Poll for Buying Cards with Chemically Removed Stains

[steve B]

I went with "would', but for me it's more complicated.

If it was done professionally or in a way that I felt was proper then it would not affect my decision much.

If it was done poorly or in a way that I thought would do more damage over time Then it would.

Steve B

[T206Collector]

What chemical?

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by steve B

I went with "would', but for me it's more complicated.

If it was done professionally or in a way that I felt was proper then it would not affect my decision much.

If it was done poorly or in a way that I thought would do more damage over time Then it would.

Steve B

I kind of agree with Steve here...additionally it really depends on the card itself.

If it's a card that never comes up...and I "need" it...it wouldn't matter as much to me...as opposed to a card that commonly appears...I'd be more inclined to pass.

I did not respond to the poll as the answers are too general for my response!

Oh...and what about water? IS that a chemical?

[Leon]

I voted it would influence me but there does need to be more info.

But the way I looked at it was...if I had the choice between the exact same card that had been chemically cleaned or one that wasn't, I would pick the one that wasn't.

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by Leon

I voted it would influence me but there does need to be more info.

But the way I looked at it was...if I had the choice between the exact same card that had been chemically cleaned or one that wasn't, I would pick the one that wasn't.

But what if the chemical was an undetectable preservative that prevented the card from turning yellow in the future and even guarded against the terror of pyrolysis.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

But what if the chemical was an undetectable preservative that prevented the card from turning yellow in the future and even guarded against the terror of pyrolysis.

LMAO....well, if it comes to pyrolosis I may have to reconsider. I am not a major purist but like my cards unadulterated as much as possible.

Now if the chemical was ONLY water, or a mark had been erased with a plastic eraser, it wouldn't influence my decision...but that is just me.

[Bocabirdman]

It depends on what chemicals I am under the influence of while sitting with my cursor on the buy/bid button.

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

Originally Posted by Leon

LMAO....well, if it comes to pyrolosis I may have to reconsider. I am not a major purist but like my cards unadulterated as much as possible.

Now if the chemical was ONLY water, or a mark had been erased with a plastic eraser, it wouldn't influence my decision...but that is just me.

I agree with this. Also, I think the poll options are a bit limited.

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

Originally Posted by Leon

LMAO....well, if it comes to pyrolosis I may have to reconsider.

FYI in my experience you can cure pyrolosis by taking the card to a cemetery during a full moon along with a dead cat.

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

I kind of agree with Steve here...additionally it really depends on the card itself.

If it's a card that never comes up...and I "need" it...it wouldn't matter as much to me...as opposed to a card that commonly appears...I'd be more inclined to pass.

I did not respond to the poll as the answers are too general for my response!

Oh...and what about water? IS that a chemical?

Those are valid points, but the fact is no card seller that I'm aware of ever discloses what chemicals are used to removed stains. So there again if you know that stains were removed from a card, would that in itself influence your purchasing decision? Let's use this card as an example:

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby

Those are valid points, but the fact is no card seller that I'm aware of ever discloses what chemicals are used to removed stains.

It would be good to know if the whiter borders and back, shown in the 'after' scan, are accurate - also, if the pink really was washed out of Plank's face. I have owned a few T206's over the years that displayed that strange look, and I knew there was something wrong with them, but of course couldn't pinpoint it, as I wasn't present at the 'cleaning', but as Barry pointed out in the other thread, it almost certainly had nothing to do with pure water. Again, let's use common sense here.

[ethicsprof]

dr. frank's engaging argument regarding the terror of pyrolysis was a mind-changer for me.
best,
barry

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Runscott

It would be good to know if the whiter borders and back, shown in the 'after' scan, are accurate - also, if the pink really was washed out of Plank's face. I have owned a few T206's over the years that displayed that strange look, and I knew there was something wrong with them, but of course couldn't pinpoint it, as I wasn't present at the 'cleaning', but as Barry pointed out in the other thread, it almost certainly had nothing to do with pure water. Again, let's use common sense here.

I've been told by someone who knows (And that I believe) That the scans accurately represent the card both before and after cleaning.

It probably got lost in the other thread, but my opinion of that particular cleaning is that it's sloppy amateurish work that goes beyond what's appropriate. And since they couldn't do it well enough to avoid lightening the card overall they probably were too sloppy to neutralize whatever they used. So the card will probably be in for long term damage.

Even if I could afford it, that would greatly influence my decision.

Steve Birmingham

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by steve B

I've been told by someone who knows (And that I believe) That the scans accurately represent the card both before and after cleaning.

It probably got lost in the other thread, but my opinion of that particular cleaning is that it's sloppy amateurish work that goes beyond what's appropriate. And since they couldn't do it well enough to avoid lightening the card overall they probably were too sloppy to neutralize whatever they used. So the card will probably be in for long term damage.

