Dick Towles process as long as the stain removal process he uses left some evidence of the stain? Is this correct?

John,
Nothing personal here - like I said earlier its an interesting subject to me.

+1

My definition of a chemical is a substance created by chemistry (changes in the composition of molecules). There are chemicals in water - some added intentionally (chlorine), some naturally (iron, calcium), some just seep into the water supply (pesticides), but water itself is not a chemical.

Soaking a card in water is no different than soaking a card in a chemical that doesn’t leave any evidence (something you can see, smell or feel). One may not like the idea of soaking cards and that’s certainly their right, but they can not argue the fact that the end result (a card free from any evdience of soaking) is still the same rather they like the idea or not.

So chlorine, iron, and calcium are created by chemistry? These chemicals are found in nature just as water is. If you are going to make up your own definitions at least make them consistent.

We could probably play semantics the rest of our lives but in the real world hobbyists don't consider water a chemical. It is especially true in this discussion. I have no issue with using water on a card. If I was asked I would tell, it not, probably not.

Hope this helps with the intense water-chemical convo.

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/i...1200345AAlFaC0

I know what I'm talking about. I hold a water license from the State of Texas. Those are my credentials. What are yours?

Do you want to keep talking and looking more foolish and do you want to shut up at this point since you really don't know what you're talking about? I would suggest the latter, but that is up to you.

Water = Chemical compound (H2O)
Chlorine Chemical element (Cl)
Iron = Chemical element (Fe)
Calcium = Chemical element (Ca)

So it really sounds like you only consider a single element a chemical and not a compound?

A great site that plays with the semantics of Water being a chemical is http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html.

From the site

Is vitamin water okay?

In Inorganic Chemistry

http://www.baseballcardresource.com/...New/Degree.jpg

Gosh I'd Love to Post My Diplomas.......
 

but they are all wet.

Does anyone else here soak their diplomas?

...disrespectful joke removed, my apologies...

.

I would show my diploma but....

NM

I drink a lot of water...and I like to swim!

After your swim be sure you Towle off.

*spit-take*

good one!

1999 - that was part of the PED steroid era. I'm just sayin'.......

I believe it will destroy the cards but will effectively replace their electrolytes.

Come on guys this conversation is getting nasty. You are both very smart and hardworking. Move on.

There should be a separate thread where dudes who get all cyber catty with each other can arrange to get in a ring and settle sh1t. It can be broadcast live on a dedicated thread.

Internet beefs never, ever do anything but spiral into petty childishness. Long before it gets to this level, go for a walk, look at the sky, hit the gym, enjoy your cards, your kids, go have sex with a beautiful woman-- just don't waste precious life beefing behind keyboards. Sheesh.

I don't know you and have no reasons to dislike you. My sense of humor can rub people the wrong way as I can be a bit juvenile at times (sidenote: I did back you up earlier in this thread that name calling is juvenile). There was nothing personal.

I am sorry for making you feel like I have a vendetta against you, because I don't.

Irony
 

Currently on the Main Board this thread entitled "Gone With the Stain"

is juxtaposed with a thread entitled "Great Wash........"

Divine Intervention??????????:eek::D

Same here.


Thank you! Much appreciated! We're cool!

Rats, those are my favorite kind.

If you are like me in this respect (or disrespect), read 'Pearls Before Swine' - also, the current strips have been a parody of 'Breaking Bad', so it's actually appropriate for this thread.

Thanks for my first laugh of the day!

Also, I have to congratulate all members who have been able to show certificates and licenses that are relevant to this discussion. All I can present is a copy of my MBA, but all that was good for was basic decisions related to business (also, ethics and such), and this is more of discussion of....

I have not read the entire thread but have a hypothetical question:

When given the choice between two similar condition cards and you know one has been treated, cleaned, stain removed (whatever you want to call it)---Which one do you choose?

I don't know the answer but could you quit posting so often? We're going to have to impose the 15 post-a-day rule for you :).

Actually, I will answer the question :). If I were told one was cleaned with water and a Q-tip, and one had nothing done to it at all but was the same grade, I would pick the one that looked best regardless of washing or not. Now if you told me it was cleaned with solvent I wouldn't be so sure...

The one treated with tap water from Philadelphia, as I can suck on it in emergencies and get any appropriate minerals.

Whoops - I'm probably above my posting limit as well. Leon - I'm still unemployed and not prone to exercise, so what's a guy going to do?

I try to limit my posting to twice every 5 years or so :). I do read the forum on a more regular basis.

-

Welcome to the boards, I think :D

If they're similar condition, I think we would all (even the ones that aren't opposed to stain removal) choose the one that hasn't been cleaned.

