Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>they protected the card from<br />a. fading, due to uv light<br />b. acidic air pollutants<br />c. accidental liquid exposure<br />d. relative humidity changes<br />e. tampering/crack outs<br />f. inconsistent grading (subjective = too lazy to clearly define all parameters with weighing factors for each) There are a finite number of factors, cut the bs already.<br />g. they did not support combustion, and they provided the card some protection in case of fire.<br /><br />This is not too much to ask. But what Im offered is a plastic holder which incorporates the following advantages:<br />a. you can see through it<br />b. The perception that you have something that has been accurately assessed in terms of condition (and hopefully legitimacy) which in turn gives it a perceived value which makes it easier to sell to someone that desires that partcular piece of cardboard.<br />c.<br /><br /><br />Edited to add: Oh wait, SGC's design looks nicer.

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>b. The perception that you have something that has been accurately assessed in terms of condition (and hopefully legitimacy) which in turn gives it a perceived value which makes it easier to sell to someone that desires that partcular piece of cardboard.<br /><br />

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>Gil, you don't like card grading?<br /><br />I had no idea.<br /><br />-Al

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>Well yes Al, you see, I prefer to maintain a low profile and shy away from controversial subjects, but in the case of slabbing, I think that there is room for product development.

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>MikeU</b><p>Even UV protected plastic can not prevent fading. This is a myth that that plastic can somehow prevent fading.

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>MikeU: can you offer an elaboration on that, I was under the impression that polycarbonate had uv filtration as one of its physical properties.<br /><br />

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>Perhaps there is UV rating for plastics. Maybe it's like an SPF rating for sunscreens. I for one wouldn't display my cards in an area where I'd be concerned about the affects of solar radiation.

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>Yes Judge, I believe there is a rating for different plastics. But we have a resident expert on this subject on the board, jmk59, who recently investigated the capabilities of the PSA slabs:<br /><br />I am Director of Quality for a company that makes personal safety equipment, inlcuding welding lenses. I have a very expensive piece of test equipment in our lab - a spectrophotometer - that we use to scan welding lenses to make sure that they are blocking all of the radiation that is harmful to the human eye. It scans the radiation spectrum from UV through visible and into the near IR ranges.<br /><br />I wondered if slabs would prevent fading too. Instead of finding out on one of my cards, I used a PSA slab that had once contained an E93 Donovan PSA 1. I break out PSA 1 cards automatically, and usually save the two halves.<br /><br />I had one of my Techs scan the Donovan slab, being careful to shoot it through the clear middle instead of the textured borders. <br /><br />It does not block UV. I don't remember - the actual scan and transmittance curve is in my desk drawer at work - but it allows transmittance of a substantial portion of the UV rays. I swear I will scan the scan (hee) and post it in the near future!<br /><br />Perhaps jmk can provide some insight on the uv filtration capability of polycarbonate and other options.

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>I guess we better hope that the plastic's transparency does not have to change when a protective property is added. <br /><br />It would be interesting, you could have a plastic protector that obscures the card. That would be great because then we could all rely on the label when we make our purchases and assign a value to the cards. It would make the SMR a more legitimate document rather than a price guide that we read when sitting on the toilet... that is until we opened the plastic protector and saw the botch job on the grading evaluation... then we'd all be able to create a thread that has a topic name of... "Look what PSA (insert grading card company name - I'll use PSA) did to me this time"...

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Scot Reader</b><p>I have often wondered if there was a market for a premium authentication/grading service that would protect baseball cards against the environmental hazards that Gil mentions. The question is, given the higher cost structure and attendent higher prices, whether such a service could do sufficient volume to turn a profit.

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>I am not plastics man, Judge, but I think that nothing has to be added to polycarbonate. It just has the property of naturally filtering out uv light. I sure could be wrong on this, but right now I think that Ive got it right.<br /><br />And Scot, all I am really asking for is to seal the holder air tight (and do so in a pollution free, controlled humidity environment). Yes there would be some costs for that, but I believe that it will happen eventually. Why not now?

