I thought you understood that I was using a hypothetical, not that I was countenancing the use of hydrogen peroxide on a tobacco card. I have no idea what the interaction would be -- and severe damage or bleaching may certainly result.

I take no offense, and I don't mind the fun, but I do think it is critical to get at the heart of what people expect from their 100+ year old cardboard.

I did understand, but you definitely should have an idea as to what the interaction would be; if not, then it's hard to take you seriously when you are talking about chemicals and their effects.

What chemical is being used that has the exact same properties of water? Did I miss something in this thread? :confused:

For me the line is easy the day a glass of tap water can make stains like these disappear, and the day items like this are sold with disclosure about the cleaning undergone be sure to let me know.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=132902

Otherwise you are doing something to alter the appearance of the card found and therefore increasing its value with secrecy which to me is not on the up and up. Also if our hobby was so excepting of this it would be disclosed all the time hmmm I wonder why it's never mentioned in auction write ups?

Just because one may spread icing on a turd doesn’t make it chocolate cake in my book regardless if I can taste the difference or not. :)

Cheers,

John

Just because one may spread icing on a turd doesn’t make it chocolate cake in my book regardless if I can taste the difference or not. :)

Cheers,

John[/QUOTE]

Please do not try this at home! Or anywhere....

Please do not try this at home! Or anywhere....[/QUOTE]

There goes my Net54 cookbook deal...

This is perfect. How does what you said here apply differently when water is used:

Actually, I am pretty sure you got sidetracked by the actual effects of H202 on a piece of cardboard, which is wholly irrelevant to what anyone was saying in this thread.

Towle
 

H2O2 = hydrogen peroxide
H2O = water

Paul read my post...and look at the link. Let me know when tap water makes major stains on a T206 Plank go away.

Not relevant to what I am saying, but thanks anyway. Answer my question first.

You need to give it up. I wasn't the one who incorrectly compared water to hydrogen peroxide. Go take 30 hours of chemistry, then come back and we can continue this discussion.

Okay, where were we?

I need to give what up, exactly? Show me where I said that water and hydrogen peroxide would have the same effect on a T206 card?

What is your first name?

This conversation is over, but if we are going to talk in the future, I would prefer to be able to address you by your name. Thanks, Scott

Wonka,

Are you saying you have cleaned some of your cards with warm H20 in the past and had no issues?

Does not seem right that you are ok with removing stains with water regardless of how much or little of the stain "you think" will be removed... You can not possibly know how much stain would be removed until you are done.

I can recall over the years people posting about (how can I clean) my card and then posting the results as they turned out - then people say great job etc.... I can recall things like distilled water, drop of dawn, wrap in paper towel place in book etc... I do not recall people flipping out about it - instead handing out Kudos....?

Sorry, Paul M. is my name. I thought you knew that. You and I have exchanged several personal emails over the years -- at least five times between 2005 and 2012.

Paul I have stated an answered your question about ten times in this thread perhaps indirectly sorry.

Soaking a card in water doesn’t clean cards to the extent of the example posted above. This is what some of us myself included have issues with in terms of chemicals and solvents used by Dick. Soaking some OJ’s from a scrap book like Jay did with the Cambridge collection still leaves cards that have flaws and would grade likewise. They just won’t be attached too old nasty 8.5x 11 sheets of paper anymore.

However having chemicals applied to remove any trace of residue or brighten a card beyond its dingy dirty state without some sort of disclosure like the example above is not on the up and up. Hence why it’s not mentioned and hidden 99% of the time. This exactly what Paragon did in my example above no mention in print about the cleaning. Once caught hand deep in the cookie jar they quickly changed the online description. Does this seem like something folks do since everyone is so open to this in our hobby and its so harmless and accepted?

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...ages/plank.jpg

So now that I have outlined my simple position once again. Please help me understand how tap water was used to remove the stains from the card above? Or what harmless water like substance was used and why it wasn’t disclosed since it's harmless?

