Future fading of autos?

I'm sure there are many ways to look at this question so in my opinion, there are some obvious things we should get out of the way. One being, how things are stored are always a factor. Another is type of item signed. Another is what it was signed with.

These are all things I weigh in my mind before I even buy or obtain an autograph. Not long ago I was boxing up a bunch of autographed baseballs and noticed varying degrees of issues.

This scared me. I was told it might have just had something to do with something maybe being on the surface of some of them as some were faded while others looked as good as the day they were signed. I still don't have a definitive answer.

So I'm wondering about cards. I love a lot of the new stuff as it is on card. Even some nice sticker stuff to be had out there. But I've noticed on some of them, particularly acetate cards or the topps legacy and five star as well as museum collection, the autos at times are really light or look like they might be in a pre-fade type of mode.

Which bothers me because I have a slew of these and other types of autos. And since my main focus for collecting is autos(outside of Bagwell stuff), I don't want to build a nice collection to have it slowly fade away. So I've turned to older cards for some answers. It seems acetate stuff does not hold autos well over time. Anything plastic doesn't as a whole from what I can tell although I have a ton and have purchased some recently as well(which truth be told I did simply to have an example of that particular card in my collection), I think I will steer clear of these(no pun intended) for now. Just to wait and see.

But museum, legacy, and five star have me curious. So what I'd like to know is does anyone have any insight on these and possibly any others to stay away from? I've even seen sticker stuff on eBay and here where some of you have posted that's either faded or started to fade. I don't bother asking because I don't want to rub it in or belittle someone's new pickup. But I have to wonder was it how it was stored, what it was signed with, or the card stock? Many may not even know or care.

I just want to do the best I can to buy/collect something that will last. And I think there is some obvious problems with that as the card companies have very little stake in whether the auto lasts or not and collectors collect them, store them away, and forget about them. I'd rather not open a box in 10 years to find all these autos fading. Not if it can be helped by avoiding certain brands or types of cards while keying in on others since there are so many choices now.

Thoughts?

With a few exceptions, I have generally stayed away from collecting autos for this reason. I've seen stuff pulled from Sweet Spot and the auto was nearly faded away after being packed away from daylight. It should be interesting to see how the signatures hold up on stickers, high gloss, and chrome surfaces over the next 20 years or so. I would think those type of surfaces would not allow the ink to be absorbed as much (however, I do have a '93 refractor that was signed and the ink looks as to be as bold as it can be). I woudl think an autograph on a mat finished card (like A&G) would allow the ink to better integrate into the surface and better resist the fading process.

As far as what is being used, I've never understood why Sharpies are used for autographs. These are dye based markers that are not designed for archival or fine art use. Essentially sharpies and other office grade markers will eventually fade much faster. I draw and paint (my other hobby) and from what I know pigment based markers and pens are designed to withstand fading far better. The only issue with these materials would be they would probably take much longer to dry on a gloss surface (and initially prone to smear) and would be better suited for a mat card or the leather of a baseball. If I was going to have something autographed in person I would prefer to use a Sakura Pigma Micron pen (Graphic 1) or a pigment marker by Windsor & Newton. Both of these would hold far better that what is is likely being used.

Does anyone know what Topps and the other card companies are currently using for their autographs?

Well to be honest 2007 sweet spot was a doozy of a product because of the kind of leather used. It was more of a plastic. Like the cheap baseballs you can get for a dollar or two. Though oddly enough, some of those were not signed on the same types. I've got some Hunter Pence stuff that still looks spot on. And some of them seem to be signed in pen, others in fine tip sharpie or some other paint type of marker.

I've seen paint or what I assume is paint(Panini Luxe for basketball), regular sharpies, and pen. I guess there might be other things used but I'm not sure if they bring the pen/marker with them when they have the guys sign or if guys just get to use whatever they have or whatever. Some of this stuff looks nice as hell but it would be like buying a nice looking car that self destructs over time. What's the point?

I tend to go after, if the guy has one, older autos if I can. Especially if it's like out of the Donruss signature series or something like that. Those things are 20 years old. Could they still fade? Yes. But what you see is probably what you're going to get for the foreseeable future. Stuff like older topps finest (http://www.ebay.com/itm/JOSH-HAMILT...520097?hash=item542d0476a1:g:GRMAAOSwq19XDB7f), the upper deck glass(basketball) (http://www.ebay.com/itm/2003-UD-Gla...hash=item360c928880:m:mmzBLKEuCXi9Ey4X8EgTLBw ) , scare me as does some of the older pinnacle football( http://www.ebay.com/itm/1997-Pinnac...hash=item360c68cb36:m:m5SUjHXE-6YuxrsljFYci4w ).

These are just a few examples and who knows how they were stored. Yet there are also others that are bolder and nicer looking. It kind of makes you wonder if one thing or another helps or hurts and if so, what it is that is doing so.

