I’ve seen the car restoration analogy used on a few different platforms and just wanted to comment on why I think it’s a flawed analogy.
Most cars derive their value from their function, not their history. Fixing a vehicle or retouching it’s paint after an accident is irrelevant if it’s value is in its use. Often that’s a defining difference of antiques, art, and collectibles is the preservation of the item in its original state. Alteration of any kind obscures its history. It’s true that some cars are collector’s items too, but very few. Those that are collected (not driven) are sought after as close to factory-issue as possible, with any restorations being disclosed. Usually, restored collector’s cars earn much lower value than a mint, factory original. Just as in some cases, restoration of a painting can entirely ruin its collectability and its value. In fact, the only times it doesn’t tends to be when it’s physically necessary to preserve the artwork . . . and usually those are one of a kind pieces.
I agree with what you said but the definition of restoration doesn’t change. The point of applying Kurt’s cream to cards is to make the card appear better than its current state. To remove dirt, scratches, abrasions, etc. The action of restoring is the same with any item on the planet. You restore a car for its functionality. You restore a painting to preserve it longer(unless you damage it in the process). You restore an antique clock make it function like it did when it was made. You restore a Pokemon card to increase its value. You restore a book spine to keep it from falling apart. Restoring something has different outcomes depending on the item but the action and definition of restoration doesn’t change. Unless I’m wrong and I’m just not understanding. My take is if you do this to a card for monetary gain and the card is deactivated by PSA, BGS, CGC and the person who bought it now is in the negative from the money spent on it then that’s wrong. If they do it with zero intention to sell it then I don’t really care how many cards Kurt’s cream goes on bc nobody is technically being screwed over.
I said this last time the art analogy was referenced:
The art analogy is irrelevant. Every Pokémon card, even the rarest, have multiple copies. Regardless, this is just a distraction from what’s really happening: Money. People aren’t cleaning cards to preserve the history of a 1/1 item. They are cleaning cards with 10,000+ copies so that theirs might be worth more than the other 10,000+ copies.
The literal definition of “restoration” doesn’t matter. The context and intention are the important parts.
Restoration of a car is a form of maintenance. You can’t keep a car functional and in untouched condition so restoration is necessarily a part of the maintaining vintage cars. Likewise, as @smpratte said, paintings are 1/1 and also are often centuries old. They are restored to enjoy the art the way the artist originally intended. Additionally art restoration is an art itself, where everything you do is to maintain the original integrity of the piece by making as minimal a change as possible and to ensure all your alterations are completely reversible.
There are also plenty of hobbies where restoration harms value. Coins and stamps consider polishing or cleaning an undesirable trait. Diecast cars and antique furniture too. The thing these all have in common is they are mass produced items. The value is in finding an unaltered item that is still in amazing condition. The reason we value condition at all is because we all partake in the battle against entropy and finding that item that has beat the odds and still looks new years and years after it was produced. To produce a facade of that is entirely counter to the point of valuing condition in the first place.
If the distinction is still unclear, let me fix that. A person with a restored car knows exactly what parts are original and which ones are new. An art conservator documents all their changes and makes a lot of them visible under UV light. A successful pokemon card “restoration” tricks PSA into giving a damaged card a higher grade in order to unknowingly pass it to the next person at a higher price. These aren’t the same things. Again, it comes down to context and intention.
That makes perfect sense. Thank you explaining it the way that did @pfm. The way you explained it with cars and art is perfect. My father has a collection of 9 muscle cars from the years ‘67 to ‘74 and when he replaces something or modifies his cars he tends to search for an original part. Even spending thousands of dollars on parts such as windshields, panels, windows. When he does he makes sure it’s from the same model, year, car, etc and one that has 100% original parts. I wasn’t very informed on the differences between cars, art, coins and such. So thank you for that.
I’ve been cleaning Pokemon cards for a few years now and recently started an eBay/IG/etc. Now all of a sudden, the debate over products like Kurts Card Care has been making waves in the card collecting community. I’m genuinely curious about e4 members opinion on if they consider using polish, spray, and flattening techniques are considered altering. PSA has recently stated they consider it altering but the problem is they can’t tell if a card has been cleaned or not. They can revoke a cert if they catch you bragging about it and forget to cover up the cert number but all-in-all, I’m a big proponent of Kurts Card Care. I recently watched Rattles video about all this and left a comment that there seems to be a lack of education about what the product does, and doesn’t do. Rattle then sends people into my DMs saying “they have a message for me” and boom, he drops a video today calling me out and trying to cancel me. I responded back to him, you can see that video here.
The date over all this is heating up and I would love to hear your thoughts on the topic. Thank you!
Yes, adding foreign materials to a card is altering. Calling people out about altering cards is not cancel culture. It’s a free world, you’re free to alter cards, we’re free to call you an absolute clown, refuse to do any business with you, and publicize your idiocy.
It’s strange, you claim to understand that adding ink to cards (recoloring) or removing edge material (trimming) is wrong and violates the integrity of the cards. But adding polish to cards or removing factory finishing gloss and replacing it with new gloss is somehow fine. Both practices add aftermarket material or remove original material to conceal flaws, but one is wrong and the other is acceptable. Make it make sense.
Im fine with wiping off cards or whatever for my own personal preference and for stuff in my collection but i really dont think id want to buy something that has gone through all that. Just doesnt sit right with me.
It’s a fairly simple moral question. It’s one thing to consent to your own cards being cleaned this way. It’s a another thing entirely to consent on behalf of other people. For example, the number of cleaned cards I want in my collection is 0. So any instance of me buying a cleaned card is an act of deception and someone along the chain of custody of this card has consented for it to be cleaned on my behalf.
Put in other terms, imagine if I thoroughly wiped every card I own on my testicles before grading them. PSA is not going to know because they aren’t sophisticated enough to differentiate finger oils and testicle oils, right? If I only do this to my own cards then it’s strange but everyone along the chain of custody has consented to the process. If I were to sell my teabagged cards, I think most people would agree they would rather not own these particular copies even if they can’t distinguish them. And if you’re a teabagger and it is publicly revealed, can you blame people for not wanting to ever own a card you graded?
/s