About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Microtrimming/reshaping--some of the same things you would to to try to get a card to an 8.<br /><br />Thought this was most prevalent among ungraded cards.<br /><br />Jim

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>Your premise is wrong. Microtrimming/reshaping may be something that you would do to try to get a 5 or 6 to an 8, but below 5's have creases or wrinkles that make microtrimming/reshaping a strategy without a goal. That is, some of my best 1's have sharp corners and edges, but it's the paper loss or creases or unerasable ink that keep them in those holders. All the microtrimming/reshaping isn't going to help.<br /><br /><br /> <br />

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Paul,<br /><br />You either want to argue or are angry with me--the guy is an expert and I was just relaying his opinion--believe it if you want.<br /><br />Jim

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>...want to argue or are angry with you. But when I read comments in support of a theory that PSA 5's are more altered than PSA 8's it is impossible for me to sit on my hands. That theory has no explanable basis and the circumstantial evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.<br /><br />

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>Tom Boblitt</b><p>but I'd clearly agree with T206 on this one.....the marginality between even a 6 and a 9 other than centering and some corner wear is such that it'd sure be a LOT easier to take a 6 to a 9 than a 1 to a 3. Especially if employing any type of trimming procedure. Pure numbers but I think the vast majority of collectors would agree. As Dennis Miller used to say....just my opinion, I could be wrong........

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>JK</b><p>I generally agree with Paul that more higher grade cards are altered than lower grade. Common sense tells you so. As for this dealer of Jim's being an expert - well, unless you are saying he alters cards, he is not an expert and is merely giving his biased opinion (as he was about to sell you high grade cards). That being said, I believe its a problem shared by all cards - just as microtrimming might increase a 6 to a 9, spooning out creases might very easily bump cards up from a 3 to a 4 or 5 (I know Ive got a number of sgc 40s that have sharp corners and could be 60s if not for a some nearly undetectable wrinkles - actually, in some cases, they are undetectable).

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>Tom Boblitt</b><p>however.......<br />For the 3 to 5 changes, they are alterations that many (not you Jim) would consider to be okay such as soaking or pressing a corner down or erasing something. For the 6 to 9 changes, they would likely involve something that most ALL of us would consider improper such as trimming, flattening, coloration or paper added to corners/borders, etc. <br /><br />

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>Rhett Yeakley</b><p>I'm in agreement with Josh here. I don't care how big of a dealer you are, unless you are seeing the 3's being turned into a 5, his opinion is worth about as much as anyone elses here on the forum. Also, as a salesman, he is telling you exactly what you want to hear as you were purchasing 2 high grade high dollar cards from him. If you were the world's biggest buyer of PSA 5 cards, a smart salesman would tell you the exact opposite. <br />-Rhett

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>JK</b><p>Tom,<br /><br />You finished my thought - well, actually I just chose not to add my personal opinion that, while I dont do it, I really dont care if my 3s, 4s and 5s have had wrinkles taken out of them, been soaked, had pencil erased from them or had a corner laid down. What would bother me is if my low/mid grade cards were recolored, rebacked, rebuilt, trimmed, etc (ie major alterations).

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>[I really dont care if my 3s, 4s and 5s have had wrinkles taken out of them, been soaked, had pencil erased from them or had a corner laid down. What would bother me is if my low/mid grade cards were recolored, rebacked, rebuilt, trimmed, etc (ie major alterations).]<br /><br />That's where I come out, too. There is no way to know whether more PSA 8's have been soaked than PSA 3's -- it may be that they are equally soaked. But, when it comes to micro-trimming to improve value and appearances, nobody's got any stake in micro-trimming the low-grade stuff.<br />

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>It sounds as though in your last post removing wrinkles/creases in not a big deal in your mind for the cards you collect......<br />It seems intriguing with every post, the line on what is fair game for 'working' on a card gets moved along a little further, or at least opened for discussion.<br />So, if allowing soaking, erasing, spooning or other pressing methods for removal of creases and wrinkles, what becomes so different with the remaining methods of altering cards?<br />If, for instance, you could re-back a card with another original back from the same card example, so that in essence you had two original sides now mated, how different would the card be to what was intended at manufacture?<br />And then, re trimming, if simply removing some of the card and the remaining portion has not been added to in any way, why is that not as the manufacturer would have designed it?<br />We all know cards were cut to very unexact dimensions, cards were also hand cut, so if what is left after trimming is the same original card, just slightly different sizes - where is the foul?<br /><br />Just asking, and not at all having a go at you, as I'm just interested to see how far the line might become blurred once wrinkle/crease removal becomes accepted...<br /><br /><br />Regards<br />Daniel

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>He was apparently talking about the microtrimming/reshaping of low-mid grade cards--to make corners and edges look a lot bettet--apparently a lot more widespread than I believed.<br /><br />Jim

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>...but if you take a 5 with rounded corners and you trim them to sharp corners you get an 8. If you trim a 5 but leave the corners rounded, you're still stuck with a 5.<br /><br />If you take a 3 with rounded corners, it has other problems that cannot be fixed by trimming the edges, usually creasing or wrinkles. With trimming, you simply can't turn a 3 into a 5, but you can turn a 5 into a 6, 7, 8, 9 or 10.