Don't know why this harmless no worse than water cleaning of Plank wasn't disclosed in the write up I'll give you a hint.... :)

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...ding-money.jpg

Cheers,

John

John,

Respectfully, I think your argument boils down to "If water would remove the stain, then it is okay to use and it is not deceptive to hide disclosure." Did I get that correctly? For what it's worth, I agree with this statement.

But, if you are also saying "I would only use water to remove the stain even if a chemical would have the same impact as water would" then I just don't know why you would draw the line at the chemical, as opposed to the impact on the card. To me the impact on the card is paramount, and I do not know how I would ever determine whether water or a chemical would have dissimilar effects on the same stain.

I am not trying to be obtuse here.

Paul M.

I have never cleaned a card. About all I have ever done in terms of using water is to remove some non-sports actress cards from scrap book pages so they can fit into sheets and done this about twice in my life and only recently. In fact I bought a non-sports card from Jay recently and had him soak it off the Cambridge collection page as I was to afraid to try it. :)

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...bsize/Seal.jpg

You can still clearly make out where it was once glued..."gone with the stain" far from it....

Cheers,

John

Added to the "Value" definitely....

99% there Paul, I would expect disclosure if one used any method to remove stains and or clean up a card. If disclosure was made and it was only water.... I guess it would boil down to how much I trusted the person selling me the item and how much I needed that item. Does that make sense?

Cheers,

John

My apologies, Paul - I recognized your handle and knew that I should remember who you were.

Scott my real name in case you forgot...

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/F_8RH2hiqMQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

How could you ever forget a name like that... :) That's better than shorty....

Whew. I thought it was LongJohn von WonkaDonka

Yes, okay. I think disclosure is unrealistic even in the water context because of the profit issue. Also, I think disclosure of water is unfair given how many of our forefathers practiced ritual T206 soakings. I believe many of my SGC 60+ T206 cards have spent some time in the bath, which is why they remain so fresh. And, finally, I think a chemical which leaves the card in the same state as water does is just fine with me.

I think I've now beaten my dead horse enough, but at least I feel better having talked it through.

:D

My mom always cleaned my cards with this. :D:D:D

http://photos.imageevent.com/rgold/ebay/image_8.jpg

Agree depending on folks to come clean wink wink is not going to happen.

However if I bought a 20k card from you and got before images down the road from someone else, and they said you know Paul bought that card like this and then worked some magic on it. To find out you sold it to me with no mention of the cleaning water/chemical whatever it would be the last transaction I would do with you.

To me if this is so innocent and harmless why would anyone choose to omit.

Cheers,

John

That's a question I have avoided (should you disclose soaking?). I personally don't think it's necessary, given the affect of water on cards; however, I do respect the opinions of collectors who don't want a soaked card. If I was selling or trading a card that I knew had been soaked, to someone who either asked that question, or who I knew was adamantly anti-soak, then I would certainly disclose it. I rarely soak cards anymore (and don't own any as far as I know), so it probably will never be an issue. If I were to obtain "a lot" of cards that needed to be soaked, then I probably would put a line in every sale page, mentioning that all the cards in the current group being sold, had been soaked from an album.

As you have mentioned, water doesn't remove everything - I have never had it completely remove a stain, or even have much impact on a stain; however, it does take off old tobacco, most dirt, and paper affixed by water-based glue. And I think that's good.

As an aside, I have a few great baseball albumen images with horribly disfigured mounts - I'm looking for similar mounts in better condition with uninteresting pictures and plan to do a transplant.

I would disclose the transplant when sold.

+1

I once heard about this secret mud that would be dug from a river bank by umpires and they would rub onto baseball cards as a protective coating... I have nothing to back this up though...

Ron, I guess it beats the other brand.... :D

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...9617958519.jpg

I found these instruction for using Hydrogen Peroxide, and thought I would share.

http://rocketbelts.americanrocketman...DE_WARNING.gif

Also note - if you are using this product to clean vintage baseball cards, please be sure to remove one Oxygen molecule for each two Hydrogens. If you get confused and instead accidentally remove one Hydrogen for each Oxygen, the result will be Hydroperoxyl, which is responsible for the destruction of ozone in the stratosphere. Don't get confused and end up accidentally destroying ozone in the stratosphere.

addressing a single issue
 

it's so much a personal call as to where the line gets drawn. The "hobby" seems most accepting of soaking - the rest not so much.

