Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="krispy, post: 1477190, member: 19065"]Yes, my comments do speak for themselves, they don't rely on name dropping and random text searches for notes from an auction house's marketing terms. You haven't read any of my posts if you think I am refuting the existence of 'natural paper wave', nor have you summarized anything but your own lack of experience on this topic, which is why I referenced your slim post count and your reputation here when discussing this.  As I stated earlier, some paper wave is an indication of incorrect printing and/or drying in the production processes or, most likely, storage and exposure to moisture/humidity long after the note entered circulation/collections. Look at the severity of the OPs note and compare it to those you found on Heritage. there is natural and then there is a level beyond what is natural. Consider that the note was originally printed and came off the press on a flat, crisp and perfect sheet. It was trimmed from that sheet and ended up with perfectly squared margins and yet now all these years later, it displays major ripples. This is beyond 'natural paper wave'. To attempt to trim an original sheet of notes with that degree of paper wave would not result in clean straight cut edges. As previously suggested, the OPs note was exposed to heavy humidity or a damp environment at some point in its life, very well after it was encapsulated. While it obtained a high Gem grade for it's original paper surface, embossing, centering and other graded factors, it very well may not have been stored properly after being encapsulated. Such careless storage and exposure to humidity or even great shifts in the humidity of the storage environment exacerbate, beyond what is "natural" and go to the level of severe or dynamic, as we see evident in the OPs note. In some cases, stabilizing the humidity of the storage environment may allow such dramatically rippled paper wave to "relax". It would take a good amount of time to reverse and without any pressure being applied, but it is possible to minimize with silca absorbing moisture away from the note and creating a safe storage zone around the note. Likewise the notion of how many notes were pressed was absurd to the reasoning of this discussion, which was equally dealt with earlier. "The fact is that paper wave is desirable to knowledgable gem-quality collectors..." The implications of your words needs major refocusing. The fact is, paper wave is "acceptable" to some degree among some paper money collectors who can spot natural paper wave from those notes which have been stored incorrectly and exhibit unnaturally heavy paper wave. If you compare prices between the two and could actually perform a survey of what gem-quality collectors desire, heavily rippled notes are not one of the eye-appealing factors they seek out, and the flatter the note the more desirable and pricey the note is likely to be, particularly when rarity is a factor. To knowledgeable collectors, as I have been sharing with you from my own knowledge, such rippled paper like that of the OPs note is a signal of improper storage, negative eye-appeal and a factor that can well affect resale value, EVEN IF the note is otherwise Gem and accurately graded as we agree the OPs note is.  So yes, go, read and research, instead of fighting about it here. Reread this thread first of all and look where you took wrong turns, first agreeing with someone else's poor reasoning and lack of understanding of the factors that caused this note to ripple beyond acceptable degrees of 'natural paper wave' and further for your insolent position to simply be argumentative because you refuse to be corrected when other options are presented and challenged your own thinking and assumption of generalizations in the matter. Thus far you have provided nothing of quality to support your protests. But you can alway try again. Yes, I do know something about conservation and preservation of printed works on paper. I know a great deal about the printing process, particularly traditional printing processes, how materials react to the presence of moisture and I have been collecting and looking at numismatic items for, it seems, as long as you have been living. The addition of my post count here is a recent addition that collects plenty of support in my favor for understanding numismatics, be that paper or coin. You haven't been on this forum long enough yet to realize that, nor my passion for collecting, grading, and helping others with these same things in our shared hobby. Further, your insulting use of 'moronic' only shows the cracks in your own personality for dealing with challenges to your understanding of what we are talking about. Certainly all paper wave is not natural, but can and does amount to damage from exposure to dampness in the environment. That is something which can escape grading and essentially not effect the note and thereby the grade it is given, but more likely, it's due the breathability of the holder, and occurred after the note was encapsulated and stored with lack of precaution to prevent such damage. That takes no leap whatsoever to arrive at as plausible reason for the severity of paper wave with regards to the OPs note. I assure you that you have done nothing to educate this thread, let alone "help" me, nor am I stubborn to the ideas of others. However, I will not change my position when it's clear how weak your own evidence has been, and how slim your experience shows you to be discussing this with any sense of authority. Name calling isn't winning you any arguments nor is it showing you to be correct about this topic. You can leave this discussion but it doesn't change the fact that you have underwhelmed this topic with evidence to support your claims and protests, and you decided to stamp out because you couldn't be right.[/QUOTE]

Create my FREE Account!

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches