|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
REA Auction - Noting prior work done to cards
I found it very interesting that two of the big cards in the current REA auction have information about what was done prior to the card before it was graded.
T206 Doyle (https://bid.robertedwardauctions.com...?itemid=150606) After much research and consultation, Graphic Conservation Company, a professional art restoration and conservation company with a specialty and focus on all paper items, was selected to handle the project. Weeks of process testing on some of the non-sport cards provided valuable insight into the manner in which the cards were mounted. After perfecting the process, the Doyle was cleanly removed from the page on which it had lived for over 110 years. Graphic Conservation performed no other cleaning or conservation type work on the card, leaving it in virtually the same condition as when it was diligently added to the scrapbook by the original collector. SGC, as part of its grading process, was briefed on the work done to remove the card and reviewed it thoroughly to ensure it met the company's standards for grading. T206 Plank (https://bid.robertedwardauctions.com...?itemid=150612) This card originally appeared as Lot 282 in REA's Spring 2010 auction (realizing $32,313), having been consigned by the estate of Charlie Conlon, one of the hobby's truly great pioneer collectors. It should be noted that since the sale of this card it had a moisture stain removed from the top portion of the card. They didn't have to disclose both... just interesting that they did. Thoughts? Last edited by parkplace33; 07-25-2023 at 10:47 AM. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
The Doyle discussion about the preservation work done seems a little more necessary.
Earlier in the description, they disclosed that these pieces were all pasted down in a scrapbook. So the logical question follows how they managed to get them out of the scrapbook and into a slab. There’s certainly room to suggest that they could have just skipped the discussion of the scrapbook altogether, and avoided the need to talk about the process of getting them out. But I suspect the story adds as much as it might detract for any collector. And particularly with this piece, being as rare as it is. A little extra story helps add to the aura and legend.
__________________
Trying to wrap up my master mays set, with just a few left: 1968 American Oil left side 1971 Bazooka numbered complete panel Last edited by raulus; 07-25-2023 at 11:54 AM. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
My initial thoughts are kudos for disclosure but graders should not grade cards based on explanations, should they? Either the card is worthy or grading or it is not. Just wonder if any of us would be afforded the same consideration and if some conservation is now ok and a card can get a numerical grade, where do we draw that line and how is that line drawn?
__________________
( h @ $ e A n + l e y |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
I don't see any issue with removing a T206 from a scrapbook for grading. There are posts on this board all the time that seek guidance for soaking cards for the same effect.
I think it's great they disclosed this to bidders but not that it was entirely necessary. We're told to buy the card, not the holder. A successful soak or scrapbook removal is reflected in the card and not the disclosure. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/ He is available to do custom drawings in graphite, charcoal and other media. He also sells some of his works as note cards/greeting cards on Etsy under JamesSpaethArt. |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
I have no issue with scrapbook removal--it happens all the time. This time it was just done in an optimal fashion. What I do have an issue with was the water stain removal. How far is that really from crease removal? At the least, the restoration should be disclosed on the slab. In my opinion, the card shouldn't have been graded.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I thought we were talking about scrapbook removal. That's what my comments were about. |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Not directed at you but so what is it that is ok and what is not? Each of us will have a different answer of course. So should we all send our cards off to conservators and then try to get them past the graders? What is ok for a conservator to do to a card before it is considered an alteration? Ya think that if we did have them professionally cleaned that we would get their ear for an explanation and still yield a numerical grade? Heck didn't PWCC push this whole concept and he got ripped to sheds over it like 3 years ago?
__________________
( h @ $ e A n + l e y |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Maybe someone just wanted to do a good job and remove the card without damaging it. People seek advice for the same thing on here all the time. Whether you soak the card yourself or pay someone to do it for you, isn't the motivation the same?
My definition of altering a card is adding or subtracting from the card itself. If you're trimming the card or you're adding color to the card or you're frankensteining two cards together, that all falls under alteration to me. Removing an original card from a mounted surface without altering the card, is not alteration in my opinion. If you can reduce a stain without removing or adding anything to the original card, you have not altered it either. Otherwise, you would have such a stringent view that a crease must be considered alteration, etc. because the card was not released creased, etc. |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
And nothing against REA and whatever involvement they had with these cards, and since you responded to me, how do you feel abut REA having access to the graders to explain the conservation? Do you think you and I would have the same access and be received the same way?