I think a better question would be something like, "If given the choice between to of the same cards:

one that has a NM appearance, but has been cleaned, or
one that is EXish that hasn't been cleaned

Which one would you choose?"

Shawn you are just grasping at odd hypotheticals to try and make soaking a card off a scrap book page in the same hemisphere as Dick’s work of cleaning and crease pressing. Not sure what else I can say. I will say it once again perhaps you will be the person who addresses this and doesn’t go back to trying to split hairs to make a case. Or go back to posting chemistry debates on H2O etc.

You tell me what bowl of warm water removes stains from Planks, brightens the entire card and removes most all traces of toning and age? Also tell me if it’s not a big deal why did the auction house try and hide this?

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

If not wanting to be lied to and be sold doctored up cards that had wax, tape stains and creases that now are sent in to Dick under secrecy and then sold to collectors with no disclosure at a huge profit makes me a hypocrite guilty as charged.

Cheers,

John

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

To those that do not mind treatment, would it matter which card you received (treated or non treated)? Assuming all other things about the cards were equal.

I think members have expressed their views (and you have gotten a lot of free press). Can we please kill this thread?

John,

I do not care for the Plank at all... Nor I do not care for your removed cards out of scrapbooks... Yes I am throwing out hypotheticals but they are not unreasonable situations...

I do not like nor do I buy into the "oh water.... its so gentle... I think i'll just toss a couple of cards in a bowl... because, well just because". If you think people remove or restore or clean-up cards to the point that one barely can tell the difference before & after the water soak your just fooling yourself. We have seen examples here on the board where people made huge differences in the before & after with just water. And of course money is never the motivator when water is used right?

You tell me how you know what in the world a bowl of warm water would remove from a card? By the way, I think apparently you would be amazed at what my mother can do to stains etc. with just warm water. :)

Oh & I may be splitting hairs but I have not been posting chemistry debates as you say? - you can go back to searching your desktop cache of funny pictures you swiped from the Internet etc. in hopes that you find something that fits what you are not able to verbalize....

If Towle's services are so kosher, why don't people disclose them as an affirmative selling point?

When's the last time anyone saw a card for sale saying "appearance much improved after cleaning by Dick Towle"?

Smokelessjoe - I have soaked several cards. They proudly reside in my collection. I don't intend to sell them and I talk about the process with people.

If you do not mind me asking, why do you soak them?

I am happy, not mad - I do not want you to think I am attacking you or something. Sometimes these post get taken the wrong way :)

John, I miss that show!

http://www.tophostgames.com/wp-conte...s-533qvwh3.jpg

Shawn, it's not "just because" - it's to remove stuff as unobtrusively as possible. And in general, water does not usually have a huge effect on 'before and after', unless the card had a lot of water-soluble glued on paper on the back. People who have soaked with water understand this and have explained it.

The only reason you and others don't seem to understand it, is possibly because you've never done it. Fair enough, but I can promise you - I'm not lying when I tell you what soaking can or cannot do, based on my own personal experience.

I cannot tell you about chemicals, and because of this, I think their use should be disclosed, especially for examples like the Plank - if for no other reason, than because when the buyer of the cleaned card attempts to trade or re-sell, he's likely to have to answer questions if he encounters someone with 'before' pics, and he was unaware that a cleaning had taken place. The impact on value could be very substantial.

I collect on a budget. Buying cards with paper on the back or front allows me to purchase cards I otherwise couldn't afford. Also, I think it's fun to see the before and after difference.

LOL, nothing personal huh? I post pictures because I find it enjoyable. Yes some pictures come from the internet I use the internet sometimes when I visit net54.com. :) As for not being able to verbalize I think I’ve been pretty clear on my stance. It’s you that keeps wanting to convert me to your thinking or convince me that work like the above is no different than removing a $5 card from a scrapbook and then placing that stained clearly removed card in a binder.

If what was done by Dick and others that results in cards just like the Plank posted is no big deal in our hobby. Why asked now many times is it not mentioned with pride at the time of sale and hidden from TPGs?

Also if your mom can get work like the Plank done with just warm water then Dick should hang up his “towle”.

John

Hi Scott,

Hope you are doing well.

I know its not "just because", I was being facetious in making that comment. Your point is partly what I was trying to say - that is people are not just throwing cards into a bowl "just because" but are actually trying to improve the card / photo whichever... But I do not buy that using water is just this hapless innocent thing with no other motive. The use of water can greatly increase the value of a card or a photo. I have seen it before my very eyes on this forum. And I think you know this is possible as well.

