Card Doctor haters please respond

[drcy]

Sentiments are sentiments.

But with a painting there is only one in existence and by design it's meant for display on the wall. A movie poster may not be unique, but it is also intended for display. I think display value is the number one reason whey it's more accepted.

Also, a painting is made up of a lot of materials that may deteriorate or change color with time. The varnish on old oil paintings turns brown and restoration often involves removing the brown varnish to reveal the original colors.

Also, irrelevant to desirability or acceptability, in all areas you have to disclose at sale when an item has been restored. My brother in law collected movie posters and, while he saw nothing unethical about restoration, he did say it effected value and you had to disclose any restoration. He said a Vg poster restored to Mint was worth more than a Vg poster, but worth less than a naturally Mint poster-- so you would get in trouble in the hobby if you didn't disclose restoration.

There's nothing illegal about trimming or recoloring a baseball card. It's knowingly not disclosing what was done at sale that is illegal. And, similar to movie posters, many altered baseball cards do have value.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by drcy

Sentiments are sentiments.

But with a painting there is only one in existence and by design it's meant for display on the wall. A movie poster may not be unique, but it is also intended for display. I think display value is the number one reason whey it's more accepted.

Also, a painting is made up of a lot of materials that may deteriorate or change color with time. The varnish on old oil paintings turns brown and restoration often involves removing the brown varnish to reveal the original colors.

Also, irrelevant to desirability or acceptability, in all areas you have to disclose at sale when an item has been restored. My brother in law collected movie posters and, while he saw nothing unethical about restoration, he did say it effected value and you had to disclose any restoration. He said a Vg poster restored to Mint was worth more than a Vg poster, but worth less than a naturally Mint poster-- so you would get in trouble in the hobby if you didn't disclose restoration.

There's nothing illegal about trimming or recoloring a baseball card. It's knowingly not disclosing what was done at sale that is illegal. And, similar to movie posters, many altered baseball cards do have value.

Understood. I was more responding to Barry regarding his statement that cards and coins value is based on condition, therefore restoration is frowned upon. That is not the case with movie posters.

You are correct that posters have display value, and thus the value of a restored poster would go up because it is more aesthetically pleasing. And your brother in law is absolutely correct regarding value and auction houses disclosing not just that a piece has been restored, but what restoration was done and what the condition of the piece was originally before restoration.

I guess I am a bit conflicted on the topic. On one hand, I get restoration means that a piece has been altered, but having collected movie paper for as long as I have, it doesn't bother me that much. And I only display a very small fraction of my collection of posters.

Tom C

[frankbmd]

Breaking News

[EvilKing00]

I can tell you having and origional classic car, imo, is better thsn a restored one

[bxb]

I wonder how many of our "original" high grade vintage cards are already touched up, but we can't tell and never will.

[packs]

As was said, there is only one painting and it is meant to be displayed. So I think we can all agree that a restored painting is going to be preferable to look at than a fading, hole ridden and unrecognizable work of art will be. The Last Supper is barely original. The rest has been repainted over centuries over and over again. Also everyone hated it when it was painted, so it was nearly bombed out during WWII. Do you want to look at what we have today or what it would look like on its own?

Cards are totally different. For the average vintage card, there will be thousands and maybe hundreds of thousands of them, each one more or less exactly the same as the last. So why would anyone prefer a faux, touched up version of a card that comes in such a large edition when you can get a real, original one any time you want?

[ksabet]

So it seems as though as long as it is disclosed people don't have a problem with restoration.


I may be in the minority but I think I would rather have a clean, bright restored Wagner with a AUTH next to it than a dirty wrinkled stained 1.5.

[Beastmode]

Originally Posted by bxb

I wonder how many of our "original" high grade vintage cards are already touched up, but we can't tell and never will.

I'm surprised there are so many posts of pre-war collectors stating that do not care if a card has been altered as long as it's slabbed and graded.

Between this thread and the other one, many posts have the opinion that altered pre-war cards carry the same value as long as they are undetectable and slabbed.

What happens when PSA or TPG's come up with the technology to determine if existing slabbed cards have been altered in any manner? That technology is coming, and it may not be the TPG's that do this. I think you'll care then if your pre-war cards have been altered.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I don't believe for a minute any of it is "undetectable." See Steve B's posts. There is a lot of wishful thinking and rationalization going on. Or complicity.

