Sapphire is rebacked CE/IE
Ruby is the only real one.
Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin
and the lord said, let there be light
and there was, light illuminating a mox as fake as Kim Kardashian
mtgpimp
I do not get the conclusion because the Jet picture is pretty bad
I was right?
nope u were wrong. it´s clearly the sapphire, but that the sapphire was absolutely outstanding a fake was pretty clear even before he made the light-test.
Und jetzt ... erklär mir warum das falsch ist.Sapphire is rebacked CE/IE
Corners suck and the backside does not match condition wise. My point of view.
Anyway decently done for a Beta fake I guess.
I was thinking the Sapphire was fake before I scrolled down because the corners look like someone rounded them with a pair of scissors.
So re-backs do not pass the light test? Aren't they just pealing off the front of the CE card and pasting on the back panel of a normal card? And this lets LESS light through than a real card? Correct?
Does the front of a CE card have the same print dots as a normal card under magnification? Or is the dpi higher or lower etc?
Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
Afaik exactly the same as A/B besides the obvious (corners + backside) ...
sry didnt see ur last post. of course ure right then!
Thanks oRen. I own multiple pieces of A/B Power and other A/B cards all of which I believe are real. Whenever I get a new BB power card I always inspect it with a jewelers loup, light test it, and compare it with other A/B cards.
That being said, I'm not sure if I have ever closely inspected a rebacked CE card.
Does a re-backed CE card have the same thickness and weight as a real card?
What other differences are there between rebacked and real cards besides the light issue and possible crappy trim job on the corners?
I am sure it is in no ones interest if anyone including me goes too much into detail. People gaining advice how to properly reback CE cards would be pretty bad.
Most rebacks slightly differ in weight (mostly higher) and are slightly ticker than real cards. This will be not noticeable in most situations without additional equipment like a scale or a magnifier. Only if the person rebacking the CE card did not know how to do it properly you will notice further stuff like traces of glue or edges pealing off.
Also it will be more likely that someone will attempt to fraud Alpha (apart from Trop + Volc if not leaking common sense ...) cards because you can use a corner rounder for those iirc.
I have seen rebacks passing every imaginable test. It all comes down to a lot of training, know how and so on ...
But, if you do have access to an analytical balance, you're totally fine. If you have someone you know working/going to school at a university, the Chem labs will have them for you to test them on.
-Matt
Even the bend test? Because I've never seen that. And I bend-test the fuck out of any Beta piece I pick up that's not obviously real.
Nope, using an analytical balance isn't acceptable since we are not weighing known compounds with exact composition or specific gravity. We have to consider that each cardboard must weigh differently depending on how much pulp were clumped together to create each sheet. I assume the real Beta cards you would use as standards won't weight exactly the same either, unless they have been pulled from the same booster pack and stored in humidity controlled environment or have been dehydrated using a dessicator. Aside from the glue elements we have to take into account the moisture content of each individual cards.
I'm assuming we take an average of Beta cards stored in different environments, then obviously put them in a dessicator to account for moisture absorption, then reweigh again and find our median and mean masses. Obviously the approach isn't perfect, but we have to assume that the glue adds enough weight that it is statistically significant. If we take enough cards, we should be able to get a reliable estimate of the average, and account for cards from different regions, stored in different ways, and with differing densities.
Silly goose, I'm in Science. I just skipped all the boring stuff for the non-science audience
-Matt
Database error=double post. Frick.
-Matt
the sapphire is a pretty good fake, but it's not that good (i knew there was something wrong as soon as i opened it), so i assume that the seller knew it was fake when he sold it to me - although he swears it's real (well he would) has great feedback, we've had good communication, i've bought stuff off him in the past etc. etc.
anyway, he's offered to refund me my money so of course i'm taking him up on that,
if there's any problems with the refund i'll out him here
there's so much fake beta power now, that a big problem is sellers who buy it thinking its real and then pass it on (this can go through a number of hands), they've been screwed by someone previously and it's only now that they are being called out
but that's not my problem
mtgpimp
Yeah, not your fault at all. Return it like a champ.
-Matt
I'm going to go out on a hunch and say most magic players know someone with an accurate scale (for ebay labels of courseI'm assuming we take an average of Beta cards stored in different environments, then obviously put them in a dessicator to account for moisture absorption, then reweigh again and find our median and mean masses. Obviously the approach isn't perfect, but we have to assume that the glue adds enough weight that it is statistically significant. If we take enough cards, we should be able to get a reliable estimate of the average, and account for cards from different regions, stored in different ways, and with differing densities.
Silly goose, I'm in Science. I just skipped all the boring stuff for the non-science audience
-Matt). Would it be possible for someone to get average weights for some inexpensive beta cards and post them? I'd donate some Beta lands to dehydrate.
My web site, www.TheWorldExposed.com
I have easy access to a good one at my lab. I'll just have to clean the coke dust off of it, and it's ready to go! *Tweak
Plus, I have ~300 beta cards, so I could weight all of those as well and enter them into a spreadsheet. If anyone is willing to help out, that'd be cool!
-Matt
There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)
Reply With Quote