On a side note: your response to somebody else post about the effects a "slab" can have on a card does concern me... I had not thought about it... I used to run track - I started when I was 5 years old - back then you would get ribbons and medals for 1st - 6th place - The Medals would come in these little plastic cases with a piece of black foam to cushion the medal. I collected things even at that early of an age of which included coins - Well I had what I thought was a great Idea and used those little plastic cases to store my prized coins in - Over the years I would randomly admire them (still in the case) until flash forward 35 years - I decide to take the coins out so I could look at the other side - low & behold the coins are stuck to the foam and have actually had a chemical reaction (to most but not all) that has eaten away at the metal!!!! Here I thought I was such a smart kid and now the coins are ruined....

John,

It is nothing personal, at least to me - You took a little jab at me so I threw one back. I mean no harm and I am waving the white flag - My apologies for taking it to far.

I don't think that was me. I'm not so concerned about the effects of the plastic on the cards, but they do smell plasticey when removed, and I would rather they smelled like old cardboard. Regarding coins - after a few years, I often see grayish spots on proof coins. That was partly the reason that I stopped collecting them - including those flimsy thin plastic enclosures the U.S. mint used. I still have all of them, so I can show some ugly proof scans if anyone is interested.

Also, I always seem to miss those facetious remarks - I can dish them out, but I can't understand them when others do it :)

I just read my reply to you sorry if you saw a jab in there I was just answering your question to me on you saying I was a hypocrite etc. yes guilty of silly pictures.... :)

Problem solved.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_RccTLu6UaM...se%2Bgraph.jpg

Shawn, not trying to corner you but you seem to have some "stones" if you will. Since everyone else seems to ignore this question perhaps you can answer?

If what was done by Dick and others that results in cards just like the Plank posted is no big deal in our hobby. Why asked now many times is it not mentioned with pride at the time of sale and hidden from TPGs?

I actually would enjoy hearing your POV on the above question since you seem to be in the camp that what Dick does is not a big deal.

Cheers,

John

Disclosure
 

Personally I don't see anything wrong with the stain removal process as long as it doesn't leave any evidence behind - nothing you can see, smell or feel. For those that do have a problem with it, I respect your opinion. I can at least see where you're coming from and tell that you're very passionate about it.

Here's the part that is bothering me. Some people have mentioned disclosue upon the time of sale. I do agree with that part - especially on something like the Plank. But disclosure shouldn't be a part-time ethic, right? When one of our own board members admitting to "rolling out creases" I didn't see any of his buddies calling for "disclosure" and, for some reason, they didn't seem to be as passionate about it then as they do now. In fact, the thread went quiet pretty quickly when he questioned why he should even have to disclose it. So, again, is disclosure a part-time ethic, or in other words, does it depend on the seller whether or not they have to disclose it?

What's more wrong: rolling out a crease and not disclosing it or removing a stain and not disclosing it?

Very interesting read...

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...en+cobb&page=3

David both are incorrect and if you’re trying to say I give Dan a pass on rolling creases and not disclosing I don’t nor did I in that thread. Both are the same tweaking a card to get a better result in order to profit from the system Dan knows this and admits it openly. I don’t dig it and am not a fan that’s my stance.

However using your stance in this entire thread if Dan removed the crease and it fell under your guidelines that it left no evidence behind you would be ok with it then? Because in that thread you were not a fan and felt Dan was pulling a fast one and had no right to bust chops on grading etc. hence our back and forth on grading standards.

“Personally I don't see anything wrong with the stain removal process as long as it doesn't leave any evidence behind - nothing you can see, smell or feel.”

So really I think this question is better aimed back towards you as I have stated my stance. Do you feel it's different crease vs. major stain and if so why? Both increase the cards value thru manipulation both can leave no trace behind…In that thread Dan took his beating for being honest and saying yep crease gone tweaked the card.

Yet the flipside here is Dick offers this exact thing as a business and even more services that include chemicals/solvents and that's defendable and no big deal as long as nobody can tell. That’s what I don’t get???

Did I abuse Dan nope, but have Dan come on here and offer it as a business. I'm also not abusing Dick (boy that sounds bad) just saying not a fan of this type of work and think its a bad trend to start IMO.

Cheers,

John

John,

No "cornering" felt :) Bare with me - it may take a few post before I answer your question. I am not real sure about the angle you are taking with the question?