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>Daniel,<br /><br />I know you didn't pose that question to me, but it is not a slippery slope. While there may be gray about what is acceptable practice in the middle, nobody thinks trimming, color adding or paper restoration are acceptable. The slope will never got so slippery that it would lead you there. <br /><br />Thus, in short, there may be areas of gray -- obviously -- but just because there is gray area in the middle, doesn't mean that you should wind up sliding one way or another. <br /><br />You see the gray and want to have an absolute standard so that it can be black and white for you. But most of us see the same gray you are looking at and don't have much of a problem with it, because our issue is only with the really hardcore stuff -- again, trimming, color adding, paper restoring, etc.<br /><br />Paul

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>so tell me your thoughts on the areas I posed regarding re-backing and trimming, and where people might not be able to make the same argument regarding simply returning a card to its intended design, especially if they haven't added anything to the card (unlike re-coloring, building up corners, etc.)? What makes re-backing and trimming such untouchable words in this hobby?<br /><br /><br />Thanks<br />Daniel

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>...that mis-states the issue. It's not about returning it to the original "design," it's about restoring the card -- the actual piece of cardboard that came out of the cigarette pack -- to its original condition. Trimming an edge off or rebacking it with another card do not restore the card -- they fundamentally change its composition. The reason soaking is fine is because it removes gunk from the card.<br />

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>Paul, in my mind trimming means removing some of the existing card, and does not change the composition of the card - there is merely less of it afterwards. In the same way, wear and rubbing of corners that results in corners being so rounded there is literally missing paper where once there were corners, does not mean the composition of the card has changed, just less remains.<br /><br />And with re-backing again the composition of the card is the same, 2 layers of card that are meant to be married, the only difference is that they are not original to eachother. But in the words of many who have argued for soaking, corners being layed down, marks erased, and wrinkles removed....if you couldn't tell afterwards that it had been done, and the graders were unable to tell, then surely you could not have issue with it - or those who performed the alteration.<br /><br />Sincerely<br />Daniel

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>The argument that trimming a card is the functional equivalent of corner wear is absurd and really does not deserve much attention. One is the intentional destruction of the original composition of the card, the other is the normal wear and tear inherent in things old. It's the difference between amputation and a skinned elbow. <br /><br />The statement that "with re-backing again the composition of the card is the same" is just false. This comment also deserves little attention. I don't think you seriously believe what you wrote and so I will not entertain your hypothetical.<br /><br />Trimming and rebacking are detectable alterations. I therefore have an issue with them. If trimming and rebacking were undetectable alterations then we would have a very different hobby indeed.<br /><br />Your best effort at equating trimming with soaking was when you said you'd hire some paper conservators and see what they had to say. What has happened with that effort?<br /><br />

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>The complete disdain with which you address my points of interest result in exactly the same feelings I have towards anything you may ask of me.<br /><br />Daniel

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>...is that I don't think you seriously believe corner rounding is the same as trimming so (a) if you don't, then why does anyone have to explain it to you, and (b) if you do, then you have a lot of altered cards in your collection and soaking is the least of your troubles.

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>Peter_Spaeth</b><p>Paul you have much more patience than I would.

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>I think it's important to try to be patient with people on this Board, especially those that have different opinions from you. I think Daniel has some good ideas and is trying to have a reasonable debate about this issue. <br /><br />To my knowledge, Daniel has never claimed to be the backbone of the hobby, tried to belittle the collecting interests of others or otherwise unduly bragged about his collection. That kind of stuff makes me really lose my patience.