It's not OK to do anything to a card.
It's OK to soak a card in water to remove it from something.
It's OK to soak a card in another solution to accomplish the task.
It's OK to soak a card in water to remove surface glue or paper remains.
It's OK to soak a card in another solution to do the same thing.
It's OK to soak a card in water to remove a stain.
It's OK to soak a card in another solution that will do the same thing.

Water contains "chemicals". Water can also leave a stain and react with inks and fibers. How it will impact the future of the card is unknown but everything degrades with time. Without soaking most cards would still be in albums. Some people might think that isn't a bad thing. We are temporary keepers of this "stuff". I try and leave everything as I found it unless it's rapidly degrading or the problem is such that it prevents my enjoyment of the aesthetic elements. Everything degrades over time - I'm on "the back nine" and showing some stains myself but I wouldn't want to wittingly be the root cause of accelerating the decline of myself or stuff. I have soaked cards in distilled water and that's about as far as I am comfortable going. I haven't seen evidence 20 years later that the few cards I still have from then are any different. I have restored/conserved 2/3 posters and a tin sign. Restoration of such items is accepted and often encouraged - cards not so much.....
While the issues surrounding disclosure are thought provoking (personal responsibility) as are the "if you can't see it how do you know it's there?" arguements - I assume most of my cards have been soaked in some solution and rely on my experience to foster the self preserving belief that nearly all are unaltered otherwise. I'm fine with that.
Mostly these days I find myself grappling with the issues of personal freedom and the moral and ethical implications of making something available in the marketplace that likely will be used in a deceptive manner (recent threads on flips and empty slabs comes to mind). I have to rely on my core belief that there's no reason Dick can't offer such a service that enables others to enjoy their cards in whatever form and condition they want? I have a friend who is a board member here. He collects early base ball and he loves his cards. He took a marker and colored all the edges of his Mayo's becuse he liked the uniformity. It kills me - but they're his cards. That others have and likely will continue to use the service and not disclose what was done to enhance a particular card is troublesome but out of our control. I can only be responsible for myself and that's enough of a struggle.
I like that DT has come here (albeit with an expected outcome that he will do more business) and explained his position. Like the subject of TPG this is a divisive topic. I appreciate when threads like this come up as it helps me to define and redefine how I feel........

I may be repeating something already said, but water is a chemical. It's also the most widely used solvent there is. If you look up water in a chemistry book it will tell you water is called the universal solvent because more substances dissolve in water than in any other chemical. So to say I would never soak my card in a chemical, but soaking a card off a page in water is ok, is a contradiction. Your just taking a less aggressive approach.

So if we drop the semantics, as I'm sure you've never referred to drinking a glass of water as 'drinking a glass of chemicals', so you do realize that water and [other] chemicals are generally, using the English language, typically differentiated in conversation...your point is that water is less aggressive than chemicals?

Okay, Thanks.

+1, or at least hypocritical. To focus on the solvent (water or otherwise) as opposed to the impact on the collectible, is misguided, in my view.

+2

Scott,

I actually agree with his stance on water being the universal solvent. Having said that, I understand that water is delivered (or collected, plumbed, etc.) differently by people, depending where they are. This likely presents in a fashion most varied when discussing "tap" water.

It appears that you know more about chemistry than some of us. Please explain why the "chemical" water I drink when in Philadelphia is different than the distilled water I buy at the grocery store.

I truly do respect you (and always have) and sincerely want your opinion on this.

Best regards,

Eric

Sure thing guys, what type of plain old water removes these stains again and makes whites pop like an oxy clean ad? :rolleyes: :)

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...huge/plank.jpg

Sure I guess one could say a pocket knife is a self defense weapon...but I don't think it would be hypocritical stance to say a gun has a bit more punch compared to grandpa's Swiss Army with a can opener. To me that's difference here from a little water to Billy Mays Towle.

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...mimages/i2.jpg

P.S. Eric maybe it is our Philadelphia water. :)

I agree with this statement.