__________________
( h @ $ e A n + l e y |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
It's hard to answer that question because I'm not sure how relevant the disclosure was to the graders. In other words, it might make a company look good public relations wise to say they disclosed XYZ but the reality might be that the disclosures were unnecessary and had no impact on the outcome.
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
( h @ $ e A n + l e y |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
I would agree. The unknown in this instance is how much scrutiny was raised about the cards, if at all, prior to disclosing their history.
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
I am sure it was disclosed upfront or maybe even prior to giving a green light to the work. I am just not overjoyed by one more instance of privileges granted to some and not to all.
__________________
( h @ $ e A n + l e y |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
As someone elsewhere noted...there appears to be some loss on the back of the doyle from removal. Should this warrant a 3.5? There is no question that all submitters are NOT created equal. Guessing if I submitted same card with same qualifications it'd be in an A/1-2 holder.
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Last edited by parkplace33; 07-25-2023 at 02:11 PM. |
#18
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Wonder if the card was presented to PSA first and did not grade or if work was disclosed and PSA said do not bother submitting it? Not that PSA is some pillar of ethics or anything. Awesome so not only does it get over graded but the submitter has access to the graders to explain work that was done. Good thing it is only a Doyle variation and not an important card int he hobby.
__________________
( h @ $ e A n + l e y Last edited by Lorewalker; 07-25-2023 at 02:11 PM. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
I agree with Jay. Removing the moisture stain is a card alteration. The card should grade authentic.
|
#20
|
||||
|
||||
I love and respect the disclosures.
That adds greater trust to the auction house and allows the bidders to decide what to do based on their preferences and beliefs. Especially with high end rare cards. Both are great cards and I hope it makes it into someone collection on this board.
__________________
Thanks all Jeff Kuhr https://www.flickr.com/photos/144250058@N05/ Looking for 1920 Heading Home Ruth Cards 1917-20 Felix Mendelssohn Babe Ruth 1921 Frederick Foto Ruth Joe Jackson Cards 1916 Advertising Backs 1910 Old Mills Joe Jackson 1914 Boston Garter Joe Jackson 1915 Cracker Jack Joe Jackson 1911 Pinkerton Joe Jackson Shoeless Joe Jackson Autograph |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Sgc was a good idea for that card
Someone will try and cross it, and wonder why it won't make it.
__________________
"Trolling Ebay right now" © Always looking for signed 1952 topps as well as variations and errors |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Is Conservation Now Being Accepted by SGC to receive a number grade without disclosure of the work???
Great Job REA for disclosing...my question is why doesn't SGC’s grade on the Doyle say “RESORED” Maybe sgc changed it's standards and allows work? |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
If this is a 3.5, I’m a 9.
Just as the 9.5 Mantle, SGC is clearly happy to over grade big name cards to get more attention and sales records for their slabs. And it will work, as ‘collectors’ don’t seem to care about reality but the number on the paper slip. The Plank should be an A. The Doyle I would get a 2 if I sent a common in the exact same condition. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
It doesn’t say it was restored. Just removed from a scrapbook. PSA grades those as well. The PSA 2 Doyle that sold at Mile High was also removed from a scrapbook.
|
#25
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/ He is available to do custom drawings in graphite, charcoal and other media. He also sells some of his works as note cards/greeting cards on Etsy under JamesSpaethArt. |
#26
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Dunno if you are a 9 or not but the comment gets a 10. Exactly my point. As great as the disclosure is I am very uneasy with the rest of the story surrounding both cards. I am far from a purest but I call bullshit on the whole thing. If SGC or PSA is not going to do this for you then they should not be doing it for REA or REA's higher profile consignor. I get 60s commons booted for fucking min size from both companies.
