|
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
The intent of soaking in water can be just to get the cards out of a scrapbook in the first place.
__________________
Four phrases I nave coined that sum up today's hobby: No consequences. Stuff trumps all. The flip is the commoodity. Animal Farm grading. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Soaking a card in water with glued paper on the back is still altering the card from its current condition. The card was glued and has residue/paper now stuck to it. I am removing that residue/paper and that changes the card (in my mind). It wasn't intended to be there but neither were ink marks, stains, etc. that are removed by chemical. I don't know, maybe I'm splitting hairs here. But I consider that pretty much the same thing.
__________________
T205 (208/208) T206 (520/520) T207 (200/200) E90-1 (120/121) E91A/B/C (99/99) 1895 Mayo (18/48) N28/N29 Allen & Ginter (100/100) N162 Goodwin Champions (32/50) N184 Kimball Champions (38/50) Complete: E47, E49, E50, E75, E76, E229, N88, N91, R136, T29, T30, T38, T51, T53, T68, T73, T77, T118, T218, T220, T225 www.prewarcollector.com |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
I have no issue with being as purist, but at the same time I would point out that soaking out of a scrapbook is (I think) generally accepted by the community whereas most other things are not.
__________________
Four phrases I nave coined that sum up today's hobby: No consequences. Stuff trumps all. The flip is the commoodity. Animal Farm grading. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Oh yeah, I totally agree with you, Peter. It's definitely considered to be more acceptable. I just don't necessarily think it should be.
And as full disclosure here, I've soaked cards in water but haven't used any other chemicals, etc., so this definitely isn't a holier than thou kick against soakers. I just have a hard time separating the two as much as the majority.
__________________
T205 (208/208) T206 (520/520) T207 (200/200) E90-1 (120/121) E91A/B/C (99/99) 1895 Mayo (18/48) N28/N29 Allen & Ginter (100/100) N162 Goodwin Champions (32/50) N184 Kimball Champions (38/50) Complete: E47, E49, E50, E75, E76, E229, N88, N91, R136, T29, T30, T38, T51, T53, T68, T73, T77, T118, T218, T220, T225 www.prewarcollector.com |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
I assume one rationale for the distinction is that water is not generally believed to adversely affect the integrity of the underlying card whereas chemical solvents (using the term in its common sense) generally are believed to do so. But it's probably hard to articulate a distinction that one couldn't find some fault with.
__________________
Four phrases I nave coined that sum up today's hobby: No consequences. Stuff trumps all. The flip is the commoodity. Animal Farm grading. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Peter? (Anybody else can answer the question as well) |
![]() |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| FS 51 Cards 1970 Topps All High Numbers High Grade! | Northviewcats | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 12-12-2014 02:53 PM |
| 1956 Mickey Mantle PSA 7 Rare HIGH END HIGH Grade | CollectiblesNJ | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 49 | 07-18-2013 02:31 PM |
| For Trade My High Grade T206s for Your High Grade Cobb Portraits | RGold | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 3 | 11-28-2012 07:37 PM |
| Mile High- T 209 Set | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 14 | 10-02-2008 02:13 PM |
| High-grade E93s Wanted | Archive | Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T | 0 | 01-20-2006 09:22 AM |