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>DJ</b><p>I too am quite disappointed that the slabs do not protect the cards all that well in sun light. There have been many times that I have wanted to take them to the beach and simply knew that it wasn't a good idea. <br /><br />Either way, I have turned to accepting slabbing because I would simply put my cards in a holder anyway and these holders do the job. Gil, time for you to open up a grading card and I'm sure a large majority of us may follow with those incentives.<br /><br />DJ

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>DJ,<br /><br />Were you going to take the cards to the beach to pick up on chicks? What beach? I think I need to visit that beach!!! I bet some of us putz's could score big time... could you imagine (to steal a line from that wicked Jay Behren's guy)... "ya wanna see my Polar Bear Johnson?" <br /><br />edited to add: I think it was Jay that said that... maybe it was another board humorist like John D... In any case, it's a good line to use when trying to pick up chicks with baseball cards...

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>Id open on Monday if it was really feasible. Because Id like an honorable hobby. But to make it feasible, a financier would be necessary for start up, also an expert, like drc1 (actually there is no one like drc1, so it would have to be drc1). Then somebody who can do the slab manufacturing (you see? I have no real value).<br /><br />Then maybe Jay Behrens, as chairman of the complaint department. Anymore nominees?

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>I'd love to see a company use a true 100 point scale. have a 1-20 scale for for corners, register, gloss, edges and centering. Total the 5 areas up, and you have a score from 4-100. Makes a lot more sense than any of the current systems.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>A good friend will come bail you out of jail. A true friend will be sitting next to you saying, "Damn, that was fun."

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>Nah Jay, it would never work because it is too simple and it makes far too much sense.

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>joey</b><p>I really enjoy PSA slabs for my t206s due to the higher resale value (not that I will ever sell mine), but I wish they would consider putting the back brand on the front as SGC does and list name and type on top of the slab as GAI does.

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Larry</b><p>UV protectors in plastics of any type would make the appearence of the plastic amber or "toned"...clear plastic does not deflect UV rays...I am sure since we have same problems with acylic clears vs. pigmented products..in the paint world!<br /><br />I do not recommend tanning with baseball cards !

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Frank Wakefield</b><p>There is a thin film, like plastic, that blocks UV considerably. It is sold in curved strips that fit over flourescent light tubes. I would think that grading companies could use their same silly little hard plastic cases, but use this film to hold the card inside. The film isn't perfectly transparent, so folks would whine about it. I wouldn't whine, I'd be busting the little guys outa there anyway.

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>joey</b><p>Larry,<br /><br />What if I use something with an SPF 35 or higher on them? Would it be ok then? My cards like to go to the tanning bed with all the good looking girls that are there.

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>David Vargha</b><p><i>Nah Jay, it would never work because it is too simple and it makes far too much sense.</i><br /><br /><font color=blue>Oh yeah, 97 subjective grading levels would really simplify things. "This is bullcrap! PSA gave my 1982 SNL's Greatest Players Chico Escuela a 42. I have 51's that don't look as nice. This was a 56 if ever I've seen one!"</font><br /><br><br>DavidVargha@hotmail.com

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>I'm not sure that these suggestions make much practical business sense, and I'm not sure that if they were implemented, they'd win over the anti-grading crowd anyway.<br /><br />David's right. People spend enough time debating the differences between a 2 and a 3. Can you imagine the nightmares over arguing the merits of a 67 vs. a 65? <br /><br />There are always going to be people who choose not to embrace the concept of grading. That's fine; I understand many of the sentiments. But the fact remains that grading services have encapsulated millions of cards, and will continue to grow. They've got to be doing SOMETHING right.<br /><br />Gil, what you're asking in your first post IS too much to ask. Even if a grading company went through the enormous amounts of R&D money that would be required to retool all their molds and use a plastic that would make their slabs A) impervious to UV light, B) impervious to acidic air pollutants, C) watertight, D) immune to changes in outside atmospheric conditions, and E) impossible to be cracked out, can you imagine the liability issues? Let's say SGC made such a thing, and you put your T206 Wagner in it, and then put it in a display case on your front lawn. What happens it the card fades a little? Or if, for a goof, you toss it in the ocean, only to find that it wasn't properly sealed due to human error, and now your Wagner is ruined? <br /><br />I can't even imagine what it would take to find out whether your slab is impervious to acidic air pollutants. To me, it sounds like you'd have to find out the chemical composition of the air in all different parts of the country and all different altitudes. Then you'd have to actually MAKE some slabs, and slab every type of baseball card there is, using every type of ink and every type of paper. Then you'd have to come up with some way to do accelerated life testing using all the paper/ink combos and all the chemical/altitude combos, and artificially age the slabs - how long? 100 years? 200?<br /><br />Plus, I could just hear the comments. "These people expect me to pay $275 to have my 1960 Don Mossi card protected from the sunlight? I've got ALL my Don Mossi cards in a shoebox in my basement! What do I care from sun?! Plus, when they're in those space-age, alloy tombs, you can't smell them!"<br /><br />These companies are CARD GRADING COMPANIES, not defense contractors. Their job is to make an assessment of authenticity and condition, and then encapsulate the card in such a way that it is reasonably well-protected from tampering. They do that nicely. Sure, they make mistakes sometimes, but so do I. <br /><br />-Al<br /><br />

