![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
The last time we discussed this issue, didn't someone talk about how old time collectors of T206 cards used to drop scrapbooks filled with them into a bathtub of water? Frankly, I have always assumed since then that any high-grade T206 card was once glued into a scrapbook and then removed in this process. That's why the corners stayed sharp and the borders stayed white -- they were in scrapbooks.
A lot of collectors got pretty upset learning about that, if I recall. Especially the PSA 8 collectors who thought their cards were pure and divine. To many, soaking a card in water is taboo. But ethics doesn't enter into it when an untold number of T206 cards already have been soaked for decades and decades. Today's collector cannot be held to a stronger standard than yesterday's collector when we're talking about cards that have been exchanging hands for now over 100 years.
__________________
Galleries and Articles about T206 Player Autographs www.SignedT206.com www.instagram.com/signedT206/ @SignedT206 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
If the problem can't be solved with a bowl of warm tap water then I'm out, that's just my stance. Also if your stance isn't mine all good. My major problem here is disclosure. As I said earlier if this was uncovered as something a major auction house was doing by taking nasty cards and using chemicals and solvents to work cards to high dollar status and doing so without disclosure. Well I doubt very much folks would be so quick to tell an REA no biggie that you took me for an extra 50k not being forthcoming after all I couldn’t tell good on you. Cheers, John |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
When I was a kid, I learned you could take wax stains out of a 1987 Topps card by pouring lighter fluid on it, and then sitting it on the radiator for a short while. Pretty amazing and no residue or anything was left behind. It was magic. My guess is that Dick uses something like that, maybe something alcohol based, which evaporates a lot faster than water and leaves no trace. Maybe he uses hydrogen peroxide. Then you're talking about the difference of one extra oxygen atom -- H202 vs. H2O. Who knows?! Dammit, Jim! I'm a card collector not a scientist!! In any event, if the "chemical" leaves the same trace as water (i.e., no trace at all), then I'm still in. No harm comes to the fibers of the card, and the effects are simply not detectable within the lifetime of my immediate heirs. I accept this work has been done on every card I own, and I sleep well at night. But, if you get a gag reflex from a good warm water bath for your T206 card, then you probably just don't understand how many of these little guys have spent some time in water over the past 103 years.
__________________
Galleries and Articles about T206 Player Autographs www.SignedT206.com www.instagram.com/signedT206/ @SignedT206 |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
That's not what the posts in this thread would indicate.
__________________
$co++ Forre$+ |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I agree Scott. Big difference to most/many collectors, I would say.
__________________
Leon Luckey |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
So then this question remains...if the solvents that Dick uses can be proven to cause no permanent changes to the cardboard stock...the colors/images...would people still have a problem with this?
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
+1 - that's the relevant question, not whether it is water or something else. If you are comfortable with the illicit uses of water on baseball cards for these reasons, then why are you uncomfortable with the illicit uses of CHEMICAL X for the same reasons?
__________________
Galleries and Articles about T206 Player Autographs www.SignedT206.com www.instagram.com/signedT206/ @SignedT206 |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
***That's not what the posts in this thread would indicate.***
***I agree Scott. Big difference to most/many collectors, I would say.*** Stated another way, how can you distinguish from water when you have no evidence that what Dick uses has any lasting effect distinguishable from water? People may say they have no problem with water, but then they do have a problem when a "mysterious chemical solvent" that has the same lasting effect as water (i.e., none at all) is used. Again, if Dick was using H202 (hydrogen peroxide) instead of H20 (water), then you are arguing over a single oxygen atom. Seriously? Wouldn't you want to know what your chemical is before drawing a line that shows a "big difference" of opinion?
__________________
Galleries and Articles about T206 Player Autographs www.SignedT206.com www.instagram.com/signedT206/ @SignedT206 Last edited by T206Collector; 03-26-2014 at 11:08 AM. |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
$co++ Forre$+ |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
I grow hydroponic produce for a living so I have learned a lot about water quality in the last few years. With out getting technical the average gallon of tap water has about 1 teaspoon of chemicals in it. I know that does not sound like much but 1 1/2 teaspoons of fertilizer per gallon of water gives it all the nutrients vegetables need to grow hydroponically. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
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....? |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
![]() ![]() You can still clearly make out where it was once glued..."gone with the stain" far from it.... Cheers, John |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
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........ |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Too soon?
__________________
Read my blog; it will make all your dreams come true. https://adamstevenwarshaw.substack.com/ Or not... |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Can this stain be removed? | HOF Auto Rookies | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 15 | 03-28-2013 01:18 PM |
Stain or Transfer | Bwstew | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 2 | 12-11-2012 04:21 PM |
33 Goudey gum stain? | mighty bombjack | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 2 | 10-12-2011 08:43 PM |
Letters in the stain | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 2 | 05-12-2008 09:39 AM |
Name that stain! (c'mon - it's FREE!) | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 10 | 08-25-2004 12:38 AM |