![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
And if you look and still can't see it you, you still can't take off for it.
I might even go as far as to say even IF they did see the before picture, it is STILL graded correctly today.
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
My guess is that this card has had significant chemical intervention, in which case it is not a "small small" matter as Brent suggests. I hope I am wrong.
And I will go further to say that if he is aware that the card was restored/altered to make a significant difference in its appearance and grade, he is withholding a material fact.
__________________
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/ Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 02-04-2017 at 09:02 AM. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Here we go again... nothing at all new here... card has been embellished...it is obvious to anyone with decent vision let alone the foremost grading company in the world. The card is over graded it has obvious remnants of what used to be there it is not a seven and should not be a seven. And it seems some people are now on PSA's payroll!!
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I don't think he meant you Leon. If he did, I withdraw my approval of that portion of the post.
Last edited by orly57; 02-04-2017 at 09:15 AM. |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I think it is great to share differing opinions.
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
I don't see how this can be good for the hobby. It has all the appearances of fraud and deception. Heck, even PSA can't figure it out. If someone was doing this to the cards I buy (early 70's PSA 9's), I would be disgusted. BTW, PSA pooffed the thread over there. Someone posted a really nice pair of photos showing both cards side by side. Can someone do that here within the thread? |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
And who said SGC cards wouldn't cross to PSA?
__________________
Check out my aging Sell/Trade Album on my Profile page HOF Type Collector + Philly A's, E/M/W cards, M101-6, Exhibits, Postcards, 30's Premiums & HOF Photos "Assembling an unfocused collection for nearly 50 years." |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
![]()
__________________
52 Topps cards. https://www.flickr.com/photos/144160280@N05/ http://www.net54baseball.com/album.php?albumid=922 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
As long as there are no long term effects to the card, I have no problem with it. And, until someone can prove it was more than just a soaking in water (which is acceptable in our hobby), then you're just making assumptions. That said, I do think the grade is a little generous. Looks more like a 6 to me.
Oh, and to blame PWCC for selling it just shows you have an axe to grind wirh Brent. |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I don't see anything wrong with soaking cards and other stuff out of scrapbooks and albums with water. I've done it myself many times, though not with anything expensive.
If it doesn't harm the card, and releases it from it's jail. No harm, no foul. THAT, is not a product of water restoration, distilled or otherwise. The first time, in the REA auction. Yes. No biggie. To bump it up to a (7)? You could soak an old piece of paper/cardboard with that much toning for days, and it wouldn't come out that clean......and even if it did, the paper would have soaked too much water into it's fibers for too long to recover to it's original state. Like stretching the rubber band in your underwear for too long. Just my opinion, but I think it's pretty "Cut & Dry" ![]() See what I did there? ![]() |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I have no idea, but to just throw out "significant chemical intervention" is a bit reckless in my view. Heck, who knows, maybe distilled water did it.
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
![]() |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Ok, got me there. But most collectors as you well know, in polls done on this board, have not had the same disdain for water as they have for anything else. And I agree with that sentiment.
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com |
#17
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
According to someone whose opinion I respect highly, the distilled water thing is wishful thinking.
"Your post about the card is essentially correct. It has undoubtedly been submerged in a caustic chemical such as bleach in order to remove the toning and obscure the lighter, untoned areas on the front and back. The type of chemical that has been added has altered the chemical composition of the card and will likely cause the fibers in the cardboard to degrade over time." This person also believes improvement was made to the corners, based on his close examination of the respective scans.
__________________
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/ |
#18
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Just as reckless as your other post. Who is the person? And I think your person is entirely wrong too.
Quote:
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com Last edited by Leon; 02-04-2017 at 09:33 AM. |
#19
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
If it will cause long-term deterioration of the card, this goes from a harmless fix, to a full-blown scam.
|
#20
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
.
__________________
Neal Successful transactions with Brian Dwyer, Peter Spaeth, raulus, ghostmarcelle, Howard Chasser, jewishcollector, Phil Garry, Don Hontz, JStottlemire, maj78, bcbgcbrcb, secondhandwatches, esehobmbre, Leon, Jetsfan, Brian Van Horn, MGHPro, DeanH, canofcorn, Zigger Zagger, conor912, RayBShotz, Jay Wolt, AConte, Halbig Vintage and many others https://www.youtube.com/@Coach_Neal Last edited by Neal; 02-09-2017 at 11:14 AM. Reason: . |
#21
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I would suspect that they would have to tag it as "altered" if they saw the transformation no? And a 7 with that centering is a stretch in my opinion. I just don't think that I or any of us get a 7 on that card if we sent it in. And why no qualifier on the stain? In this case, the whole card is stained except for the two light areas.
|
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
1936 Goudey Wide Pen R314 Joe DiMaggio Type 4 SGC 60 | luxurywines | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 1 | 11-02-2014 03:38 PM |
Does anyone here own a 1936 Joe Dimaggio World Wide Gum rookie? | Zone91 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 18 | 09-23-2014 05:13 PM |
1936 Goudey Wide Pen R314 Joe Dimaggio SGC 30 | majordanby | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 1 | 01-11-2011 08:25 PM |
1936 Goudey Wide Pen R314 Joe Dimaggio SGC 30 | majordanby | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 1 | 12-17-2010 04:38 PM |
DiMaggio Rookie - 107 1936 World Wide Gum Cards on eBay | Archive | Ebay, Auction and other Venues Announcement- B/S/T | 2 | 06-05-2007 01:06 PM |