Kurt's Card Care

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

It's been published and talked about for a long time. He's also mentioned numerous times that he uses a small amount of rubbing alcohol in his spray.

For those unaware, every card manufacturer uses rubbing alcohol to clean up stray ink marks on signed cards when they get them back from the athletes after having them sign. They literally sit there with a q-tip and a bottle of rubbing alcohol, cleaning them up one by one. The cards often come back with all sorts of marks and smudges from the athletes stacking them while the ink is still wet.

And what about the "proprietary detergents"? If you're going to be the Great Defender (shout out to the Platters), at least address the whole thing.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

And what about the "proprietary detergents"? If you're going to be the Great Defender (shout out to the Platters), at least address the whole thing.

I don't know anything about the detergents he uses. I don't use his spray to soak my cards. I use distilled water.

[Flintboy]

+1 for a Platters shout out.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I don't know anything about the detergents he uses. I don't use his spray to soak my cards. I use distilled water.

OK. Then until you know more, perhaps you should stop defending him, as you've done here and before.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

OK. Then until you know more, perhaps you should stop defending him, as you've done here and before.

You should probably just keep claiming that we don't know the long term effects of card cleaning despite the fact that it's been going on for at least a hundred years with millions of examples to point to, including the majority of the most valuable cards in the hobby.

Hell, even Jefferson Burdick advocates for it, and discusses how to do it in his book.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

You should probably just keep claiming that we don't know the long term effects of card cleaning despite the fact that it's been going on for at least a hundred years with millions of examples to point to, including the majority of the most valuable cards in the hobby.

Hell, even Jefferson Burdick advocates for it, and discusses how to do it in his book.

Why do I care what Jeff Burdick thought? Different world, where having an example was everything and set completion was paramount. There's a reason bleaching, for example, has been frowned upon since at least the early 1990s when I restarted collecting.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Why do I care what Jeff Burdick thought? Different world, where having an example was everything and set completion was paramount. There's a reason bleaching, for example, has been frowned upon since at least the early 1990s when I restarted collecting.

Because it's the best resource we have on the beginnings of this hobby and its history. The point is that this is a long standing tradition whether you like it or not. And it's been a widely accepted practice whether you like it or not. And it's not going away.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Tradition or not does not answer the question whether certain chemicals damage cards. Bleaching cards at one point was widespread to lighten toning. Do you think that's an acceptable practice?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I don't know anything about the detergents he uses.

Originally Posted by Snowman

You should probably just keep claiming that we don't know the long term effects of card cleaning despite the fact that it's been going on for at least a hundred years with millions of examples to point to, including the majority of the most valuable cards in the hobby.

Don’t know what they are or anything about them, but we know there are no long term effects of Kurts. That makes a lot of sense. Or maybe it’s more like…

Originally Posted by Snowman

The idiocy of this board has no bounds.