First attempt: If you feel that "revealing" who the person is that conserved, cleaned, "their term", "your term" the card, all of the sudden justifies or validates the practice I am going to call BS... I collect all kinds of things of which include furniture, paintings etc.. Some things do come with a disclosure as to who, what, where for the restoration and while there are many reputable folks that do these things - I am going to say that for the most part it is not bragged about as to who did the work. There is a place here in town that has been in business for close to 100 years that does anything from framing to very detailed restorations and even have some of their work at the Hall of Fame. They will tell you - there biggest promoter is word of mouth. They cannot stick stickers etc. to a lot of these items and I don't think they want to. Do these folks at the shop feel guilty for what they do? No. Do they assume their client feels guilty for hiring them to restore X? No. You assuming something wrong is occurring because there is a closed door and no one is running out announcing "hey I just had my card restored" makes me feel like you have something to hide.

By the way, this shop has an amazing reputation and from my experience has an open door policy - But be advised, it scared the shit out of me seeing the state of some of the items they were restoring, caused by their own hand! Scraping paint? or what ever they were doing...

I will say that a poor restoration job on a lot of items will bring down the price of most things, a good restoration job will bring the price up - in my experience - who the restorer is - does not have a bearing on the price. My one caveat on this is that I think folks who deal in motorcycles & cars will sometimes pay a premium based on who did the restoration.

I liken some of what your saying to my Son coming up to me and telling me ("dad, I just shot and killed an Eagle with my pellet gun, I did not want to get in trouble so I came and told you the truth"). This is wear I say "Son, you did the right thing by telling me the truth, but telling the truth does not make it right". "Now your grounded for a damn year go to your room". This is an extreme example :) But hopefully I make my point.? That is, you seem like you would have no problem if all was revealed and I question that.

I do not separate what you have had done to your cards (which you did not mention who removed those cards for you) from what other people had Dick do to theirs. I am a purest - leave it alone!

I am getting bombarded here at work - so please bare with me in regards to grammar and continuity...

Shawn I appreciate your reply. I think you went deeper than what I was asking and made some fair points.

Mine was more a simple approach. It’s well known and accepted restoration and cleaning in certain circles and collectibles but never has been in this hobby. A lot of folks here seem to take the stance no big deal as long as I can’t tell.

So my question was more if it is in fact no big deal why not just address it and get it out in the open?

Simply say in an auction description the card has undergone a significant cleaning removing wax stains etc. and now presents and is graded NM. The very fact that it is not addressed in that way I think is evidence that what Dick does is not so openly accepted, and that taking the approach I can’t tell so no big deal is just a way of kicking the can down the road vs. addressing it.

That’s all I’m saying…thanks again for responding.

Cheers,

John

John

How do you think the market would react to a card graded say PSA 8 but where the seller subsequently disclosed that it had been chemically enhanced by him?

I've only had a restorer work on one card (ungraded old judge of pop smith, born in Digby NS where my spouse was also born) and when I eventually sell it, will make full disclosure)

I've had a number of books restored (mostly missing front endpapers or split hinges) where the restoration should be obvious, and again, I have and will always disclose.

Here's the latest candidate for restoration, a 1948 Japanese language edition of The Babe Ruth Story. . Might have to turn the H2O up to 11 on this one

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7161/...45b03782_z.jpg

Max, the market wouldn't like it that's my exact point. For so many who are saying they have no issue with Dicks work lots of the hobby and TPG's for the most part don't feel the same when it comes to cards.

I have never had any stain removal done but I can answer your question. They don't reveal the stain removal was already done in order to attract buyers that intend to use the stain removal process.

"Don't drink water; fish **** in it." W.C. Fields

As for soaking, cleaning, etc., it is done for one reason only: to improve the way a card looks, either for personal aesthetic reasons or to get it into a higher numbered slab for resale. All the rest is just prevarication.

Max, it would be the kiss of re-sell death. Not the case for a soaked one. Fair or not to Dick and ilk, that fact is what it is all about for most in our hobby.

Sent from my SM-G730V using Tapatalk

Classic Saul!!!! Love it.

Nobody else really seems to mind, but if I knew a card had been soaked in water, it would diminish its value to me.

Yeah, but we don't have Saul - who we gonna get?

I was curious, so I looked for more about the Plank.

And I believe It's an example that can be used to clarify how I view things.

I'm in favor of light surface cleaning to remove buildups of "stuff" on the surface. Some stains can be removed or reduced the same way, usually only reduced.
I'm also in favor of professional deacidification for items that need it.

The key being professional.

The conservation work I had some links to shows what's proper. Cleaning, preserving, making it stable in a reversible way that won't cause further damage years after the work was done. And documenting the work done.

All that implies limits to what should be done.

I believe the surface cleaning I did on my card was limited and proper. The card is better off long term. (And I must admit being surprised at the grade -I was expecting maybe a 35-40 or an A, and hoping for a 50) I didn't document the process other than before and after scans, but I'm very open about what was done and how.

