Ok, so I’m a bit confused about something. I collect NM sets (by NM I mean generally the equivalent of PSA 8 or 9, but I don’t care about factory damage like print lines, or errors like poor centering). Throughout the course of my collecting, I’ve encountered plenty of sorts of damage on cards. But there have been two specific sorts of damage that I’m beginning to question whether or not these are post-factory damage at all. I don’t know what to call these types of damage, but to make it easy to refer back to these, I’ll call the first sort of damage a ‘ripple’ and the second a ‘vertical edge indentation.’ Here are examples of both (based on how frequently I see these, I imagine that others on this forum are also familiar with them):
Ripple (on an English Expedition Dragonite holo):
Another example of a ripple (on an Expedition Clefable holo):
Vertical edge indentation (on an English Jungle 1st ed. Clefable holo):
Up to now, I’ve been excluding cards from my sets with these sorts of damage. I’ve been evaluating these cards as HP (in the case of the vertical edge indentation) and damaged (in the case of the ripple, which appears like moisture damage), and I’ve priced them accordingly when I sell them.
What’s making me unsure now is that this is the THIRD time that I’ve cracked open a PSA 8 that has rippling. The first two times, I chocked it up to PSA negligence. But I cracked the Expedition Dragonite holo today, and seeing that ripple is now making me question what impact this sort of damage has on how one should grade the condition of the card. Connected to this, I’d also be curious in knowing if I’m correct that the ripple is moisture damage? Or is it just how some cards are textured? I have Expedition holos without ripples like this, so I know that not all cards from there are textured like this. I’ve also found a good amount of EX-era holos with similar rippling. It’s been the bane of my existence. Note that the rippling CAN be felt, if you move your fingers across both sides simultaneously. So it’s not just a visual effect.
I only thought about vertical edge indentations when I started questioning what I knew about rippling. The Clefable pictured above is an extreme example of it – often cards have it much more subtly (note that it typically extends along the whole edge). The same questions I asked above about rippling I’d also like to know the answers to as it pertains to vertical edge indentations.
TLDR: are these post-factory damage? and could a card still be NM if it has these?
I can’t tell what you’re referring to in the first two photos. The last photo (vertical indentation) happens when the card shifts to the side inside the pack, and then is pressed over the edge of the other cards by some force outside the pack. It’s a type of aftermarket damage. The 72 count booster cases had these issues.
Edit: I think I may see what you mean, and I believe they are possibly factory, but I’m not sure. I found a spot on one of my pack fresh expedition holos that meets the description, but I can’t match it to your photos.
Just consider it aftermarket damage. If that’s the way it presents to you then that’s how someone else might view it too.
Re: the vertical indentation – ahhh, I see, interesting.
Re: the rippling – I’m referring to the texture of the card – it’s ‘wavy’. What makes me unsure what sort of damage it is, is that it ONLY occurs on holos, and only holos from certain sets. I’ve never seen a non-holo card with that texturing. And it’s also just confusing because I’ve now opened three PSA 8s (both old and new cert, and from different sellers) that had this issue. So either PSA screwed up with these, or they don’t consider it, or the ‘damage’ happened after the cards were encased.
Regarding the wavy holos: Here are a few possibilities to consider. Everyone knows that most holos want to curl a bit. This is the result of the tension involved when applying the foiled mylar sheet to the card stock. You need this tension to keep the shiny film smooth, but as the film tries to return to its normal dimensions it needs to pull the card stock in a bit.
Usually the tension on the film is minor, and the curling effort is minimal. So minimal that it is easy to keep a card flat simply by storing it in a top loader or even a stack of cards in a card box.
But there are a couple of ways when this process isn’t perfect, or when card storage isn’t perfect, that the waves might occur.
The foil film is usually applied to card stock with a very thin amount of adhesive that activates with heat and pressure. If that adhesive layer isn’t perfectly even you can run into situations where the card stock might look a bit uneven because of the very slight thickness difference and the very slight differences in adhesion.
Most foils want to curl inward on the front to relieve foil stresses. But if you store cards in binders you can have a situation where the binder page effectively puts pressure on the card which makes the card want to curl outward (toward the back). An example would be the top pages in a large “D” ring binder, where the top pages have room to arch up toward the top cover (especially if stored horizontally). If done lightly this can eventually cause a wavy appearance on the card back. If done longer or with greater pressure it can eventually some cause creasing to appear on the backs.
Very interesting! These cards are curved inward, as normal, so option #1 is a potential explanation. It would also make sense because this slight waviness/rippling happens with some holos from some sets, but not with ones from others (even from sets where the holos are just as prone to curling).
Is it a potentially reversible effect? I know how to uncurl normal inward-warped cards, but it sounds like there might be residual damage even after uncurling these?
@hammr7 Interesting thought… I always thought it was thermal contraction or humidity effecting the moisture content of the paper that caused the curl. I never considered tension in the foil layer being a significant factor, but it makes sense.
I can’t say about zorloth’s card, but the ripple in my card definitely could be an adhesion issue in the paper! But it presents more like water damage. So too much adhesive then?
Mine presents like water damage, too. If you look at the back of your Expedition holos, do any have backs similar to this (here’s a pic that might illustrate it better than the original ones):
For what it’s worth, out of the 13 Expedition holos I have, 12 of them have this (with varying degrees of severity). For most of them, I didn’t notice until I was looking for it the other day. From the front, it’s almost imperceptible. And it’s not visible under certain lighting conditions. But it can be felt, so it’s definitely an actual unevenness that the cardstock has.
Metalized mylar films can be difficult to work with. Tension needs to be perfect for a smooth finish but not much dimensional change on the holo film (because the film wants to go back to normal dimensions once applied, which starts the curling). Unfortunately if you run into any manufacturing issues the first thing the press operator is likely to do is crank up the tension to smooth the sheet. Then back it down a bit once everything goes back to normal.
The adhesive coating is supposed to be applied uniformly and is activated by heat. Since adhesives like this are high solids, any non-uniformity in the initial application can show up as the waves. Any cold spots can also cause minor issues since the adhesive doesn’t easily flow (while hot) to further smooth the holo-coated cardstock. Finally, any minor variations can affect the uniformity of application of the final wear coat. If that coat isn’t applied uniformly it might not cure evenly, resulting in a slightly rougher surface.
