Cards that CAN and CANNOT be soaked?!

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by bbcard1

I don't make the double standards, I just abide by them.

Why? To me, it just seems like card doctoring.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Eric72

Why? To me, it just seems like card doctoring.

Generally speaking soaking a card removes things that aren't meant to be there and weren't there when the card was made. Most collectors don't have a problem because it isn't altering the original composition of the card (though I guess that could be argued). Also, erasing an errant mark isn't as taboo as it might should be. Same philosophy though.

As someone said, I don't make the double standards, I just go by them (love that saying)....

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by Leon

Generally speaking soaking a card removes things that aren't meant to be there and weren't there when the card was made. Most collectors don't have a problem because it isn't altering the original composition of the card (though I guess that could be argued). Also, erasing an errant mark isn't as taboo as it might should be. Same philosophy though.

As someone said, I don't make the double standards, I just go by them (love that saying)....

Leon,

I respectfully disagree with your casual stance regarding taking a card for a soak. In my humble opinion, this practice is as unethical as trimming. Just my two cents.

Best,

Eric

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by Eric72

Leon,

I respectfully disagree with your casual stance regarding taking a card for a soak. In my humble opinion, this practice is as unethical as trimming. Just my two cents.

Best,

Eric

Good luck trying to determine which cards you have that have been soaked. The reason that it is acceptable is that it alters nothing from the card itself (obviously trimming does this and is thusly not accepted). Many really high grade cards that exist in this hobby likely are the result of a good soaking, the cards being in an album for so long is what preserved the corners from being damaged from years or normal wear. It Is fine to take the hard-line stance but at the end of the day it is 100% imperceptible if done correctly and nothing on the card is destroyed or altered, not sure I get why this would be in any way the same as trimming a card.


FYI, never try to soak Clement Brothers Bread cards as the ink on front is water soluble. Colgan's Chips also aren't good "soakers" as the back ink tends to rub off.

[irishdenny]

Originally Posted by Eric72

Leon,

I respectfully disagree with your casual stance regarding taking a card for a soak. In my humble opinion, this practice is as unethical as trimming. Just my two cents.

Best,

Eric

Hey there Eric ,

I Respect your opinion & belief in every way!

Years ago I have had a many healthy debate/discussions about this ( Off ) topic.
I tend to be a realist and will most often refer to the Common Logic of the issue.
Eric, I do want you to know that there was a time that I thought somewhat as you do now. I didn’t believe that it was unethical, just Somehow Not Right.

Thus, my conclusion has brought me to this answer:

1st… We are Care Takers of an area of America’s most esteemed Past Time. I speaking of those who truly care for these pieces of history.
2nd …There is a difference between “Alteration” and “Restoration”. Altering (ie, Trimming…etc) a Card to get it passed a Part time/Rookie TPG’er for a Higher Grade is definitely Unethical. That’s Logical! Removing a substance that would potentially harm a Card over the Years, Pencil lead, Caramel (Which is basically Sugar, and Sugar deteriorates the hardest of Substances), glue, rust, etc… would be best for the Card, Right?
To my understanding, most Art Relics go thru some sort of periodic Restoration process, on “as needed” basis. Are you in the same frame of mind towards this process, deeming it Unethical?
Wouldn’t you want to protect and preserve these pieces for the future generations to come?

Just to add: Some of us might even pay for someone’s service in this area. I know of a gentleman in Florida who actually performs these tasks for a living.
Rhett mentioned the “101 of Soaking”, some of us might not be willing to even attempt the process.

Eric, if you could explain why soaking a Card would be “Unethical as Trimming”, I would truly listen!
Always willing to learn, maybe I missed something?

In ending, I Hope that the slight off topic, to a Very Good Topic thread, is cheerfully tolerated ; -)

As Always…

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by irishdenny

Thus, my conclusion has brought me to this answer:

1st… We are Care Takers of an area of America’s most esteemed Past Time. I speaking of those who truly care for these pieces of history.
2nd …There is a difference between “Alteration” and “Restoration”. Altering (ie, Trimming…etc) a Card to get it passed a Part time/Rookie TPG’er for a Higher Grade is definitely Unethical. That’s Logical! Removing a substance that would potentially harm a Card over the Years, Pencil lead, Caramel (Which is basically Sugar, and Sugar deteriorates the hardest of Substances), glue, rust, etc… would be best for the Card, Right?
To my understanding, most Art Relics go thru some sort of periodic Restoration process, on “as needed” basis. Are you in the same frame of mind towards this process, deeming it Unethical?
Wouldn’t you want to protect and preserve these pieces for the future generations to come?

Just to add: Some of us might even pay for someone’s service in this area. I know of a gentleman in Florida who actually performs these tasks for a living.
Rhett mentioned the “101 of Soaking”, some of us might not be willing to even attempt the process.

Eric, if you could explain why soaking a Card would be “Unethical as Trimming”, I would truly listen!
Always willing to learn, maybe I missed something?

In ending, I Hope that the slight off topic, to a Very Good Topic thread, is cheerfully tolerated ; -)

As Always…

Nice analysis. I understand Eric's position, as I feel the same way about albumen cards such as Old Judges. But I don't think the word 'unethical' should even be in this conversation. Many of us who feel soaking is okay, are not soaking because of a lack of ethics. And if you decided that it was okay to soak mounted albumen photos, I wouldn't consider you unethical, and I wouldn't feel like you should tell me the photo was soaked (although it would be nice). I just wouldn't do it myself.

If a buyer asked me if a card I was selling them had been soaked, and I knew the answer, I would certainly tell them. I guess the real question becomes: "If you were required to describe a card you were selling, as 'soaked', would you continue to soak cards?"

As far as alterations go, I do feel that the seller has to disclose the fact, or they are being unethical.