Proof On Card - Can I Soak It?

Hi - I'm considering a bid on a single card proof stamp that has some heavy hinge remnants on the reverse. The proof is from the 1873 Continental Banknote Series. Would there be a problem soaking these off? Is the card stock unusually fragile? The multiple hinge remnants make the stamp look "buckled" from the front - it'd be nice to clean it up a bit and flatten it out. Thanks!

I wouldn't soak it. Use a Q-tip and apply a bit of water to the hinges. It'll take a while, but eventually the hinges will come off.

Thanks jarnick ... I'll try that. I was afraid soaking would make the card come apart like cardboard would.

I have never tried to soak a card proof, and I agree with the advice not to. It seems as though it could well be asking for trouble.

Seconding jarnick. Wet the hinge, not the proof.

I agree with Stephen. Wet the hinge.

use a small artists paintbrush to wet the hinge only. have patience it will take a bit of time to soak through.

What's it cost? $7? Soak it. Use distilled water if you like. These proofs were printed on well moistened card stock. The worst problem you may encounter is an india on card proof separating into an india proof and a worthless piece of card. Don't believe me? try it with a $7 proof. unless it is india on card, you'll you'll get a nice clean fresh looking $7 card proof.

With just a tad less color than it had originally, though I doubt you would notice it. And the thickness will change so it should not be expected to follow the original spec that allowed identification by one of the five printings. Some people don't care about that. Only the most committed collectors (who some might say ought to be committed).

If you can clean it up without altering the original state, then isn't that what you should do? For learning how, price has nothing to do with it.

essayk: I respect "committed" collectors and don't think they should be "committed".

In my limited experience, I havn't seen any loss of color when soaking a card proof; they react the same as when soaking a stamp. If anything, the few card proofs I thought worth soaking looked, to my eye, better afterwords. But I'm no good with color, so I'm willing to concede that possibility.

I'm curious about the thickness argument. The proof was wet when it was printed and it seems to me that the thickness would be the same after drying a second time. I don't have a micrometer, so I haven't checked. Have you made measurements to back up the claim? I imagine the thickness variations can be subtle and I would like to know more.

My suggestion to go ahead and soak the proof is based on apparently good results, getting clean uniform appearance, better than what I would expect from wetting just part of the proof.

Sorry for the delay, I seldom visit the list these days.




Form the tone and tenor of your comments I don't think you mean to say "curious." I infer that you mean to say "dubious."




Where on earth did you get this idea about the treatment of materials in the proving room? How much moisture do you think was involved in prepping the cardstock for printing? Slightly dampened is one thing, soaked is quite something else. what happens to cardboard when you soak it?





Let me suggest a spring-loaded Mitutoyo dial thickness gauge. They give a uniform pressure to remove one variable in measurement, namely inconsistent pressure from user application.

And yes, I have done measurements in the quest for the five key thicknesses. A fair amount of failure there for material no longer to spec. Cannot account for all the ways that might have happened.





What do you want to know? I don't get the impression from your comment about instrumentation that you are in a position to troubleshoot this.

The bottom line for those who respect such things is don't apply radical solutions to material unless you have a good knowledge of the effects your actions MIGHT have. The OP had specified a buildup of hinges and was given a consensus opinion of a less intrusive solution, albeit at the cost of a little more effort to apply the corrective. Ignoring such advice takes on a risk you may not quite expect, since some alterations are not reversible.

OK essayk. My thought process is imperfect and my writing is worse. I respect your reputation and opinion.

Is there a good article describing the different printings (including their thickness and other qualities)? I tried Google and didn't find anything good. There was an article in the USPCS Chronicle recently, but it dealt mostly with the dates and numbers printed, not other production details.

Thank you all for the education ... learning a lot on this forum. Below are pics of front and back of the stamp I am considering. My new tactic to filling spaces for some of these expensive banknote issues is to simply get a proof. The proofs look much better than any decent used example I could find (and afford)! All decent real used ones are graded these days which puts prices in the stratosphere ...

Canyoneer - Here is a fantastic resource for all things US proofs and essays.

http://www.jameslee.com

Proofs are a wonderful thing to add to any collection. They tend to be quite beautiful - often more so than the issued stamp.

I buy mostly covers these days, but I saw two different proofs this year, that I just couldn't pass up. I will probably continue to accumulate more over time.