Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Small Size, post: 2644878, member: 77924&quot;]OK. Maybe you like paying four times as much for a note because it was &quot;restored&quot; and slabbed. I do not.</p><p>As a collector in multiple fields, I&#039;m aware of the differences in standards that exist among them. In coin collecting, no coin the surface of which has been altered in any way should be described as original. In stamp collecting, a reperfed stamp is a filler at best. A regummed stamp is especially egregious, because sharp operators will regum them using glue dissolved from the backs of common stamps of the same time and place. The only way to tell for sure is to microscopically examine the perfs for residue that wouldn&#039;t be present if the stamps had been gummed first and then perforated. Forgers of paper collectibles love the flysheets that were ubiquitous in books until the late 20th Century. It gave them a piece of blank paper the age of which was precise to the year. And you could cut them out of library books for no cost, unless you got caught.</p><p>In the document collecting field, restoration is common, often necessary, because many documents have ink and/or paper processing residues that will destroy them if not ameliorated. From necessary restoration to restoration for esthetic purposes to restoration to make a document seem more original than it is to enhance its value is a slippery slope. Paper money collecting got caught up in it, and the hobby adopted the ethos - if you can&#039;t tell a note has been restored, then it hasn&#039;t been.</p><p>That&#039;s no way to run a railroad or a hobby.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in