BTW, I'm surprised not many others have responded. I would assume with the kind of money that is routinely spent on autographed cards every day, this would be something everyone would be interested in.

predatorkj said:

I tend to go after, if the guy has one, older autos if I can. Especially if it's like out of the Donruss signature series or something like that. Those things are 20 years old. Could they still fade? Yes. But what you see is probably what you're going to get for the foreseeable future.

Click to expand...

Even a lot of those, the Ripken and especially the "notorious" '93 Will Clark (I think the Clark cards faded more due to the surface) are fading fast - although, the '91 Sandberg seem to have held up much better (perhaps due to the larger sized marker and again, surface type). You can also look at those Nabisco cards from '93 and '94 and already see the effects of fading (again those were likely sharpie or some other dye based marker).

My hope is that the autographed products that are currently being produced, especially the high end stuff, are using archival quality ink. I do think (and I'm taking an educated guess here) that the gold and silver marker (perhaps using different chemicals - maybe even paint) has a much better chance of resisting the effects of fading as evidenced by the '92 Franchise cards (Mickey, Yaz, and Stan). Those appear to be holding up quite well.

If I was going to have to invest a bunch of my money on an autographed card I would much rather go with gold or silver sharpie...but again I would still hope the industry is using archival quality inks (like pigment based dyes or paint based markers) not the stuff you would snag at office depot. Do you think a serious illustrator or artist would use a sharpie for their work? The more I think about it, I am honesty surprised that card companies (maybe someone has) have not come out and tried to use the inks that are being used as a selling point. Unless that is they don't want to come across like, "hey the stuff we were using before sucked, but now we've got ink that actually will stick around". It's a good point to think about in the long term.

On another note, I really like to keep as much my cards in binders (unless graded or super condition sensitive, of course) as I can. For the signed stuff this is good because I can look at it when I want, but it's not sitting out in a magnetic getting a sun tan. As soon as I flip the page it's back in the dark. I never keep my signed material displayed, which of course kind of defeats the purpose, but with something like a Micron or the Winson & Newton pigment markers, those are designed with art/illustration permanency in mind, so that would be totally different.

Sierra79 said "Do you think a serious illustrator or artist would use a sharpie for their work?". I think that sums it up well.

I can give card companies a pass for not having deep knowledge of autographs and archival inks in the beginning of auto cards, but now it's unforgiveable. Even those 2007 Sweet Spot autos that have suffered so much over time are unforgiveable. Autographed cards that take so much design time and so much logistical organizing to actually get signed, these deserve permanence in their autographs. Most of these cards are little works of art, and they should be built to last.

By the way, the 1992 Donruss McDonald's Alomar autograph card I have, which really looks like it was signed in ball point pen (!), still looks pretty good. I don't have a point here, just an observation.

Black sharpies used to fade and get a yellow hue on the edges years ago. I think it had something to do with the pigment in those? That is one reason why autograph collectors switched to blue sharpie.

As far as what card companies use, most of the time a staedtler is used. Especially on chrome and glossy surfaces. These are used because they don't bubble on those slick surfaces like sharpies do. If you are going to use a sharpie on slick cards, they need prepped to rub off or dull the gloss.

Staedtler I would think should also be good, but it's the "most of the time" that would make me think twice about shelling out top dollar on autographs. It should be interesting to see how the chrome cards and high gloss cards fare over the long term. My personal feeling is that high gloss just won't allow the pigment (or in the case of the cheaper stuff) or dyes to absorb into the cards surface - thus making it much easier to fade. The only sure thing would be to use a cheap ball point pen (worst thing to ever sign with) and make the player press super hard to create a truly permanent impression in the card LOL.

I do think it would be nice if the card companies did report or advertise what they are using for their autos. I myself would use anything over a sharpie...on any surface.

Since we're on the topic of permanency, how long do you think the adhesive on the sticker autos will last before they come falling off in their graded holders? I've always been hesitant about stickers for this reason. The idea that even if the ink holds, they could bubble, wrinkle, or just plain fall off over time always sticks in the back of my mind (no pun attended).

Ok, I don't think we can really expect the companies to care about the autos holding up, using the right type of cards, or the right types of pens/markers. It would be nice if we could. But I think they stop caring at the "cool factor". They just want to make something people will fork over money for.

As for the stickers, I just stay away from bad looking ones but I must admit, most seem to hold their auto, and I have yet to see any of them falling off or bubbling really badly. And with a decade and a half+ of evidence/examples out there, I think we can at least progressively see how they are holding up.

Staedler is good but sharpie can be good on the right type of item. Helmets look good with it. And a lot of cards do too.




Just a few examples but I feel these will hold and all were signed with sharpie. But for these types of cards, anything older really, and other plain card stock like Allen and Ginter, GQ and stuff, sharpie should hold. I am not hip on black sharpie as I do think it can fade easier. But on some things there really is no better color.

Just my thoughts.