What are some good resources to learn about detecting fakes/reprints?

[drcy]

I know mold and know it's bad. I was just making a joke.

The post was about how to identify a reprint, and that's all I was addressing. The smell of mold is a sign a card isn't a recent reprint. Rust and corrosion on the back of a pin and foxing on a cabinet card are signs they are old.

I think conservation of baseball cards is a good topic to discuss, considering many don't like altering a card at all. Movie posters, etc are regularly restored, including deacidified for mold. Someone should write an article on this. A friend and Net54 is an expert on conservation of documents and knows a lot more about it (and the issues) than I do.

[david_l]

Originally Posted by drcy

The smell of mold is a sign a card isn't a recent reprint.

This will be my last post on the subject as I'm pretty sure I'm just beating a dead horse at this point. A musty smell (and god forbid, mold) is not a sign that a card is an original and I think one should be cautious in making such a statement for reasons that I've already pointed out.

I can buy one of those fake Wagner cards on the 'bay, leave it in my basement for a few months and it would have just as much of a musty smell as any vintage item in question. Heck, leave a reprint card in a damp area for a few years and see what happens. It's still not an original no matter how moldy or musty smelling it appears upon inspection. We're talking mold here not stalactites.

David Luft

[drcy]

I said it's a sign not proof, but will let the issue drop too. We've both made our points. If people wish to mentally cross off my sniff test, that's fine by me.

[david_l]

@ drcy

I always enjoy the opportunity to talk about preservation issues. Thanks for the conversation. Best of luck with all your collecting endeavors in the future!

[Leon]

Originally Posted by drcy

I said it's a sign not proof, but will let the issue drop too. We've both made our points. If people wish to mentally cross off my sniff test, that's fine by me.

For the record, I was one of the first adopters (*I am aware of) of the smell test. I still use it and everything else. A lot of times it's the whole picture that doesn't add up, not just one or two things. Knowledge is king. Thanks to you and the other David for the discussion. It probably helped some folks.

[steve B]

Back when I could still smell reliably, there were some smells that were good and some not so good as far as originality goes.

The smell of printing ink - Not good unless the item is rather new.
Mold- Not so good, as has already been covered.

There's a hard to describe "old paper" smell that's usually a good sign. I have a hard time smelling it now, unless I'm in a roomful of old paper. (And since it's a smell of a decomposition product, it's a mixed bag -not bad for original, not all that good for preservation.

Smells that shouldn't be there - Wax, Solvents, etc. usually point to problems. (For paper, I almost bought a bat that was cool, but had been cleaned with lemon pledge. Wasn't a factor in the decision, but it was a bit strange )


We really should have a thread on preservation/conservation. I've read a lot about the formal methods, and constantly have to balance those with the reality of being an average person living in a house from the 1880's.

Steve B