[1880nonsports]

he stated the graders often don't use any sort of equipment - relying on their visual inspection, visceral assessment, and "experience" to grade and "authenticate" a card. Some fairly detailed analysis in a couple of prior threads here that extrapolated between the number of submissions, the number of graders (quite a few of them having just graduated college and retaining the cartophilic experience of their chronological ages), and the number of hours in a week. Like the actual number of minutes actually played in a football game - it was less than the number of functioning fingers on a shop teachers hand.
Not an argument about grading companies as I'm sure to some degree there's a relationship between the number of submissions one receives and the number of (hopefully) qualified graders. At the end of the day each of the TPG's are a business and as such look to profits - likely the other major TPG's (SGC BVG) follow similar patterns - although the dreamer in me wishes that weren't the case. Cards don't go to "era" specialists and some issues are just obscure or have variables that require knowledge of the issue itself. I would guess that for the most part the same amount of time is spent on a second year Reggie Jackson as is spent on a higher tier card like the ones shown above - even if it was appreciably more - there are seemingly de facto limits to not only how far they CAN GO - but also how far they WANT to go.
Water. Mostly inert and used across the board by early collectors to excise treasured cardboard renderings from scrapbook prisons so they may enjoyed in their existing totality. I have never soaked a card to remove a stain nor have I ever asked anyone to do it. In fact I can't even think of a time I've ASKED anyone if my card has been soaked. I have asked about the condition of the back of a card which would naturally include excess paper as well as paper loss. I have soaked quite a few cards - prefer not to - as I'm a bit like the sorcerer's apprentice and pigpen rolled into one. From all I've read combined with my "on the road" experiences the use of water CURRENTLY reflects an accepted practice within the hobby. Rubbing off a careless tobacco remnant seems fine to me as well but I'm against anything else being done to a card. Soaking a card to remove stains slippery - to remove pen marks and such - not good. Using anything but water - not for me. I would call anyone who does any form of RESTORATION a card doctor.
My desire for the personal freedoms I believe people are entitled to unfortunately allows for a "card doctor" to offer their services and for people to seek them out. Hate that there are people who would abuse the process but this is how I view things on a core level.
It's likely that water does affect the fibers themselves found in card stock as well as affecting the subsequent reactions and resultant foxing or seepage of extraneous minute particles of dust and dander into and around such fibers. I'm old and I have handled quite a few 19th century cards that I could document which were soaked more than 50 years ago and others likely before that. Other than residual staining depending on the glue or absorbency exhibited by the paper itself - I can discern no differences to the structure or "essence" of those cards.
What needs to be considered are cards that have been entombed. I'm no scientist but the cases themselves are not inert and besides the cardstock itself there are inks of unknown origin. By themselves without the circulation of air I suggest over time there will be visual and/or discernable structural defects - and it seems plausible that water might exacerbate and accelerate such decline.
How long before that happens would be a pure guess but there has to be some degree of decline of any paper over time. We are only temporary keepers of these things we chose to preserve for whatever our motivation.
For me there lies the conflict - one I've resolved to align myself with the prevailing (and convenient) acceptance of soaking - without it I'd have few cards to chase - as I already have wantlists nearly 20 years old. There's a limit as to how far my responsibility to the future goes in terms of preserving a card - at least my cards won't be lost to the near future - in a small way I have rescued them by the simple act of soaking them in water. They would still exist - just wouldn't get the attention if even only for the aesthetics of a paper encrusted verso. I suppose at that point the TPG's and hobby would get together to determine the amount of paper needed to be retained for the best grade.
It seems most hobbyists are against any other kind of doctoring - at least in public - Mr. Towle obviously gets his "customers" from somewhere - it's all been discussed before - the people predisposed to perpetrate deception and fraud will go to him or someone else.
Final aside in my usual run-on-stream-of-consciousness diatribe would be a true story about someone I'm friends with who collects rare 19th century cards of all types - a bit OT - but linked a little just the same. Over the years he has systematically colored in the edges of many of his mayo cards and other cards with full-bleed dark borders. He has some in displays (including a baseball field montage) and prefers the way they look without the worn white edging. His anal nature will never let him relinquish them in his lifetime - other than perhaps Betty White and my wicked step-mother no one will live forever (I would have said Dick Clark but....). Just a head's up that it's ALWAYS buyer beware - the provenance of our cards most often lost to time - any number of ways and any number of reasons things may not be as they seem. Probably a main reason even with their failings - like a guy who can't fix his own car or computer - a significant number of people need someone else's help for whatever reason and the TPG's have the product the consumer wants - warts and all. Hopefully the voices of educated consumers will begin to demand more accountability and more diligent examination of their cards - although in the past - response to simpler issues like the holders themselves has been quite slow.......