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>Clear polycarb naturally blocks substantial amounts of UV without any off-clear toning or additives needed. To the extent that fading is strictly related to UV exposure, use of PC for slabs would at least help, and maybe all but resolve, many fading issues.<br /><br />Polycarb has some pretty distinct properties in addition to blocking UV. One, you can't kill it. That's why they make safety glasses out of it. However, PC also scratches like nobody's business. It's one of the big drawbacks and would definitely be a negative for slabs. You can add a hardcoat for some scratch protection, but that would probably add to cost.<br /><br />The other thing is that I don't know how well, if at all, PC can be sonic-welded. I'm pretty sure that's how at least PSA is sealing their slabs. I've never tried to sonic-weld anything PC, but if it is difficult that has to be a consideration too.<br /><br />Joann

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>Al: you raise many issues, all directed at the impracticality of my proposal. Lets investigate one for example:<br />"I can't even imagine what it would take to find out whether your slab is impervious to acidic air pollutants. To me, it sounds like you'd have to find out the chemical composition of the air in all different parts of the country and all different altitudes. Then you'd have to actually MAKE some slabs, and slab every type of baseball card there is, using every type of ink and every type of paper. Then you'd have to come up with some way to do accelerated life testing using all the paper/ink combos and all the chemical/altitude combos, and artificially age the slabs - how long? 100 years? 200"?<br /><br />Perhaps I was unclear, Al. I do not care whether the slab itself is affected by air pollution, because the affects of pollution on plastic are typically considered to not be severe.<br /><br />I care about the card, which is far more susceptible than the plastic; is protected from air pollutants. To achieve this, I recommend controlling the air which goes into the air tight slab with the card. This air ideally would also be adjusted for relative humidity to assure the optimum conditions exist in the air tight holder for long term storage.<br /><br />And in regard to enormous amounts of R&D money - what? to create an air tight container?<br /><br />And the confusion regarding the difference between a 65 and 67 - the coin hobby has enjoyed this level of accuracy for years now.<br /><br />Now Im not sure that I would buy the slab product which I described above, but Im certainly not buying what is currently offered.<br /><br />Plus what has been outlined in the suggestion above is incomplete. I would want the holder to be flame resistent (i.e. would not burn), have a melting point above the card's kindling point (~400F), and provide good thermal insulation for the card.<br /><br />Edited to add: Certainly there are costs associated with the proposed change in holdering. But if embraced by the collecting community, there are significant potential profits too. Reslabbing everything they have done so far is one potential profit center.

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>There is never going to be a perfect grading system, but at least if you had a true 100 point scale and the report card that came with it, you can get a better handle on why a card got the grade it did. It also helps to make distinctions among lower grade cards, which isn't done now.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>Jay,<br /><br />Your idea of a report card would also provide some accountability to the grader. If there looked to be something off, for better or worse, a grader couldn't point to something else and claim after the fact that it was an offsetting consideration. All items considered would be documented at the time of grading, so if something were missed it would be easier to convince someone later that it was genuinely missed, not just balanced against something different.<br /><br />J

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Jay, your 100 point plan won't be implemented anytime soon for the same reason we won't see UV protected slabs: they cost too much in terms of time and money. The slabs are made as relatively cheaply as possible and cards able to be graded as quickly as possible so that the grading companies can make as much cash as possible. How hard would it be to make a slab that is waterproof and airproof? Can't be that hard-just costs too much. Sad, but true.

