Erasing a light pencil mark, altering in a negative manner?
 

Ok, I am poll happy today :). For this one I want to remain specific for one situation that is being discussed. Do you think erasing or removing a mark, is altering a card in a negative fashion? Simple question and no caveats and no other stuff collectors can dream up.

Not only don't I think erasing a pencil mark is a big deal, I'm surprised that it is even a major issue. I honestly don't understand why some people feel so strongly that it is. It isn't comparable to ironing out creases or trimming a card. That's my opinion and I'll stick to it.

+1

I agree Barry. And why is it when we say someone erased a mark others come on and start making crap up....."OH, Well, what if someone ironed out a crease or someone trimmed a card blah blah blah". It's like that can't think of something being done to a card and other things NOT being done. Maybe they need to expand their horizons :). Most of us agree that the other forms of altering are unacceptable. We can draw a line but many can't understand that simple concept, so it seems. Maybe I am missing something?

I don't think your poll question should include the word "negatively". Everyone would probably agree that erasure of a pencil mark is "altering" a card.....the question is.....Is it a negative alteration? I vote yes. JMHO dave
I feel that ANY alteration is negative!
Leon..I know you have a little interest in rare coins...would removing a spot or blemish of tarnish to a 1909 s VDB be a negative alteration?? Of course it would. dave

Hi Dave
I feel doing anything at all to affect a card in it's present state is an alteration. That is sort of black and white. I just don't think erasing pencil is a bad alteration. I worded the question very carefully in the poll. Maybe you agree with it now? :)

Our hobby almost always has a bad, mostly deserved, connotation of the world "alter." This is going against that grain.

btw, Dave, what you said is precisely why I worded it the way I did. It takes into account my definition of erasing a mark...which isn't bad but is technically an alteration.. then too we get into semantics. We both are intending the same definition I believe. I don't think erasing a mark is bad and you do.

and to answer your coin analogy question, I don't know the answer. I would have to see what is commonly acceptable in numismatics and my gut tells me, from you asking the question, it isn't ok to remove tarnish from a coin. Again with the apples and oranges. :(

altering a card
 

although I feel as Barry does, what is the big deal....I will say that in my mind if the original card stock is removed or added to, then no good...no re-coloring, adding card stock...or erasing some color near a border area to make a card better centered....I knew a big time dealer who used to carefully erase print marks in white border areas where you could not tell under a 10x Power loupe...that being said, I dont feel those that remove a very light wrinkle or laying down a border edge that has been slightly bumped up is altering because no color or card stock is being added or removed....a slightly bumped edge or very slight wrinkle was not original to the the card...I dont think removing gum, tape or glue residue is a problem unless the originally factory cardboard stock or color has been removed/damaged in the process....I think those who try it are crazy but to each his own....thanks....Bruce Perry

Erasing marks
 

+2

I think it is a matter of degrees and everyone will have their "point" where doing something to a card crosses the line. A small erasure, an "ironed" crease, soaking to remove residue, rebuilding a corner, etc. I have a couple of "rules" that might be good guides as to whether the alteration is acceptable:

1.) Does it serve to conceal or disguise a flaw/defect?
2.) Would knowledge of the alteration be material to a reasonable collector (i.e. would the alteration affect how a typical collector would value the card)?

Dave- suppose I'm cataloguing a group of raw tobacco cards and I decide to first finish my meatball hero. To my great chagrin one of the meatballs falls splat onto my T206 green Cobb. I quickly grab a paper towel and wipe the tomato sauce off the card.

Have I just altered it? Because wiping off the sauce is equivalent to erasing a light pencil mark, in my book.

You altered the cobb by meatball. You attempted to diminish the damage by cleaning some off. When the meatball hit the card...the card was altered.....by cleaning it you tried to diminish the damage by furthur alteration, ( even though the result would probably have more eye appeal).
A card was altered when the pencil mark was placed there.
Erasing the pencil mark is trying to diminish the damage.
All alterations of cards are unacceptable to me.

David, it seems to me that what you are really saying is that all minimizations of alterations to cards are unacceptable to you. FWIW, I happen to respecfully disagree with you.
Val

Me thinks you have had too much of that Hawaiian sun. :)

erasing marks
 

Dave, at least I know you won't be bidding on my Mack Old Put if it ever leaves my collection LOL. I appreciate your view, but respectively disagree. Wiping off dirt or anything that was not on the card originally is not altering the card. It's not changing the color, size or being deceitful in any way IMO. SGC are extremely professional, and are completely objective in their views. I respect the way they grade cards and try their best to be a reliable resource for all of us. I'm sticking with their views on this, and they happen to be mine as well.

So what you're saying Dave is it would be more ethical if I left the tomato sauce to harden onto the card's surface? If so, I hope the sauce falls on my red Cobb instead so that it might in fact blend into the background.

What about removing the date stamp from the recent REA Wagner? I am sure it would bump a grade or two higher.

