 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10
08-15-2020, 01:20 PM
|
||||
|
||||
So removing gum and wax stains with lighter fluid is a black-and-white non-alteration? I didn't think that was the industry consensus. Or only through distilled water soaking and it just happening to disappear on its own? Removing paint and ink (which would require bleaching) is also a non-alteration?
Not picking at you, sincerely confused. I realize that water-soluble glue (common in the scrapbooks of the pre-war era) disappears with a proper soaking and is not considered an alteration. But this adhesive that the OP seems to be talking about does not seem to be water soluble. That's why I was trying to determine the line.
__________________
-- PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head PSA: Regularly Get Cheated BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern SGC: Closed auto authentication business JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC Oh, what a difference a year makes. 
|
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| T205 DRUM vs HINDU....or, other tough front/back combos....let's talk T205's | tedzan | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 71 | 10-30-2022 04:33 AM |
| T205 O'Leary with back damage (well, it has parts of 4 cards on back?) | Leon | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 9 | 05-28-2017 04:49 PM |
| Why not a higher grade with a qualifier for tape on back? | Pat R | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 7 | 05-26-2012 04:52 PM |
| OT/ I hate magic tape, and cards in contact with tape | FrankWakefield | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 18 | 10-02-2009 05:16 PM |
| Tape on back of card???? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 11 | 10-29-2006 06:54 PM |
Threaded Mode