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>JK</b><p>Hey Daniel,<br /><br />I generally agree with much of Paul's comments. I simply have no problem with erasing pencil, soaking. As for wrinkle removal, its not so much that I think spooning out a wrinkle is ok - its just that if its happened to one of my cards, I really dont care and Im not going to get worked up about it unless someone can prove to me that wrinkles come back. Ive never had a wrinkle show up in one of my cards that wasnt already there when I bought it - maybe Im just lucky and have never had a card with a wrinkle spooned out.<br /><br />As for re-backing and trimming, different story. I also dont buy the premise that the composition of the card is the same if you trim or reback it - by definition, it cant be. In each case, you remove original portions of the original card. Intentional alterations such as those you mention are simply not analogous to ordinary wear and tear and I dont really know how to respond to the comparison between trimming and corner wear as to me (and I dont mean this disrespectfully) its just a silly argument. <br />

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>As you might imagine, I wasn't really saying that either trimming or re-backing was ok by me, or the same as the other methods mentioned, but wanted to see where and how you drew the line by making the argument or comparison.....that if you can physically change what a card looks like by doing the more accepted alterations/restorations, what exactly in your mind was stopping you from altering the physical characteristics by trimming and re-backing.....I think its probably simple in that the latter just seems wrong and 'way over the top' to you, while soaking/erasing etc. don't. I was really only looking for a more fleshed out explanation of what you were thinking as you made those decisions.<br /><br />Guess I just didn't ask in the right way in which to expect a clearer answer.<br /><br />regards<br />Daniel

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>Glyn Parson</b><p>If low grade cards are becoming a less and less important part of the hobby then why are many of the large auction houses that used to only carry psa 8 or better carrying many lower grade E and T cards along with other tougher issues even if they are in "collector" grade. I believe the statement Jim made may be accurate in certain segments of the hobby but not in the entire hobby like that statement came across.

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>ballajurra</b><p>This is in response to a post 9 December 2007.<br />I'm a stamp collector not a card collector so take this information anyway you like.<br /><br />There is a chemical used to remove adherances on stamps. It evaporates after a while & leaves no marks even under uV. Lindner hinge remover.Won't neccesarliy remove the gum/glue<br /><br />There is a device called a sweat box also used for the purpose of soaking things especially those with fugitive inks. Really works on humidity, significantly less aggresive than soaking & not affected by the chemicals in the water supply.<br />Easy to make one using a clear plastic container with tight lid & a few a sponges.There are instructions on the net.<br /><br />Finally there is a drying book called Desert Magic. No chemicals, just clever. Beats the **** out of blotting paper & is virtually endlessly reusable.Costs less than $20.

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>I understand this is the <b>post</b> war forum, but do you think this card would be a good candidate for soaking?<br />This card has alot of 'schmutz' on it... Next to his eye, all around really. Just alot of junk on the surface..<br /><br />It really makes me nervous... But I'd take a stab at it. I'm a bit confused though about the amount of time to leave it in the water. In the "How to soak" article it says: <br /><br />"Hold the card down with a finger or cotton swab and let the cardboard soak up the water for a minute or so"...<br /><b>And then it says:</b><br />"You can leave the card in for a few minutes or up to several hours depending on the cardstock."<br /><br /><b>So I'm confused as to which it is...</b> And which would one do for <i>this</i> card? Any guidance is much appreciated. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> thanks!<br /><br /><a href="http://s48.photobucket.com/albums/f250/yankeejunkee/Unlikely%20to%20part%20with/?action=view¤t=58mantle.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f250/yankeejunkee/Unlikely%20to%20part%20with/58mantle.jpg" border="0" alt="1958 Mickey Mantle"></a>

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>I'm no Saucier, but I would teach a common beater to swim before drowning the Mick. As it is, it appears vg-ex.

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>Mark</b><p>I'm no expert on this procedure either... but I do recall hearing that Tobacco/Caramel Cards (with litho images) respond much better to soaking than glossy modern cards with photographic images.<br /><br />I have a Cobb T-206 that would likely benefit from soaking. It has residue from mounting corners, and is otherwise EX/MT. But I am scared to death to attempt soaking, and would definitely practice with lesser valued commons first.

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>Mark</b><p>Just wanted to add something regarding the Mantle Card above...<br /><br />Regarding the "schmutz" near his eye, you may want to try using a common woman's nylon. Rub the soiled spot back and forth with the nylon and see if it removes the foreign substance. <br /><br />There was a thread on this a few months ago. I would recommend this before you even consider soaking this card. Hopefully, the Feds don't find this practice to be a punishable offense!

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>T206Collector</b><p>....soak post-war cards. It has to be a litho, like T206. Soaking of other cards will make their faces crack -- at least. <br><br>_ <u> </u> _ <u> </u> _ <u> </u> _ <u> </u> _ <u> </u> _ <u> </u> _ _ <br /><br />Visit <a href="http://www.t206collector.com" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.t206collector.com</a> for signed deadball card galleries, articles and more!

About soaking cards
 

Posted By: <b>dan mckee</b><p>I agree! Do not soak post war cards! My 1952 Topps Mickey mantle floated into 2 pieces with the front separating from the back. I elmers glued it back together and it now resides in a 3rd party holder which is considered one of the best companies.