Hi Barry....Of course not, if it was my cobb I probably would have dashed to the sink and showered that sauce off. I am saying that the original sauce was what altered the card (like the original pencil mark) diminishing that sauce is like erasing the pencil mark (probably with much less sucessful results). Come to think of it, isn't it strange that restoration in comic books and in classic cars is considered ok yet in coins and stamps it is not ok. To me altering a card is not ok. And altering one and getting it bumped up by a tpg is dispicable. (sp?) Aloha Dave.

reductio ad absurdam
 

I went to bed with my window open last night and forgot a few cards on the table. It was extremely dusty and windy. This morning I noticed a fine layer of dust on my cards. I took a cloth and wiped the "dirt" off the cards. Am I guilty of altering them?

I understand that any alteration bothers you, and that's okay. But a pencil erasure would not bother me.

Yes you are and the cards should be destroyed!!!! I will PM you my address so I can ensure they are properly incinerated.

All my cards were altered, because they were taken out of their respective cigarette packs. Then they got finger prints on them and the dust in the atmosphere just made them worthless. I sent a few to be graded, but they were further altered by being put in a plastic prison after being judged, not to mention fondled and molested. After my dog farted on them, they had to be burned. ;)

Oh, Never mind or NM (which I always thought meant Near Mint).

How can anyone compare wiping dust off a card to erasing a mark to smoothing a crease. All of those are very different to each other. I agree that erasing a mark to make a card look a little better is fine... Having an SGC grader open a slab and stand by while you erase a mark then upgrade said card is incredibly unethical (for the grader). Is that service available to anyone? I doubt it.

I purchased a 10 card submission to PSA one time in my life. The grades came back all over the place, overgraded, undergraded. They probably spent 10 seconds max grading each card. Its a completely worthless service IMO. I can see how it appeals to some people... Mainly those who have personal relationships with the graders and discuss various ways to achieve a better grade, as discussed here, WOW

Edit: I believe thisis to be unethical by SGC. I don't mind that Pete erased his card, it's his.

erasing marks
 

Matt, good points and they are all different situations. I know many have erased marks on cards rather easily and frequently over time. Because of the cost of the card in question, I wanted them to take it out of the holder. I asked ahead of time if erasing a mark and resubmitting it was ok, and they felt the pencil hadn't been there before, so it wasn't adding or taking anything from the card to "alter" it. But, I can see how others may feel that may not have been a normal process in having them there. I requested one of them to be there, so they witnessed me doing it and didn't think anything else would be done to the card. I'd say they'd do it for anyone if you paid the walk through price and had it graded there. It was by no means a "special" service, as I don't know any of them personally.

Barry- great analogy. i'm with ya.

Dinner soon?

Actually...maybe we can turn this thread into our next NYC Dinner thread (kidding Leon). ;)

Well Pete, your explanation makes your situation more understandable. But, not really for SGC. I live an hour away from PSA, so if I pay more for a walk through they will grade my cards differently?

So this makes total sense now, we have to pay for this "special service"... Which is fine, although it's too bad our hobby values cards (for the most part) based on this grading system.

erasing marks
 

Matt, I probably didn't explain SGC's policy of a walk through, which is having a card graded with same day service at their location. Since I was visiting my pop in N Jersey, I brought the card to them to get it regraded on the spot. I'm sure I could've sent it in with my explanation, and am confident they'd have handled/graded it the same way.

Okay, at the time of this post, the board opinion on this matter is an overwhelming 81-10 that pencil erasure isn't a negative alteration. I have one question though: Would it make a difference if this were a high-grade card?

If this card was originally graded SGC 80 / PSA 8 MK, then upon removal of the pencil erasure became SGC 98-100 / PSA 10, would you still think it's okay?

erasing marks
 

Great question, but I'd say that it shouldn't make a difference. I'm happier having the 40 vs. 20 in my situation, and would pay more for it if it wasn't mine and up for sale.

I guess I would fall somewhere in the middle. If the pencil mark being removed affected the card so you could notice something was removed, then yes it's altered. But if you are so good that even with loupe you couldn't tell, then no.

In most cases a pencil will still have left some remaining mark on the card due to pressure. I would still prefer an erased mark alteration over some of the soaked cards I've received. It's about disclosure so the buyer can make an informed decision on his purchase.

OMG, Moving the card at all is altering it!!!

Leon, I think you started this just to watch the fight. LOL

Just to play the part of stirring a cordial pot, this is kind of along the lines of Bruce's post, but, by definition, touching a card alters the card, as is also placing it in a card sleeve, toploader, or "Ultra" pocket sheet. It's affecting the fibers of the card in every way that lead or graphite do, albeit the latter affect it in a more visible and substantial way. How about the fibers from the cardstock that have slightly worn off over the years?

In a way, everyone is correct. I think the wrench in the situation, and the unstated factor in this is TPG. We're analyzing this according to what the grade would be, and, in turn, what the value would be. Is the question actually, how far can one go to "change, or alter the card" before it's considered "cheating" a future buyer?

Just some thoughts, even though I'm not really takign a stance. Ha!

.
.