__________________
( h @ $ e A n + l e y |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
alter
I dont mind it at all, and Im sure there will be many many bidders who feel the same way
|
#28
|
||||
|
||||
Great job by REA!!! I would expect nothing less from them. Full disclosure is definitely preferable. I have no qualms with them using a professional company to remove Doyle from a scrapbook. Scrapbook removal is done on a regular basis and there are even threads right here requesting help in soaking glued cards from scrapbooks or other backing. I also have no personal problem with the water stain being removed on the Plank. I have cards from my childhood that have damage from me spilling liquid on them and that makes them no less valuable to me and I keep them as part of my collection.
__________________
Tony Collecting: 1909-1911 T206 Southern Leaguers (Alabama) 1914 Cracker Jack Set (91 out of 145) |
#29
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
( h @ $ e A n + l e y |
#30
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/ He is available to do custom drawings in graphite, charcoal and other media. He also sells some of his works as note cards/greeting cards on Etsy under JamesSpaethArt. |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#32
|
||||
|
||||
I have no issue with Doyle- the goal was to detach a card, not improve it, and if that all is they did, then I don’t care. The Plank is a bit more problematic. Attached are pics of the plank with the water stain and now. If all that was done is the stain was removed/erased (as opposed to recolored, etc), then I really don’t have a problem; it’s not much different from removing the Doyle from an album. But if the card was improved by addition, then I have an issue. Regardless, it’s not ideal and I think REA is very classy (per usual) to disclose it; although they didn’t have to and anyone doing their own research could figure it out
Also noteworthy is the grade on the Plank. SGC gave it a 2. Water stain “removed” and PSA gives it a 2.5 with that paper missing in upper left corner and large crease midway down card. Compare that to this 2.5, which has a minor marking from an album removal Last edited by Rhotchkiss; 07-26-2023 at 07:29 AM. |
#33
|
||||
|
||||
I am perfectly OK with a trained conservator removing an item from an album or removing a water stain (which, frankly, is little more than a soak with some mild cleaner). Full stop.
The grades on the Plank piss me off, though. That kind of crease causing paper loss? If I send in that card maybe I get a 1.5. That card and this card are equals? And this one is worse???
__________________
Read my blog; it will make all your dreams come true. https://adamstevenwarshaw.substack.com/ Or not... Last edited by Exhibitman; 07-26-2023 at 07:41 AM. |
#34
|
||||
|
||||
Membership has its privileges.
__________________
( h @ $ e A n + l e y |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Even if they've done T206s before, they'll want to be sure because glues are different. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Grading has been very lenient on the more expensive cards since before there was anything like PSA. Especially Wagners.
The one I saw in person sold as poor, it had writing and creases, but was a Wagner. It sold maybe 3 times in the next 3 years or so, always called a higher grade and with a big bump in the asking price, eventually being a G-VG.... No alterations, just dealers grading on the curve. (which for some really uncommon cards might be a better way) |
#37
|
||||
|
||||
They are just preparing everyone for the future of cards. One small step before the giant leap.
|
#38
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
( h @ $ e A n + l e y |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Who knows what they actually did? But, it's definitely using some descriptive flair for a card that will draw a bunch of casual eyeballs and potential news stories. I respect the disclosure, even if most heavy collectors inherently expect the soaking. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Trying to wrap up my master mays set, with just a few left: 1968 American Oil left side 1971 Bazooka numbered complete panel |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Top 100 Errors / Variations and the state of collections these cards prior to 1985 | richtree | Modern Baseball Cards Forum (1980-Present) | 57 | 08-19-2023 09:52 AM |
How do auction reserves work? | robertsmithnocure | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 6 | 04-30-2022 10:10 AM |
Auto.HOF Players prior to 1990; MORE desirable; cards or 8x10 | cookie | Autograph Forum- Primarily Sports | 4 | 03-19-2017 07:14 AM |
WTB: Older Football Cards 1962 Topps and Prior | eliminator | Everything Else, Football, Non-Sports etc.. B/S/T | 0 | 03-15-2015 09:45 PM |
newspaper article worth noting | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 8 | 07-29-2007 12:59 AM |