PWCC planning to redefine the difference between altered and conserved in cards

[swarmee]

It's kind of buried in the Vault thread (and the '52 Mantle one in the post-war forum), but is a post from Blowout concerning PWCC changing the definition of conservation as compared to alteration of cards in the marketplace.

Later this month we will publish our Marketplace Tenets which, among other things, touches on the differences between alteration and conservation. Until then, I will summarize why this card is still live in our auction.

In our view, there's a difference between conservation and alteration. Conservation is any act which returns a card closer to its as-manufactured condition and does not render the card artificially different from the as-manufactured state. Removal of dirt, glue, pencil marks, wax, etc. are good examples of conservation, so long as it's done in a way that doesn't affect the natural properties of a card.

Alteration is very different from conservation in that it generally involves the addition of a foreign matter to a card (i.e. recoloring or corner rebuilding) or the removal of material (i.e. trimming, erasing print, etc).

The ‘52 Mantle in question shows no signs of alteration based on these definitions, so it is an acceptable asset to be sold on the marketplace.

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...&postcount=264

You can see it in that thread and the one exposing tons of trimmed Bryce Harper autographed cards. Have any of you been consulted on this attempt to redefine the standards of card alteration? They basically agree that the PSA 4.5 Mantle has been pressed, but since that is considered "conservation" by them, they will not remove the listing NOR mention to the bidders that the card has been worked on.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Since nobody here wanted to talk about it I posted many times on the Blowout thread lol. I'm too burned out to repeat it all, but I strongly oppose what they are doing. It's utterly disingenuous IMO. Big surprise, I know.

For proof of the hypocrisy, look only to the fact that they won't disclose it.

[Leon]

I don't think pressing cards is a good thing. It is not the same as erasing a mark or soaking or pushing down a corner that flipped up. It seems the pressing would make the paper thinner which isn't the same as when it left the mfg....

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

I don't think pressing cards is a good thing. It is not the same as erasing a mark or soaking or pushing down a corner that flipped up. It seems the pressing would make the paper thinner which isn't the same as when it left the mfg....

That's because you have a hobby history and understand the collective wisdom on alteration. And so does PSA by the way, if in practice they fall short of being able to enforce their standards.

[jayshum]

How come they consider recoloration to be alteration instead of conservation? Wouldn't that just be an "act which returns a card closer to its as-manufactured condition and does not render the card artificially different from the as-manufactured state"? That's their definition of conservation.

Really corner rebuilding is also returning it to the as-manufactured state. Trimming would seem to be the only thing that would be classified as alteration based on the above definition of conservation.

[Peter_Spaeth]

The sh*t going on out there is just evil. At some point does it reach a critical mass and people start asking what the %^&* is going on, or do we just go about our business and keep on praising all the major players and talking about how wonderful they are? Just the latest example by the super sleuth on blowout. If you check his ID you can find all his recent threads.
https://www.blowoutforums.com/showth...1#post14636793

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by jayshum

How come they consider recoloration to be alteration instead of conservation? Wouldn't that just be an "act which returns a card closer to its as-manufactured condition and does not render the card artificially different from the as-manufactured state"? That's their definition of conservation.

Really corner rebuilding is also returning it to the as-manufactured state. Trimming would seem to be the only thing that would be classified as alteration based on the above definition of conservation.

Certainly taking out creases would pass muster. It's hard to even take this crap seriously. It's just stunning to me that we have reached this point. But the cash register just keeps on ringing.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by jayshum

How come they consider recoloration to be alteration instead of conservation? Wouldn't that just be an "act which returns a card closer to its as-manufactured condition and does not render the card artificially different from the as-manufactured state"? That's their definition of conservation.

Really corner rebuilding is also returning it to the as-manufactured state. Trimming would seem to be the only thing that would be classified as alteration based on the above definition of conservation.

It is my understanding of what they posted that if you are adding (adding color to a corner or edge) or taking away (trimming), that is alteration. They are OK with anything else, pressing corners, creases, removing stains, whitening borders or anything else that removes something from the card that wasn't originally there. That is considered "conservation" by PWCC. The Joe DiMaggio rookie from last year and this 52 Topps Mantle are OK by their standards as I understand them.

