 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13
05-26-2019, 03:42 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Is it okay because there is no surface gloss on a T206? If this was on a 1989 Upper Deck Ken Griffey Jr would erasing the pencil still be okay?
This goes to the detectable/undetectable issue as well as the additional damage to the card issue. Does it matter based on the value of the card? If it is alteration on a Baltimore Ruth to remove the pencil mark, shouldn't it be the same on a $50 card? If the intent is to only remove the pencil mark, it doesn't meet the standard definition of conservation, so I would still call it alteration. Full dislosure: I used a bad eraser to try and remove a price off the 1939 Cobb HOF postcard, but once it started smearing I left the price on it. PSA graded it a 4 with no qualifiers. It should have, at a minimum, got a 4(MK).
__________________
-- PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head PSA: Regularly Get Cheated BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern SGC: Closed auto authentication business JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC Oh, what a difference a year makes. 
|
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| FS: T206 Only Moeller Sovereign SGC 80 remains. SOLD | Thromdog | T206 cards B/S/T | 1 | 05-23-2018 05:29 AM |
| Erasing a light pencil mark, altering in a negative manner? | Leon | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 45 | 06-13-2012 08:05 AM |
| T206 dan moeller psa 7!! Only 2 graded higher!! | CMIZ5290 | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 2 | 12-30-2010 03:20 PM |
| If if wasnt for that darn pencil mark/stain/paperloss... | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 8 | 03-22-2007 05:11 PM |
| Does erasing a pencil mark make a card ungradable if the erasing is apparent? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 9 | 01-20-2005 11:47 AM |
Threaded Mode