About soaking cards

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob

Aw crap, since I started this thread, I deserve to be post #300
Happy holidays y'all.
tbob

[Archive]

Posted By: John S

Jim,

Do you feel that within the hobby there is a hierarchy amongst collectors? I am making an assumption that you do. In your mind (just deducing this from your comments) this card collecting caste system places people that collect as you do at the top and individuals like myself who collect mainly GD-VG material near the bottom.

Your comment that "I am not here to make friends" was disturbing. And while I do not use the internet to widen my social circles, interacting with fellow hobbyists in a positive manner does make the hobby more enjoyable.

Please understand that most of us do this for fun. Your comments indicate to me that your collection induces more stress than relaxation (fears of tampering, card alteration, etc.). They are just pieces of cardboard and no regulatory commission, or plastic slabs, or amounts of money will ever change that.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Kravitz

What a ridiculous topic!

Most of the cards I collect only are available in low grades. I spent a very long time looking for a Cocoa Cobb, and when I found one I grabbed it. With a very limited amount known to exist of any card, you don't have many choices. And even if the Cocoa Cobb did exist in an 8 holder, I would spend so much money that I wouldn't be able to feed my family. We would just sit around the dinner table and look at the Cobb. Wait a second... That doesn't sound too bad.

The point is if you collect rare/scarce cards you have limited choices. Try and find a t-208 Plank, Kotton Cobb, Red Hindu Cobb, Mino Cobb, (you can kinda tell I'm a Cobb fan) or any other highly sought after scarce card in a high grade holder. They just don't exist, and if they do, 95% of vintage collectors could not afford it. Another thing is that the scarce pristine vintage cards just look fake. I like rounded edges and corners where you can see the layers pealing. It just seems right.

My point is that I am no less important because I like the rare/scarce Cobb's & Wagner's. When less than 5 cards are known to exist, I take what I find and have a smile on my face for weeks knowing that I have one and guys who collect PSA 8's or better don't.

Leon- Hopefully this is not too much to ask for, but I need a spell check and for you to add a number or count each time a thread is added to. When the thread goes over 300 it's hard to figure out where I left off.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

This is evolving into the same class warfare that the board always ends up in. Personalities aside, and we clearly have serious clashes in that department, this discussion still revolves around most dollars spent vs. what constitutes the typical collector. If collector A has spent $1 million on PSA-8 cards, and 50 collectors spend $10,000 each on lower grade cards, the PSA-8 collector has outspent the rest of the market by 2 to 1, yet represents only 2% of the group. So it is still unclear how we define "backbone" of the hobby- who is spending the most or who is best represented? I would define "backbone" as which group has the greatest number of collectors. For me, the PSA-8 crowd is just an elite niche of the market. Again, there is no right or wrong way to collect. We just have not satisfactorily defined which group best represents the hobby. We know an auction house like Mastro is dominated by PSA-8 cards, but their whole business model is to offer the finest cards to the best heeled group out there. They recently sold a high grade E93 set for over 300K. Would we define that as a typical hobby transaction? Hardly.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

JohnS,

I think there are famous well known collectors whose collections are highly regarded but I would not call it a hierarchy of collectors.

We all collect for different reasons and its all good. I collect primarily for enjoyment too. I enjoy the banter on the boards as well and I know a lot of collectors and dealers personally--wouldn't necessarily call them friends though.

Bob,

Cheers to you too. I love the hobby too. For the guys who collect pre-war great--for those who collect 1994 Donruss great--

I just think over time these will mostly all end up in graded card holders and increasingly the 8 and better segment is becoming the largest segment in the hobby. You disagree--fine. I like to provoke lively debate about important hobby topics--many of which relate to prewar--

For those of you that like the relaxing threads that are many knowledgeable collectors provide--great--skip mine. But I like the serious discussions about interesting hobby topics.

Happy Holidays to you.

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Barry,

Fair point over whether we should define it by dollar volume or numbers of collectors. I am thinking about it perhaps from the perspective of dealers, auction houses, shows that are dominated by 8 and better stuff.

Tom,

Did not intend to show a lack of respect--was just trying to offer an opinion. Its like the ungraded collectors who come on here and talk about the high percentage of psa 8 cards that are altered--its a serious opinion that I vehemently disagree with but those are some of the most interesting discussions on the board. So people vehemently disagree with me--fine.

Yes--I agree that high grade cards would go down in value in a general price downturn--given the long upturn we have had there will be a correction sometime--actually we have seen rolling corrections in price in different segments within a long upturn.

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

The 8-9-10 cards will become the biggest segment of the hobby...BECAUSE THEY ARE MAKING THEM AS FAST AS THEY CAN CRANK THEM OUT!!!

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

Perhaps we should take a poll. Using the most extreme definition of alteration to include even things many or even most folks would consider acceptable (erasing pencil, soaking out of scrapbooks, flattening corner flips), what percentage of PSA 8 pre-WW II cards do you think have been "altered" in some way shape or form.

[Archive]

Posted By: T206Collector

...55% -70% -- a moderate amount of trimming (which is difficult to detect) and a significant amount of soaking (which is impossible to detect).

[Archive]

Posted By: Al C.risafulli

Using the most extreme definition of "altering", which would include soaking out of a scrapbook or similar gunk removal, I go under the assumption that they all are, unless there's iron-clad provenance or a unique story behind them (like with the Tango Eggs).

Doesn't stop me from liking them, owning a few, or recognizing their value.

