![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
View Poll Results: If I knew a card for sale had stains removed with chemicals | |||
The stain removal aspect WOULD influence my purchasing decision |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
121 | 57.08% |
The stain removal aspect WOULD NOT influence my purchasing decision |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
91 | 42.92% |
Voters: 212. You may not vote on this poll |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
![]() Last edited by WhenItWasAHobby; 04-01-2014 at 10:01 AM. Reason: Added photo |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
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.
__________________
$co++ Forre$+ Last edited by Runscott; 04-01-2014 at 10:10 AM. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
dr. frank's engaging argument regarding the terror of pyrolysis was a mind-changer for me.
best, barry |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
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 |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
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.
__________________
$co++ Forre$+ |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
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. |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Steve - I would love to read about the stamp alterations if you have a link to the story.
__________________
Tackling the Monster T206 = 213/524 HOFs = 13/76 SLers = 33/48 Horizontals = 6/6 ALWAYS looking for T206 with back damage. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Stamp shows are a bit different from card shows, there's the usual dealer tables, but the bigger shows have exhibits that are competitive. The exhibit is judged against a standard and the exhibitor can win various awards based on how well the topic is presented and how difficult it is to get the items. It's more complex than that but that's the short version. They're shown in frames that hold 16 - 8 1/2x11 pages. The Philatelic foundations exhibit at the international show was around 8-10 frames, maybe more with 3-4 items a page. Steve B |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
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.
__________________
My Collector Focus Page |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
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 |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
Net 54-- the discussion board where people resent discussions. ![]() My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/ |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
![]()
__________________
My Collector Focus Page |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Sincerely, Clayton |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
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 |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
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 |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
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 |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
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. |
#18
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
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.
|
#19
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
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.
__________________
$co++ Forre$+ |
#20
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
I think it would be okay to restore a stadium seat, but that's just my opinion. If it's something you're going to display in your home, some may want to restore it, some may want to keep is as it was. I think that's just a matter of personal preference. What about other types of memoribilia? I have some autographed mini-helmets (football and baseball), that reside on my bookshelves and they tend to get dust on them. I occasionally wipe them with down a damp cloth to remove the dust. I see nothing wrong wtih that. |
#22
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
As far as wiping down your mini-helmets, that sounds reasonable. Now, if you were using Windex.... ![]() ![]() Brian- I'm not sure on the Plank. There are many questions I would have-like, who sent it in to be cleaned, the consignor? The auction house? Combination of both? What was it cleaned with? Who cleaned it? Who submitted it? Was it disclosed (all information) to the winner? As far as the last question-if it were disclosed (all information) to the buyer, and he followed through, I guess the buyer would be ok with the card as is. It's mind boggling that with such a high profile card that they would go to those extremes for a .5 bump!! As far as value-of course varies, but I'm sure someone could look up what it sold for. I don't even know what auction house sold it. It is clearly chemically altered, and an altered card should not have the numerical grade-in my opinion. The scans are the proof. Sincerely, Clayton |
#23
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
I just can't imagine ever being upset and thinking "DANG IT! I wish this card still had a coffee stain!"
__________________
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bn2cardz/albums Last edited by bn2cardz; 04-04-2014 at 08:22 AM. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I don't buy restored comics.
I wouldn't buy a restored/ chemically aided card. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
...
Last edited by Rollingstone206; 10-10-2014 at 09:42 PM. |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Poll--- Do you smell your cards? | dog*dirt | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 56 | 03-17-2014 08:39 AM |
T206 F/S - New Cards added, those sold removed | Edwolf1963 | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 4 | 05-02-2011 09:02 PM |
buying buying buying regionals test issues and oddball | sflayank | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 08-17-2010 05:17 PM |
POLL: Buying/Selling/Trading | Archive | Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used | 28 | 01-25-2008 06:00 PM |
cards removed from scrapbook | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 15 | 07-01-2006 02:49 PM |