[topcat61]

Originally Posted by Leon

I don't think pressing cards is a good thing. It is not the same as erasing a mark or soaking or pushing down a corner that flipped up. It seems the pressing would make the paper thinner which isn't the same as when it left the mfg....

Hey Leon, I'm curious cause I really don't know, but what is card "pressing"? Can you give me an example so I'll know what to look for? Thanks.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by topcat61

Hey Leon, I'm curious cause I really don't know, but what is card "pressing"? Can you give me an example so I'll know what to look for? Thanks.

My estimation of pressing as a nefarious act would be to soak a card then apply a lot of pressure to a corner (pressing) to make it thinner and longer. I have never done it or seen it done, but read what is said just like everyone else does.
Other pressing would be merely drying a card after it was soaked to prevent a curl to it. I don't have an issue with someone doing that (drying the card). But I do with the heavy pressing of corners because it can easily lead to trimming. As far as detection I would guess a loupe and holding it up to light would be useful. I don't study this crap like some others so maybe I am mistaking. If any card doctors want to come forward and let us know it would be most appreciated.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I found this online.

For cards, I think that there are three variations of this, and pressing in general is not accepted.

(1) Soaking - this is usually fairly common especially in prewar cards where you usually soak the card in water to remove it from a scrapbook, etc. It is also sometimes used to remove excess dirt or other residue that has accumulated on the card. After the water soak, the card is usually dried and then placed under some heavy objects such as books to ensure that it dries flat. This process may also remove some warping in the card. I believe this is usually acceptable in the card community as long as NO CHEMICALS ARE USED. Only water or distilled water is acceptable. Anything else is considered altering the card.

(2) Pressing - this is the process to remove wrinkles or creases in the card. This is not acceptable as sometimes over time, the wrinkles or creases may come back. A card may look to be crease-free when it is originally submitted to a TPG. However, at a later time, the creases re-appear, and observers wonder how such a card with creases got such as high grade and got past the graders.

(3) Pressing to trim - one of the reasons that there is a minimum size requirements to cards is to prevent unscrupulous sellers from trimming a card with soft corners so that the end product is a card with sharp corners. They then submit this card for a grade, but it will often fail due to minimum size requirement. However, one way to get around this is to press the card so strongly that the size of the card increases (but it becomes thinner). Then the card is trimmed, so that the corners are now sharp and it is still within the minimum size requirements. Obviously, this is not acceptable to the collecting community. >>

The pressing(#2 above) aspect reminds me of what many did in the 80's/90's with a process called "spooning". Where one rolled a spoon,the bottom/curved part of the part of the spoon that holds the liquid, back/forth over a crease/bubble to flatten it. Also the pressing to trim(#3 above) was accomplished via pressing a card under a certain tonage (PSI) in a mechanical press of sorts to "stretch" the cardboard thereby allowing more material to be trimmed from the edges. This does in fact result in a thinner stock card.

[drcy]

An issue is you don't know what pressing will do to a card later, and don't know that what the pressing does is permanent. There have been instances of wrinkles re-appearing after being holdered.

Clearly, a collector or dealer removing wax stain or pencil mark isn't like trimming and recoloring, and many would argue those are okay and reasonable things to do. However, I wouldn't catalog that as 'conservation,' with conservation be done by a trained professional, or expert amateur, who is considering and is educated in the longterm health and preservation of the item.

I don't want eBay sellers to be able to get away with saying "No, no, I wasn't altering it. I was conserving it."

Unless it's been professionally, or otherwise expertly, conserved, do not use the term conserve.

I do know a collector and board member who is a self-trained expert in conservation (does more than paper items), and I would consider what he does as conservation (deacification of documents, etc). He's also very ethical and transparent about what he does, and, for items such as antique prints and paintings, real conservation is considered a selling point.

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Are they going to start grading cards next? Stupid, they claim they aren't professional graders yet they are walking the fine line.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by HOF Auto Rookies

Are they going to start grading cards next? Stupid, they claim they aren't professional graders yet they are walking the fine line.

Worse than that. They are claiming it's acceptable to soak and press a card. We aren't talking about soaking a card out of a scrapbook here. We are talking improving corners. And probably taking out creases as the same logic would seem to say that is OK.