I voted that erasing the light pencil mark is an alteration. The reason is that I think it's too fine a line to where people are saying that as long as the erasure isn't noticeable under 10x loupe, it's fine. Then what if it were a pen mark that a paper conservator removed where the removal also wasn't noticeable? What if someone were trimming a T206 Wagner or Plank where the trim job wasn't noticeable? If the owner of the card doesn't like the mark on it, sure, he can remove it, but then the card should be advertised as having the mark removed, and let the buyer judge whether that makes a difference in the price he would pay for it.

Well, you voted for something that wasn't asked but I think you hit the jest of it anyway. The question was purposely phrased to have the connotation of erasing a mark being a "negative". Of course, technically doing almost anything to a card is altering it. The question is "is it a negative"? This also has no bearing on if the mark can still be seen or not. That too is of no consequence. The question was, and is, "is erasing a mark a "negative" alteration?" And to that, the large majority say "no".

For the record I sold a high 4 figure card to a good friend and board member, after it came out of a PSA 6 MK holder, and after I erased the mark, and it was holdered an SGC 80 (rightfully so, it's a beautiful card). I did disclose the erasure before the sale and the buyer had 0 issue with it. I don't care if someone has erased something from a card I am buying and I don't even care if they tell me or not. That's just me though and I know others want to know.....to each their own.

These are the sort of questions I find I can't answer as asked.

Different cards, different marks, it all makes the issue more complex than the question requires.

A light pencil mark that originally left nearly no physical trace - I don't think removal is a bad thing.
IF
It's done in a way that doesn't damage the card. Some erasers are rougher on the paper surface than others.

A heavy pencil mark might be ok to remove, if for instance it's on the back and erasing it doesn't damage the printed portion. There will still be indentations from the writing, so I wouldn't expect the technical grade to change.
But I have a few T206s with erasures on the front. That's pretty bad, and I would rather they'd left it alone.

Spilled ink or stuff like that- Maybe, it's usually hard for an amateur to remove without doing more damage. Removed, lightened it should still be considered marked.

Some marks are more interesting. Like owners stamps and stuff like that. I would consider removing that sort of mark to be bad, as to me the stamp might be better than the card.

:( never an "it depends" as an answer........

Steve B

I messed up my vote can I erase and start over? :)

Now THAT is funny!!:) No erasing though....you have to throw a "meatball" at it!:D aloha, dave

Whoever made the mark altered the card. One can't undo trimming, coloring, etc (don't think so anyway). Altering an alteration? My vote: no, erase it.

I have a Ruth that was graded PSA authentic and was relieved when I found out it was only due to an erased mark.

The best eraser?
 

Interesting thread.
Most surprising: that it is more or less acceptable to erase.

I'd done it when I was newer to the hobby, years ago, with some low-grade T206's. I did it not to deceive but to improve the appearance of the cards, with good results. But thinking more about it and concerned with the ethics, I stopped.

Reading this thread, I was surprised to learn that SGC and most responders condoned it. After some more circumspection, I cracked open a PSA 1 [Mk] Frank Baker I'd recently bought, erased the light pencil mark on the back, and was very pleased to have improved the card. I can't see any erasure with the naked eye, nor is it noticeable under the microscope. I would disclose it were I to sell/trade it.

But it brings up the question: What's the best eraser to use?

I've used an ordinary draftsman's eraser [the white, plastic type, say the size of a 2" long, half inch thick bar]--certainly not the standard, orange pencil eraser, which could well leave color or damage the carboard fiber--But does anyone have any better suggestions? I do remember when I was a draftsman, many, many years ago, there was a gummy/putty-consistency eraser that might even be better.

Thanks.

Doug

Erasing marks
 

Mars eraser is the best to use. It extracts the pencil off the card without the eraser making any type of mark on the card.

Thanks, Pete.
I believe that's what I've been using [see scan].
The Staedtler/Mars-Plastic is a relic from my draftsman days, 47 years ago, and still works fine. I think the Entre is the same type, and it seems to work as well.
But I seem to remember that in my shop there were putty-like, maybe art erasers, that some claimed to be superior.

Anyway, this thread has impelled me to flip through my collection, and I see that I have at least a half dozen to clean up, which I now look forward to doing.

You mean kneaded erasers. They're very gentle on the paper, and don't abrade it like other erasers can. I've used them to erase marks from collectible books before, and I'd definitely use them were I to do the same with cards.

If u
 

If u owned a collectible car with original paint and a bird shit on the hood would u clean it off?? Is that altering the original finish?? Same diff...

Those kneaded rubber erasers were designed to 'dab' at paper, and they do work really good. I've never used one on a card, but if I wanted to erase something I'd definitely try that first.

I own a T206 that has the first letter of the player's name written right in front of his last name at the bottom (it's so light you can barely see it unless you're looking for it). It came back a PSA 4 (mk). Without that mark it's at least a 7. It's beautiful. It's a shame really.

Kneaded erasers--
 

Thanks LWMM and Matt; I'll be looking to buy one.