I don't think of water as a chemical. I think of substances that are synthesized for particular purposes as chemicals. But whatever. Who wants to defend Towle's removal of wrinkles, any takers?

John,

Philly water drawn from the Schuylkill may very well be the most toxic substance on the planet.

Soaking anything in Schuylkill Punch is a bad idea. And not disclosing such a soak should be downright criminal.

Best regards,

Eric

Gone with the stain. Dick Towle
 

Soaking a card from a notebook, to me is the same as removing a card from a GIA slab. I'm simply freeing it from a holder. One requires a hammer the other water. I'm not in any way trying to improve the card other then removing it from the page/remove the page from it. Is that hypocritical?

My issue is using a man made, specially designed chemical to remove stains, residue and make whites pop. Pressing corners/wrinkles & trimming arealso meant to deceive that a card has survived in a much nicer condition then it truly has.

Edited. I've tried it once, just to see what happens.

Vid http://youtu.be/y1QFe7T8zK8

Peter,

I will not bite on defending Dick. However, I will say that water is a chemical...with a pH very close to 7. Whatever solution he uses is close to that, chemically.

Best,

Eric

I was away for several hours or would have addressed this earlier. You are not only correct Scott, you didn't go far enough on the name issue. The litmus test I use, besides the easy rule at the top of every page, is "if someone said that to me, or in response to me, would I want to know who they are?" If the answer is yes (and I almost always want to know), then the FULL name needs to be in the post, thread or easily obtainable from that thread. This is the same rule for the last 10 yrs so it's not new news. And in that respect Paul is Pau.l Mif.sud .....thanks everyone....

Good point, I'm actually a little surprised how laid back folks are about Dick's work. Like the Plank above wouldn't bother anyone? Just me? We all know that wasn't water that did that...let alone Dick's comment on taking out wrinkles. Seems more like folks are into splitting hairs or arguing semantics on what a chemical is vs. addressing the fact that this is used to profit and done under secrecy.

Even funnier over the years there have been countless threads posting dirty items from eBay or previous auctions selling in new auctions all cleaned up etc. I don’t seem to remember the “no big deal” vibe from those threads. :)

Cheers,

John

NM

PSA doesn't like chemicals either. even if they can't detect them.

N-7 Evidence of Cleaning - When a whitener is used to whiten borders or a solution is used to remove wax, candy, gum or tobacco stains.

Nice video....I have done that many times. One of the times I remember distinctly was from an original find that I called the Trucker Boy Find. Long story but it was a west coast collection...this card had paper similar to that card in the youtube video, over about 20% of the upper back.

http://luckeycards.com/pt2123weaver.jpg

I guess I just don't see the act as different.

Some kid puts a card in a notebook with water based glue 100 years ago to display it, and somewhat to protect it.

I have SGC glue two pieces of plastic around my cards for the same reasons.

Removing them, to me is not trying to deceive anyone.

I feel so ...exposed!

:eek:

Peter, you are so weird. I drink a quart of chemicals every morning when I get up. Get with the program.

I mix a little hydrogen peroxide with mine. Those extra atoms rev me up.

Well-said, John. Earlier today I didn't mind debating the differences between water and chemicals, because I was bored and not inclined to work. Now I'm relaxed and that conversation seems incredibly stupid.

Calling something "chemical" in the purely scientific sense is meaningless in normal conversation. Can anyone name any substance or solution that isnt chemical? Of course water is chemical. So is air. So is everything else. When you get down to it, the sun is LESS likely to rise in the eastern sky tomorrow than for us to find a substance or solution that isnt chemical.

Eric, yes I do know a lot more about chemistry than some of the people posting in this thread. That doesn't mean I know much :)

I took 3 chemistry classes in high school, and 8 in college. I am not a chemist. My daughter ran some tests on tap water in Atlanta and told me that it was unfit to drink. The tap water in Seattle is incredibly drinkable. I also know that the bottled water you buy in the store is often no more pure than your local tap water, but I have no idea what you are drinking in Philadelphia.

Personally, I drink tap water unless it tastes bad or someone tells me it is unsafe. I don't like the taste of 'soft' water.