Now that I know the Plank actually is that whitened and has actually lost the degree of color shown in the scans rather than the scan being brightened here's my take on that card.

It's sloppy poorly done work. Anything that would remove both the stain and that much color would need to be neutralized properly. But someone who can't avoid damaging the color while taking out the stain probably is too sloppy to do that.
Meaning not only is the card overcleaned and improperly whitened, but it's probably in for further damage from whatever was used.
That steps over every boundary for proper conservation, and should NOT be done.

Steve Birmingham

Nah, we get them laminated. Then, when the market goes up, we learn to dissolve.

Maybe overlooked, but in the "Spring Cleaning Comes Early To The Plank Household" thread linked above, post # 34 was very interesting:

Could it be that simple, with the Plank-maybe Oxi Clean?

Sincerely, Clayton

Here are some nice white borders.

http://www.milehighcardco.com/1915-C...-LOT33800.aspx

There is a common sense factor that is severely lacking in many of these posts. As Leon said, in the real world, water is not considered a chemical.

If you accidentally spill water on a card, should it then be considered altered? If you accidentally get a speck of ketchup on a card, do you have to leave it there, or can you wipe it off? If you wipe it off, should the card now be considered altered? Also, stop eating and drinking around your cards.

For me, it's pretty simple. Water is fine. Chemicals are not. I don't think I'm in the minority on that.

I don't have a degree in chemistry, but I can pretty much guarantee I've soaked more cards than anyone who does. So which background is more relevant to this discussion? The theoretical one, or the practical one? I don't need someone else to tell me what they think happens to cards when they're soaked. At least when they're soaked in water. I know what happens. Stains don't magically disappear in water, btw.

How many here are on board with the original poster and think his practices are okay? I'm a strong vote in the "no freaking way" column.

-Ryan

Addition by subtraction. He isn't adding anything. He is taking away stuff that shouldn't be there in the first place. If someone from the 30's put rubber cement on the back of a card to post it in an album, I don't see nothing wrong with removal of the glue. He isn't filling holes, coloring borders,etc. He is removing glues and stains that shouldn't be on the card in the first place. I am sure I am in the minority here.

my take...
 

Some people like cards that look like they were run over by a truck (torn/folded/creased and such). Some like nice clean cards that look brand new. To each his own. If you think a card has been "tampered" with and you don't like it, leave it for the next collector. If you don't care, buy it. Do your homework, make an educated decision and live with it. It's just cards. This is a hobby, it's supposed to be fun. When it's not fun, you lose sleep over it, you go on chat boards and endlessly bitch above everything in the hobby, maybe it's time to move on to something else. Take a deep breath and chill boys!
Life's too short to get bent out of shape about whether or not a baseball card has been cleaned on not.
My 2 cents, take it or leave it.

So will you disclose which cards of yours have been worked on by him?

i don't think this debate will ever be settled...this thread may even de-throne the monster # thread...what a sad day in mud-ville that'd be!

Not a chance!!!:eek::eek::eek::D:D:D

Let's say you're renting a house. You spill a bottle of wine on the carpet. You pay a professional carpet cleaning service to clean it because you don't want to loose your $2K deposit. The carpet cleaning service removes the stain and makes the rest of the carpet look like new. No one could ever tell a bottle of wine had been spilt. When it comes time to vacate the house, do you tell your landlord? For what? Does he even care if it's something he can't see? I keep going back to the same old point. If there is no evidence, why does it matter?

If having a stain removed from a card lowered the value of a card, I could certainly understand disclosing it. That would be common sense. However I don't think that it does - especially if it's graded after the stain is removed. Last time I looked in the SMR, there wasn't a pricing category for graded cards that have had a stained removed.

To answer a question John (Wonka) asked me earlier in this thread, yes, I do believe creases that are removed from a card should be disclosed. There's a huge difference and let me explain. It's been proven that creases can sometimes come back. The new owner of the card should know that a crease has been removed so he is aware of the possibility of the crease returning. However, there is no evidence that the stain removal process leaves any long term effects. None! Again, huge difference. And if at some point it can be proven that removing a stain can show long term effects, I would certainly change my stance. But, for now, that's how I feel.

If I was trading or selling my carpet as a collectible I would disclose.

Hey Frank, don't forget to fill out your bracket. :D:D:D

Ryan, as you can see from posts subsequent to yours, common sense is never going to prevail in this hobby.

One thing that always will prevail in this hobby are those who want to impose their own opinions, morals and ethics on others and make condescending remarks if you don't agree with them.