Site Forum

Please check out this gallery. I for one would like to see all the covered images removed (not tagged "Scan needs replacing").  Maybe it's time for Admin to make a rule about cards still in packages, covered/blocked cards, etc.

That is very annoying that's for sure, especially if you collect the guy on the right, for these cards I can see C2C's point it is to the point where it ruins the cards visual impact significantly, maybe there should be some thought given for instances like these, my few Ranford cards have words on the palstic covering but nothing to this extreme.

Though I can understand your point of view, many colletors will not remove the protective plastic from these cards for obvious condition reasons.  I rather have a scan of a card partially covered but identifiable than no image at all.  If someone does have a card where the plastic has been removed, then let him replace the current image.  But unfortunately, not everyone takes the time to scan their cards (or can scan their cards) and upload them onto this site for the pleasure and/or reference-use of other members.

Very true Sandy, I never remove the film for my collections, but in the case of the dude with no face card, as a collector of him I'd have two, one with and one without. That's kind of like buying a star wars toy sealed in a brown box and never opening the brown box. Just my canuckle POV. =)

Too bad the manufacturer did not think of putting the paper as a thin line on the bottom of the card and not blocking out the player which collectors are interested in.  

I would need 2 of the same card to remove one seal. In Canada, it is hard enough to find one of any baseball card.

The reason for images in our database is so users can see what the cards, the whole complete card, looks like.  Not just two-thirds of it. Same reason we don't want overcropped (incomplete) or low quality card images.

If a member doesn't want to remove protective film, or for that matter the packaging. That's fine, I have many cards still in packaging. But I won't scan and upload them here. Let someone else who's removed film and packaging do it.

Well I am sure the dude on the right (Greg Maddox) collectors might feel having the film covering the card as how it was issued. But can see the other point for appeal.

I agree completely with this sentiment. While it's not desirable to have a scan of a card featuring a big ugly sticker which obscrues a fair portion of the card's front, it's still better to have something uploaded to give collectors an idea of what the card looks like.  Think of it as a 'placeholder.'  And, when or if a new unobstructed image is available, it can be added as a replacement.  

Unless someone feels having no image whatsoever for a card is the best answer, I think this solution basically satisfies everyone.

Using the logic that "something is better than nothing", then we should allow incomplete, low quality, photographed, watermarked, altered, crooked, and marked cards.  Heck, anything goes as long as we get an image uploaded.

Chuck, Chuck, Chuck.... You're making too much sense again... :)

The Finest peels are one thing (although we used to peel them bad boys off), but these coverings? Why not do the same with the mystery finests? When one of the players depicted on the card is completely obscured, I think this is where we need to draw the line.

Edited to fix a typo.

C2Cigars wrote:

Using the logic that "something is better than nothing", then we should allow incomplete, low quality, photographed, watermarked, altered, crooked, and marked cards.  Heck, anything goes as long as we get an image uploaded.