PWCC's 1936 Goudey World Wide Gum DiMaggio PSA 7

[botn]

Originally Posted by sterlingfox

Is it just me, or does the PSA 7 look like the reverse text is bleeding a bit? I find the reverse text on the SGC 4 to be significantly sharper.

Could just be a slightly out of focus scan... or just me

I had not looked that closely but you might be right however all the resident board experts know without a doubt that only distilled water was used to turn the Joe D into a 7 and distilled water would not cause the text to bleed.

[conor912]

That's one of the ugliest cards I've ever seen. Looks like a mugshot with a Yankees cap on.

[scotty21690]

Originally Posted by conor912

That's one of the ugliest cards I've ever seen. Looks like a mugshot with a Yankees cap on.

Still nicer than his 38' Goudey Heads Up, albeit not by much.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by scotty21690

Still nicer than his 38' Goudey Heads Up, albeit not by much.

Ha! I love that set. There's no accounting for taste

[Paul S]

Originally Posted by conor912

That's one of the ugliest cards I've ever seen. Looks like a mugshot with a Yankees cap on.

My thoughts as well. If I owned it I might say, "Here's my Dimag PSA 7". But I could never say, "Here's my Dimag PSA 7. Ain't it a beaut?".

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Paul S

My thoughts as well. If I owned it I might say, "Here's my Dimag PSA 7". But I could never say, "Here's my Dimag PSA 7. Ain't it a beaut?".

Right but if was a PSA 4 Diimaggio you can say its an excellent example for the grade and a candidate for a bump.

There are many collectors i know that for their personal collection they would rather have a prime '6' than a low '7' and would trade straight up by giving the higher grade card for the lower grade card depending on the card or at least giving a great deal on paper

[Paul S]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

Right but if was a PSA 4 Diimaggio you can say its an excellent example for the grade and a candidate for a bump.

There are many collectors i know that for their personal collection they would rather have a prime '6' than a low '7' and would trade straight up by giving the higher grade card for the lower grade card depending on the card or at least giving a great deal on paper

Wrong. Get your you's straight. I was commenting on Conor's remark (Hi Conor) that the image itself is a mugshot. Fugly foto no matter what the grade.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Paul S

Wrong. Get your you's straight. I was commenting on Conor's remark (Hi Conor) that the image itself is a mugshot. Fugly foto no matter what the grade.

Wrong, I think my you's were straight (agree to disagree), and am going with the same comment even after your comment to my comment about your comment about the comment

There are are many collectors i know that for their personal collection they would rather have a prime '6' than a low fugly foto '7' and would trade straight up by giving the higher grade card for the lower grade card depending on the card or at least giving a great deal on paper

[Stonepony]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

Wrong, I think my you's were straight (agree to disagree), and am going with the same comment even after your comment to my comment about your comment about the comment

There are are many collectors i know that for their personal collection they would rather have a prime '6' than a low fugly foto '7' and would trade straight up by giving the higher grade card for the lower grade card depending on the card or at least giving a great deal on paper

I tried to read this post twice, then headed for the Tylenol.

[Neal]

Does anyone know if Brent collects cards? Does he buy and sell?
Just curious

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by botn

however all the resident board experts know without a doubt that only distilled water was used to turn the Joe D into a 7

Show me one post where anybody said they know without a doubt that only distilled water was used. Just one post. Nobody can say that because nobody knows for certain.

Conversely, there are several posts where the resident board experts say there was more than just distilled waters used. I guess they were there and watched

[rats60]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Show me one post where anybody said they know without a doubt that only distilled water was used. Just one post. Nobody can say that because nobody knows for certain.

Conversely, there are several posts where the resident board experts say there was more than just distilled waters used. I guess they were there and watched

Or maybe they are experts on soaking cards and know what water only may remove.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by rats60

Or maybe they are experts on soaking cards and know what water only may remove.

yes...that!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Show me one post where anybody said they know without a doubt that only distilled water was used. Just one post. Nobody can say that because nobody knows for certain.

Conversely, there are several posts where the resident board experts say there was more than just distilled waters used. I guess they were there and watched

People can make reasonable inferences based on detailed before and after scans as well as their experience and knowledge. One doesn't need eyewitness testimony.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

People can make reasonable inferences based on detailed before and after scans as well as their experience and knowledge. One doesn't need eyewitness testimony.

Based on that experience and knowledge, what chemical(s) do you think were used?

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Based on that experience and knowledge, what chemical(s) do you think were used?

Yes wouldn't that be awesome. A list of chemicals and maybe detailed info on how to use them. That way we could have more idiots altering cards.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Yes wouldn't that be awesome. A list of chemicals and maybe detailed info on how to use them. That way we could have more idiots altering cards.

If you know what the discoloration is from that information is readily available on several websites.

Steve B

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by steve B

If you know what the discoloration is from that information is readily available on several websites.

Steve B

I understand that Steve. I just don't think it should be available because it is used to alter cards for the sole purpose to deceive someone to make extra $. I could give detailed instructions on how to counterfeit cards also but choose not to. I am sure you also know how easy that is.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Based on that experience and knowledge, what chemical(s) do you think were used?

I would think -- and this has been reinforced by people much more knowledgeable than myself -- bleach or some sort of caustic agent. I posted the contents of an email I had received early in the thread to this effect. Maybe there are newer and better methods, but I am just really skeptical that water alone could bring about that change. I mean on the SGC 50 detailed scan I posted, look at the contrast between the protected areas on the right side and the rest of the card.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

but I am just really skeptical that water alone could bring about that change.

If you search this forum, there are many threads about successful soaking with just water...and cards that were a lot worse than the Di Maggio. Here's one...

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...highlight=Soak

Check out post #10. Not only does the paper and glue come off, the glue stains come out as well. Watch the video. You'll notice that after the paper is removed, there are still glue stains on the card. I'm guessing he soaked it long enough to remove the glue stains as well.

[Peter_Spaeth]

To my eye the issue with the DiMaggio was toning, not staining, and my understanding which could be wrong is that water alone will not remove extensive toning.

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

People can make reasonable inferences based on detailed before and after scans as well as their experience and knowledge. One doesn't need eyewitness testimony.

Absolutely.

I do not believe this was water and I have a theory, but no proof. The only issue I have with this thing is presenting theory as fact. If this was all presented as a talking point without the thread decending into stating it was unequivobly true a few posts in without anything but a photo, it would be more palatable.

Not being political, but as a reference, this is somewhat like switching between Breitbart and Huffington Post...the truth is likely in the middle.