Even if I could afford it, that would greatly influence my decision.

Steve Birmingham

Steve, your point was not missed - it was what made me go back and study the two scans again. It also reminded me of the 'odd' T206's I've owned in the past.

Peter's point might also have been missed by some - this is partly about the premium placed on graded cards. Even though it was shown that the seller probably lost money on the cleaning/grade bump, that might not be the case if someone who's better at cleaning does the job in the future. And even if the TPG can't detect chemical evidence, the collecting community is pretty good at locating the 'before' and 'after' scans, and that's enough to hurt value.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Steve, your point was not missed - it was what made me go back and study the two scans again. It also reminded me of the 'odd' T206's I've owned in the past.

Peter's point might also have been missed by some - this is partly about the premium placed on graded cards. Even though it was shown that the seller probably lost money on the cleaning/grade bump, that might not be the case if someone who's better at cleaning does the job in the future. And even if the TPG can't detect chemical evidence, the collecting community is pretty good at locating the 'before' and 'after' scans, and that's enough to hurt value.

And that premium is another whole discussion. (I think I'm one of the few that are ambivalent about the whole grading thing. )

I think some preservation work on cards should be acceptable. Removing them from scrapbook material that will damage them eventually or that will crumble away in a few more years should be fine, And preferable to the common back damage from just ripping them out.
And some cleaning and perhaps stain removal on some cards. The Johnson I cleaned is probably a good example of where I think the limits are.
And some cards like most strip cards should be deacidified or they likely won't last another 90 years.

The stuff used by the pros is actually beneficial long term IF it's used properly.

Cleaning with random stuff, especially stuff that removes a noticeable degree of color is extremely poor practice.
I'd almost go so far as to say that it's a solid indication of deception. The means to do a basic surface cleaning and maybe remove most of a stain that will cause damage is well within the ability of anyone with a bit of patience.

Some chemicals are actually totally ok to use on paper. Stamp watermark fluid is ok and often does a very little bit of surface cleaning just from checking the watermark. It won't remove any color, or for that matter most stains. And its use is almost universally accepted. There are devices for detecting the watermarks without fluid, but one is very expensive and the other (which I own) doesn't really work. So the fluid is used by nearly everyone except the people too cheap to buy it. They use lighter fluid. (And many stamps that aren't from the US the watermark can be seen by holding it up to any decent light. )

It's just so situational to me there isn't an easy answer.

Maybe---
T206 given a light cleaning or removed from a scrapbook -ok
T206 Bleached to * - Not ok

W515 - deacidified by a conservator with a letter/receipt - ok
W515 - "prettied up" by straightening a poor original cutting from a strip -???Less ok- Somehow I recall many people being in favor of doing something like that

The point that alterations, both positive and negative are rarely if ever disclosed is a big one. I think that if a professional cleaning/stain removal was less stigmatized we'd see more disclosure. Stuff done to deceive will always go undisclosed.


Steve Birmingham
PS you guys should see the S that's done to stamps. The philatelic foundation had a display at the international show in DC in 2006 that was really pretty scary. I'm not bad at spotting some alterations, but they had examples that were almost impossible to spot without being shown what was "wrong" about them.

[T2069bk]

I chose it would influence me....but probably not as originally intended.

A card is a card- if I want it and it looks great and a few less people will buy because of the disclosure- that becomes a win win win for me. I am buying to enjoy it and to display it and if it comes cheaper because of the "cleansing" that is even better.

I understand your arguments, and I can agree with them, but to each their own.

[teetwoohsix]

If I knew a card for sale had stains removed with chemicals, it would definitely influence my purchasing decision. It would be an easy decision to not buy that card, and let someone else put it in their collection, if they don't mind chemical alterations.

Let's hope going forward that any seller who lists a card for sale and knows it's been chemically cleaned will do the right thing and disclose it to any and all potential customers. Fair enough?

Sincerely, Clayton

[E93]

Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby

Some good questions would be:
1) If you purchased this card all cleaned up and later discovered the before scan on this forum, would you be pissed?
2)Would you want your money back?
3)Would the seller/auction house/TPG be obliged to give you your money back?

JimB

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by E93

Some good questions would be:
1) If you purchased this card all cleaned up and later discovered the before scan on this forum, would you be pissed?
2)Would you want your money back?
3)Would the seller/auction house/TPG be obliged to give you your money back?

JimB

1) Absolutely. You can clearly see that the card was altered-just check out the shading in the uniform, that says it all.

2) Yes.

3) I've never dealt with an auction house, so not sure how to answer that one.Maybe someone with more experience could explain who would ultimately be responsible. But- herein lies the problem when someone who cleans cards with ANY type of unknown (unknown to everyone but the "cleanser") chemicals, and thinks just because it can pass through the graders that all is well-just look at the Plank. It crossed over and got a .5 bump. But, when you see the comparison scans, to me, it screams "altered". Should be graded "A". Will this card degrade 10-20 years from now?