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>MikeU</b><p>Gil, <br /><br />Here is one link to a decent article with testing of differnt UV filters to slow fading of valuable or historical items. From this, you can infer that the public as a whole could have a bit of a false sense of security regarding the preservation or protection of their items with so called UV protected materials. No item is 100% UV protected. Because of this, any extended exposure, even with 98% protection will cause fading. Protected items do look better for a short period of time e.g. 6-18 months. Longer than that, there really is not visiable difference between a protected/filtered or a non-filtered item. <br /><br /><br /><a href="http://www.cr.nps.gov/hps/TPS/technotes/PTN30/Print_Version.htm" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.cr.nps.gov/hps/TPS/technotes/PTN30/Print_Version.htm</a><br />

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>Thank you Mike. Based largely on this information, but coupled with other inputs; my understanding on the potential for card fading is that it can be reduced by holder materials which contain either natural or additive filters for ultraviolet light. However, it is recognized that no filtering medium is 100% effective (so even with the best holder possible, it is unwise to leave your slabs poolside for weeks at a time). Also, the potential exists that fading of some cards, or maybe all cards, can be affected by visible light. However, since it is visible light that allows you to see things, any reduction in visible light will make your cards more difficult to see.<br /><br />There is no deterioration in the effectiveness of holders with UV filtering attributable to time or use.<br /><br />Do I have this right? Is there anything which you would like to add?

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>OK. I'm about ready to sacrifice a very low end card or two to try this UV thing out. <br /><br />This is what I think: UV protection, whether natural or via additive, will help prevent fading although not completely bar it forever. I've found this to be true even in hard hats. I will occasionally put a few on the roof of the shop to see how they respond with and without the UV additive (they are not PC, so we use additive). Those without will start noticeably fading within about 3-4 days, and fade almost completely within a month or two on the roof. Those with protectant will maintain near-normal color for months, but if you leave them up there long enough you will start to notice slight degradation. So no, UV protectants aren't bullet proof forever. <br /><br />As to cards, if I had UV protectant storage (even if toploaders could have it - not just slabs) I would look at it as providing protection from fading in incidental and normal daylight, but not if I leave them sitting out in the sun for weeks - or even days - on end. So it would help keep them nice in normal use, display, showing off, etc, but not if I'm a moron and leave them in the back yard for a week.<br /><br />We have a UV accelerator in the lab. It's kind of like a tanning bed for flat panels of material. I'm going to take a few shiny cards and put them in there. I'll put one in what's left of a PSA slab, one in a regular toploader, and one between two pieces of clear 4x5 Polycarb safety plate. The UV chamber accelerates the effect of daylight. I'll see what happens and how much UV protectant can really help.<br /><br />Because as to the normal kitchen counter, desk top, etc incidental daylight exposure, UV protectant slabs or toploaders would be awesome.<br /><br />Joann

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>edacra</b><p>I believe the most important aspect of picking materials for preseravtion is that they are acid free. The slabs really should provide museum quality protection, and UV would be a nice premium for that piece of mind - but the most important thing in preventing fading is wether or not the materials touching your cardboard are actually acid free.

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>PC</b><p>I do not think that the 100 point system, with 20 point subgrades/ranges, would clear up the confusion. As an example, if an otherwise perfect card has a hole in it, and received a zero for the 20 points assigned to "surface" (or whatever), it would grade out as an 80. Would that card be as nice as other 80s? Probably not as nice as a card that got 16 out of 20 in all five categories.<br /><br />Becketts has, and the old SCD had, subgrades which I think are helpful, but Becketts will not assign an overall grade more than one level (or is that half a level?) higher than the lowest subgrade. That system works well for the "hole in the card" example, but it does not work as well for very minor defects.

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Using your hole in the card example, you would not score a 20 on gloss either as there would loss where the hole is. If the damage goes to the edge, then the edge score gets hammered to.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>MikeU</b><p>"There is no deterioration in the effectiveness of holders with UV filtering attributable to time or use.<br /><br />Do I have this right? Is there anything which you would like to add?"<br /><br />Gil, <br /><br />That is correct. However, keep in mind that after a period of time e.g. 1 year or so, the difference in damage between a unprotected object and an object with UV protection is negligable. The UV filtering did not change, it is just that enough UV light passes through over time to cause the same amount of damage as an item with zero protection. <br />

Slabs would be more attractive to me if
 

Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>I will soften my position on this subject a bit: there are legitimate applications for holders exactly as they are currently manufactured. But it is also true that there are colleagues who are walking the halls of Net54 and elsewhere with 4 figure (and greater) cards in their pockets. IMHO these cards deserve the protection that current technology can provide. Not some rinky dink slab that your pet tabby can open and gnaw up the card on you.<br /><br />Sheesh guys what are you doing? Do you insure the card from loss in the mail? Well ...<br /><br />Edited to add: Joann: you may wish to consider cutting a single card into three test sections, thereby negating potential between card differences and minimizing costs.