pwcc (part two)

[vintagetoppsguy]

Last night I had someone contact me with some information about PWCC doctoring their auction scans. He said that he would provide me proof, but also asked for anonymity. I promised him such.

Take a look at the 1951 Parkhurst Hockey Milt Schmidt cards below. They are the same card, same serial number. Notice how the red print dot (to the right of his head) is missing from the first scan, but is visible in the second scan. Here’s is the card history:

PWCC first sold this card in August 2012 for $653. Here is a link:

http://www.pwccauctions.com/item.php?item_no=249611

In this auction, the red print dot is missing. The scan has been touched up to remove it.

**************************************************
PWCC sold the same card once again just recently, this time selling for $542.73. Here is the link:

http://www.pwccauctions.com/item.php?item_no=496377

Perhaps the first buyer received the card and didn’t like it feeling it was misrepresented and returned it for a refund (I can only speculate), but for whatever reason PWCC ended up with the card once again. The second buyer now has it listed in his eBay store and the red dot is clearly visible...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1951-PARKHUR...#ht_111wt_1121

There is, to me at least, a difference in tweaking a scan so that it is a closer representation of the actual card versus editing a scan to cover up a known defect.

Thoughts anyone?

[calvindog]

Are we actually still debating whether PWCC doctors its scans? Unless you're a consignor of PWCC or named Brent does anyone else honestly think they don't?

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Are we actually still debating whether PWCC doctors its scans? Unless you're a consignor of PWCC or named Brent does anyone else honestly think they don't?

Again, there is a difference (at least to me) in doctoring scans to make a card more aesthetically pleasing (adding color) versus doctoring scans to hide flaws within the card. Yes, both are wrong, but I think the latter of the two is way more deceptive. Until now, I’ve only seen where he added color to make his scans appear more brighter. This shows he doctors scans to hide flaws within the card.

[autograf]

Agree completely on removing a print dot. Contrast/Hue/etc is one thing and might be explained away in a few circumstances. If the above is true, very indicting...........

[glchen]

Again, I'm a known consignor to PWCC, so it is what it is. However, in the above scan, could it possibly be due to the dust removal option in the scanner? I've seen examples where the dot was removed from the half letter grades in PSA flips in scans. (e.g., "7.5" would appear as "7 5").

[the-illini]

Originally Posted by glchen

Again, I'm a known consignor to PWCC, so it is what it is. However, in the above scan, could it possibly be due to the dust removal option in the scanner? I've seen examples where the dot was removed from the half letter grades in PSA flips in scans. (e.g., "7.5" would appear as "7 5").

If I am the seller of the card and I saw that a setting I had turned on removed a significant flaw like the one above, I scan the card again, until it shows up properly.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by glchen

However, in the above scan, could it possibly be due to the dust removal option in the scanner? I've seen examples where the dot was removed from the half letter grades in PSA flips in scans. (e.g., "7.5" would appear as "7 5").

I've seen exactly what you're talking about in reference to the PSA flips, but I don't think that is the case here. If he had the dust filter turned on, why would it only remove that big red print dot and not other things - e.g. any of the punctuation (dots or commas) at the bottom of the card that is even smaller and even more resembling of dust?

[Bocabirdman]

Geez guys, you are no longer beating a dead horse. You are no longer even beating the wet spot where a horse used to be. Now you are just thumping the ground hoping a horse comes by and drops dead in the path of your swing. Three threads. No resolution. Neither of you is either going to convince the other. You are both partially correct and the actual truth lies somewhere in between. Give it up. This thread needs to sink from the top of the first page. Let's get back to celebrating this hobby that we all share.

Here is a scan just for the hell of it. Just in case anybody on a baseball card forum wants to .......Gasp!!!...see a baseball card.

1939f 001.jpg

Why did this card only get a 1.5? The back is clean with no paper loss

[RCMcKenzie]

Jamie and Jeff are both good guys, but the point of the thread is worthwhile. Folks should do their own due diligence before buying cards. Study the card series you are buying. Study the prices they go for. Buyer Beware.

[bobbyw8469]

I'm just dumbfounded that Brent is always able to find these bidders who have no earthly idea what the current going rate is for any particular card in any particular grade. Got a card that sells in the $700-$900 range?? Brent sells his for $2,000. Got a card that sells for $500-$800 within a 15 year time period? Brent sells not even a good example of the card for $1,800. How come every single one of the cards that I auction off/sell privately, fall within that mean/median range, yet he always seems to find bidders that have no concept of pricing in regards to cards and will gladly pay PSA 9 prices for a PSA 6 copy???????

[Peter_Spaeth]

I am with Bobby -- there do seem to be quite a number of prices that are not just high, but so off the charts as to be inexplicable. I wish I had an answer for how this happens.

[MikeGarcia]

Originally Posted by Bocabirdman

Geez guys, you are no longer beating a dead horse. You are no longer even beating the wet spot where a horse used to be. Now you are just thumping the ground hoping a horse comes by and drops dead in the path of your swing. Three threads. No resolution. Neither of you is either going to convince the other. You are both partially correct and the actual truth lies somewhere in between. Give it up. This thread needs to sink from the top of the first page. Let's get back to celebrating this hobby that we all share.

Here is a scan just for the hell of it. Just in case anybody on a baseball card forum wants to .......Gasp!!!...see a baseball card.

Attachment 119484

Why did this card only get a 1.5? The back is clean with no paper loss

Because of the tiny pinhole.....hold it up to a bright light.....happened to me a couple times too

[Bocabirdman]

Originally Posted by MikeGarcia

Because of the tiny pinhole.....hold it up to a bright light.....happened to me a couple times too

I have looked at that card countless times and never saw it.......

[cyseymour]

Thank you, Superman, for saving the hobby. Now here is your cape.