Sincerely, Clayton

[steve B]

Originally Posted by teetwoohsix

1) Absolutely. You can clearly see that the card was altered-just check out the shading in the uniform, that says it all.

2) Yes.

3) I've never dealt with an auction house, so not sure how to answer that one.Maybe someone with more experience could explain who would ultimately be responsible. But- herein lies the problem when someone who cleans cards with ANY type of unknown (unknown to everyone but the "cleanser") chemicals, and thinks just because it can pass through the graders that all is well-just look at the Plank. It crossed over and got a .5 bump. But, when you see the comparison scans, to me, it screams "altered". Should be graded "A". Will this card degrade 10-20 years from now?

Sincerely, Clayton

That's pretty much how I look at that card too.

I'd be mad, and I'd want some change in price either a full return or some reduction.

But I don't think the auction house would be required to give me anything unless they were part of or knew about the cleaning.

I do have a feeling that that particular card will have problems in a few years.
And the way I view that card is different from how I view other cards that were cleaned less aggressively.


Steve B

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by E93

Some good questions would be:
1) If you purchased this card all cleaned up and later discovered the before scan on this forum, would you be pissed?
2)Would you want your money back?
3)Would the seller/auction house/TPG be obliged to give you your money back?

No, no and no.

Did Kendrick get mad when he found out that his Wagner was trimmed? Probably not. Did he ask for his money back? Probably not. If finding out purchasing a $2+ million trimmed card didn't upset Kendrick, why should purchasing a cleaned card bother me? I have too many other important things to worry about in life.

The questions also infer that the card (Plank) loses value now that is publicized that it's been cleaned. Did the Wagner lose value after it was publicized it's been trimmed? Again, probably not.

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Did Kendrick get mad when he found out that his Wagner was trimmed?

Interesting question. Part of me finds it unfathomable to not be indifferent that a $2.8 Million dollar investment turned out to be fraudulent, yet at the same time the apathy and indifference towards fraud and deception in this hobby at times has been astounding.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

No, no and no.

Did Kendrick get mad when he found out that his Wagner was trimmed? Probably not. Did he ask for his money back? Probably not. If finding out purchasing a $2+ million trimmed card didn't upset Kendrick, why should purchasing a cleaned card bother me? I have too many other important things to worry about in life.

The questions also infer that the card (Plank) loses value now that is publicized that it's been cleaned. Did the Wagner lose value after it was publicized it's been trimmed? Again, probably not.

I agree with you about "too many other important things to worry about in life", and if we weren't discussing this card, I wouldn't give it much thought; however, with all respect, you can compare the trimmed Wagner and the chemicalized Plank in terms of their both being slabbed alterations of 'big' cards, but that's about it - the T206 Wagner is famous and has a long pedigree, including a book and a huge court debacle. All of that has apparently kept it's value steady. If it is sold again, we'll see if that holds.

The Plank has none of that going for it, although Eddie now gives the appearance that he's no longer embarrassed to be in a slab, and is ready to be on a slab instead.

If you really want to compare the two, and chemical-cleaning is going to be deemed okay, you would have to imagine that trimming is also okay, and doesn't have to be disclosed for PSA-slabbed cards. In such a world you would only have 'before' and 'after' scans. I would go for chemicals over that scenario.

[teetwoohsix]

I have a question for the memorabilia collectors here-hopefully some are reading this thread. Is it taboo to clean memorabilia? Bats with wood chips missing, is it ok to fill those in? Cleaning up a glove, or a ball? A seat from a stadium that no longer exists-if the paint is dull, is it ok to paint it back to it's original color, because it would "look" better? Or, do collectors of these items like the item to be left exactly how they received it?

Thanks in advance for any responses, I appreciate the input-

Sincerely, Clayton

[bn2cardz]

Originally Posted by E93

Some good questions would be:
1) If you purchased this card all cleaned up and later discovered the before scan on this forum, would you be pissed?
2)Would you want your money back?
3)Would the seller/auction house/TPG be obliged to give you your money back?

JimB

IF I was able to pay the money for a plank I think I would pay more for the clean one even after they disclosed it. I know I am in the minority (as shown by the above poll) but that is me. Also there isn't a single card in my collection currently that is cleaned to my knowledge, but I wouldn't have a problem with it if I found out one had been cleaned. I do have some that are trimmed, but I would never pay more for a card that is altered (in my mind altered is not the same as cleaned).

I just can't imagine ever being upset and thinking "DANG IT! I wish this card still had a coffee stain!"

[midwaylandscaping]

I don't buy restored comics.
I wouldn't buy a restored/ chemically aided card.

[Rollingstone206]

...