-Al

[Archive]

Posted By: Will

After devoting so much time to reading this thread, I had to say something...
Back when I was a part-time dealer in off-condition vintage (in the 90's when there were shows), my typical day was:
$1,000 gross sales, 30 different transactions, $400 profit
High-end vintage (graded)dealers (people I know and like)typical was:
$3,000 gross sales, 5 different transactions, $200 profit.
If 10 of my regulars didn't show, I had a bad day. If 2 of theirs didn't show, they had a bad day. I also didn't have or need the 6 locking showcases and bodybag to secure everything.
If you only follow certain aspects of the hobby, please don't make blanket statements about the hobby. I know nothing about high-end vintage (except a little from this board)or anything post-1980. If you want to talk flea-markets and hotel shows in Baltimore, I'm the guy. Or rummaging through piles of old photos in an antique or "junque" shop. Please do not minimize what or how I collect based on what/how you collect and please, please, please leave out the words "invest" and "investment" when referring to collecting.
William List

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

I think Peter is on to something: however, why not have a poll on what we consider altering to be?

[Archive]

Posted By: T206Collector

There were two alteration polls in August -- one centered on soaking/erasing; the other on flatening/removing creases. I would prefer to see the opinions of the board on the poll suggested by Peter.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Peter's poll is provocative in theory; the problem is everybody who participates would be guessing. It would end up being a very unscientific poll, with numbers all over the place. It would be mostly hearsay without much evidence.

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

Life would be no fun without a little hearsay and speculation. Obviously the point is not to come up with a definitive answer, just to see what people think would itself be interesting I think.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

The answers would be all over the board, from none, to 2% to 10% to 40%..and nobody would really know. My guess would be about 5%, or perhaps a little more. And my answer is based on absolutely nothing.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

I met with a leading dealer in the Northeast yesterday who told me he thought that for both graded and ungraded he thought a far higher percent of low grade and mid-grade cards were altered than high grade and that the card doctors were doing all sorts of stuff to the low-mid grade cards as it was tougher to detect.

He also sold be a 41PB Joe D and a 38 Goudey Foxx.
Getting close to complete in 8 on the first set--the 38 Goudeys are very difficult to copmplete in high grade.

Just thought I would pass it on.

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: T206Collector

Yeah, all those creased VG 3's are totally altered. Are you that naive? Though, by your definition, the PSA 1's with paper loss on the back from scrap book removal are technically "altered."

The fact that you purchased high grade cards from the same guy who you are getting information from makes his opinion, well, totally and completely biased. Did he tell you the cards he was selling you were not altered before or after you made the deal?

Finally, how does your near completion of the Goudey sets have anything to do with soaking or altering cards?

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Paul,

He thought that it was easy to improve a 3 to 5 --much more difficult to improve a 6 to an 8 and from what he knew the first was much more widespread.

Not biased--just repeating what he said. He has been a large dealer for 15-20 years.

And rather than post somewhere else on my new purchases I just added it here--

Sorry you took offense.

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: T206Collector

...ask him how to improve a 3 to a 5? Because I'd wager there is no way to do that in an undetectable fashion. And remember, card soaking is not about improving a 6 to an 8 -- it is about cleaning off a back to move from a 1 to an 8. And it is just as easy to move from a 1 to an 8 as it is to move from a 1 to a 5. I just don't have any concern about that particular movement.

I suspect you'll find a lot of dealers of PSA 8 material to back his theory up though.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Microtrimming/reshaping--some of the same things you would to to try to get a card to an 8.

Thought this was most prevalent among ungraded cards.

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: T206Collector

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.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Paul,

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.

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: T206Collector

...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.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

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........

[Archive]

Posted By: JK

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).

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

however.......
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.

[Archive]

Posted By: Rhett Yeakley

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.
-Rhett

[Archive]

Posted By: JK

Tom,

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).

[Archive]

Posted By: T206Collector

[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).]

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.

[Archive]

Posted By: E, Daniel

It sounds as though in your last post removing wrinkles/creases in not a big deal in your mind for the cards you collect......
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.
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?
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?
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?
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?

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...


Regards
Daniel

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

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.

Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: T206Collector

...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.

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.

[Archive]

Posted By: T206Collector

Daniel,

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.

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.

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.

Paul

[Archive]

Posted By: E, Daniel

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?


Thanks
Daniel

[Archive]

Posted By: T206Collector

...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.

[Archive]

Posted By: E, Daniel

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.

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.

Sincerely
Daniel

[Archive]

Posted By: T206Collector

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.

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.

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.

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?

[Archive]

Posted By: E, Daniel

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.

Daniel

[Archive]

Posted By: T206Collector

...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.

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter_Spaeth

Paul you have much more patience than I would.

[Archive]

Posted By: T206Collector

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.

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.

[Archive]

Posted By: JK

Hey Daniel,

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.

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.

[Archive]

Posted By: E, Daniel

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.

Guess I just didn't ask in the right way in which to expect a clearer answer.

regards
Daniel

[Archive]

Posted By: Glyn Parson

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.

[Archive]

Posted By: ballajurra

This is in response to a post 9 December 2007.
I'm a stamp collector not a card collector so take this information anyway you like.

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

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.
Easy to make one using a clear plastic container with tight lid & a few a sponges.There are instructions on the net.

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.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

I understand this is the post war forum, but do you think this card would be a good candidate for soaking?
This card has alot of 'schmutz' on it... Next to his eye, all around really. Just alot of junk on the surface..

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:

"Hold the card down with a finger or cotton swab and let the cardboard soak up the water for a minute or so"...
And then it says:
"You can leave the card in for a few minutes or up to several hours depending on the cardstock."

So I'm confused as to which it is... And which would one do for this card? Any guidance is much appreciated. thanks!

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve

I'm no Saucier, but I would teach a common beater to swim before drowning the Mick. As it is, it appears vg-ex.

[Archive]

Posted By: Mark

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.

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.

[Archive]

Posted By: Mark

Just wanted to add something regarding the Mantle Card above...

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.

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!