That's all I know, and water doesn't interest me enough for me to do additional research. Oh yeah, it has one less 'H' than Hydrogen Peroxide, and that makes a really big difference if you are debating on which one to drink.

You make some good points - points that shouldn't be necessary, but in the spirit of debate, are winners. But in the end, as ridiculous as this tangent might be, we still have to thank Leon for allowing this thread to continue, because it has certainly yielded a lot of entertainment today.

Can anyone disagree with that?

I agree they are not for it....unless Paragon submits a Plank on a $5 bulk submission. :D

eric
 

this is as far as I've gotten in the thread - but I wanted to suggest for your longevity that distilled water is not a source of water to sustain your life - as everything has been removed........

I think he meant 'bottled water', but I'm just guessing.

(This thread has it all)

Water has the chemical formula H2O. What comes out of the tap has a variety of other molecules in it. Most common will be elements such a calcium and magnesium which stain your bathtub and sink fixtures. There are also a number of other chemicals that haven't been completely filtered out at the water plant. When water is distilled it is evaporated and condensed to remove other products which don't have the same boiling point. The distillation process and the number of distillations will determine how pure the water is.

Water is a chemical and a solvent like other solvents. They all behave differently. Water can be extremely dangerous and reactive in certain situations.

As I mentioned before, the process of soaking in water or soaking in Towle solution is detectable. It might be cost prohibitive for the grading companies to detect it, but it is detectable.

This is a joke right?

The question is whether or not it matters. How detectable is water? How much does it change the item? Ask the same questions about Dick's chemicals. Drinking water is not going to kill you, but I'm guessing that drinking Dick's solution might make you a little sick. But maybe it's just like water - that's what some here would have us believe.

Common sense tells most of us that water is well, sort of safe. It washes stuff off, wood is basically made of water, and paper is made from wood, etc., etc. But let's not let common sense confuse the issue. After all, water is a chemical.

No, it's a fact. Distilled water has most of the minerals removed, and we need minerals in order to survive. You can drink distilled water, but why would you pay more to drink water that is less healthy?

Water is a chemical. Bleach is a chemical. Therefore water is bleach. Or, at least, there is no difference between soaking a card in water and bleaching a card. QED.

FWIW, water is not really a chemical, it's an compound - a combination of two or more elements (hydrogen and oxygen).

Shit just got real!

I have said for a while that I believe a lot of high grade cards were soaked from albums. Who cares? In a perfect world this stuff should be disclosed, but it rarely is. To me, right or wrong, it is just a part of the hobby.

Yo yo Mr. White
 

Note to auction houses and sellers, feel free to clean up cards with solvents and chemicals no need to disclose to collectors as long as nobody can tell. Sell away...

But god help you if you get your chemistry notes wrong. :D

It's like a Breaking Bad episode up in here. :)

Cheers,

John

I learned a lot, and was reminded of a lot, in 'Breaking Bad'. Great great show.

One of the best ever!

Alex, I've noticed a couple of forum members stating this. I'm sure this is part of it, but I really think that most of the high-grade slabbed cards were simply larger cards that were trimmed. Soaking card from albums, from my experience, doesn't generally create a 'perfect' card. Most album cards do not have sharp corners, and when soaked, usually still have imperfections that occurred as a result of being glued to an album page.

That is entirely possible. However, I recently purchased an N28 that was removed from an album and the corners were pretty nice.

Perhaps Dick and "gone with the stain" work under a shell company...

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...ared/image.jpg

Sorry Scott, you are correct it is more healthy to drink water with minerals in it than without. I misinterpreted his post to mean that you couldn't drink distilled water.

If you are going to make statements like this please specify your definition of a chemical. If you type chemical into google the first entry is chemical substance on wikipedia which uses water as the first example. My guess is you are referring to chemical elements. Since the only elements which are liquid at room temperature and pressure are mercury and bromine, I don't think anyone was referring to soaking cards in a chemical element.

peter s
 

fabas indulcet fames.

best,
barry

geez
 

try and save a guys life and what happens :-)

It's a crazy world ain't it Henry?

Hey Barry

Lots opinions all over the place