Peeling the "Passed" Stickers ?

<p>A new acquaintance, herself a collector of 50's-70's cameras, recently visited and upbraided me for leaving the little JCII "Passed" stickers on my bits and pieces. She peels them off and removes any trace of adhesive with solvent. I'd actually never considered doing this, but it's got me wondering. Any opinions out there?</p>

I always let 'em be. Have a few pieces that somebody in the past did what she does to them, but, it doesn't bother me. I

don't lose any sleep over aftermarket lens covers or camera cases, either. Ted

I'm in agreement with her. They look terrible. Off they go.

<p>I never thought about it . I leave mine on. I am a little surprised that she feels that way as a collector. Most collectors I know want things as close to new as possible. With original stickers, paperwork ,etc.</p>

<p>If they're cruddy, creased, and worn, off they go.<br>

Otherwise I leave them on. A clean sticker in excellent shape is just one more good selling point for minty equipment when it comes time to auction them off.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>On ancient (by the standards of today) cameras and lenses from late prehistoric times (say pre-1984), the JCII stickers can actually affect the underlying enamel or chrome*, so it would have been a good idea to have removed them when they were purchased back in 1976. However, if they have been left on all this time, removal will often then show the oval 'mark' of the sticker. I'd recommend that if the darned thing has made to this stage, then you'd do better to preserve the "original condition" and leave it on.</p>

<p>Whether that applies to things like the LV95 Passed Taiwan-made sticker like that on my precious TIME camera is a real question. It is possible there that its removal would drastically lower the value of the camera as much as 20% (that is from 25¢ to 20¢, say). :) My guess is that it was sort of passed in the same sense as a kidney stone....</p>

<p>_______<br /> *it is also possible that the sticker <em>protected</em> the original finish, but either way, its removal can leave a mark where it formerly was located.</p><div></div>

<p>This subject always brings a lively discussion.</p>

<p>I have a few classic cameras/lenses with the JCII stickers, but I don't have any preference as to whether to leave them on or peel them off. I have seen many a camera which was left with a permanent mark on its finish when the sticker was removed after many years, but by then the sticker itself had become an eyesore (faded, torn, etc.). The stickers were never meant to be left on, but I remember when I peeled them off my new Canon T50 and 50/1.8 in 1984. A couple of my friends were horrified!</p>

<p>In the olden days I *always* peeled them off. Peeled them off my Nikon FE2, and my dad's Nikon FE2. Why keep them? Now I know better, and a sticker in good condition means the camera was not used so much.</p>

<p>I agree with JDM. If the QC sticker is still there after 30 or 40 years, it may as well stay.</p>

<p>I usually ignore them but I have a few examples where the sticker has outlasted the rest of the camera !</p>

<p>I've always removed them...it seemed to me the equivalent of leaving a price tag on clothing you bought, or like the tags which always hung off Minnie Pearl's hats.</p>

<p>Be advised that you are violating Federal Statute #200136, as well as a host of State and international treaty agreements by removing said "passed" stickers.</p>

<p>If there are any original stickers on I leave them. If the camera is a user camera and the sticker gets broken... then I will throw it away. In older cameras the stickers and attached metal plates etc. just give more information of the camera and it's time.</p>

<p>@Stephen I cannot believe you just called upon Minnie Pearl's hats. I know the classic camera/film crowd is old but we should make a minimal effort to avoid cultural references worthy of a 1967 Merv Griffin Show. With Arthur Treacher. Jim Nabors. And Selma Diamond.<br>

Yikes.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>I'm in agreement with her. They look terrible. Off they go.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Me too. I always take them off.</p>

 

 

<blockquote>

<p>Be advised that you are violating Federal Statute #200136, as well as a host of State and international treaty agreements by removing said "passed" stickers.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That sounds like nonesense to me. Once you own it you can do what you like with it. It might be true if you were selling it new.</p>

 

 

<p>I don't have a strong opinion as JDM mentioned they often leave a permanent mark. On the Canon QLIII I have, it fell off much later so now there is a permanent oval mark in the chrome I'd rather have the sticker there than this "mark" My wife would take them off me I try to keep as much on something like a scratch cover on the mobile phone.. why not protects against scratches and on my little Sony digicam... the ZEISS sticker stays!!</p>

<p>They do look awful. But they evoke some kind of childhood memories in me - the cameras I lusted for bristled with them... I love em, cant get rid of them.... gross as they are.</p>

<p>You all clearly do not remember the <a href="00UtkI">lively discussion about Passed Stickers</a> back in 2009 (and I clearly spend too much time on CMC if I can remember every damn thread around here). Of particular note is John Liberty's post about half way down.</p>

<p>I have left them on in lenses or cameras that were in good cosmetic condition, especially if I wanted to sell them on! I am not a collector and want to use everything unless it is totally rubbish! Even then I might just expose some frames with rubbish lenses to make my money's worth!</p>

<p>I say leave them on. But I mainly feel that way about camera bodies. Lenses less so. Usually there is little space on a lens and the sticker has worn off.</p>

<p>On junk lenses and cameras I carefully remove them, save them and reglue them onto good cameras that are for sale. As others have said, "it is so barely used it still has the sticker on it." Sometimes the sticker serves the added purpose of hiding a cosmetic defect like a scratch or mild dent. Hate the fake stickers on the Time type cameras. It is a bonus when one of those junker "point and shoots" has a good sticker on it.</p>

<p>Vince, you left out Moms Mabley.</p>

<p>I had a Nikon F3HP that I bought with some other accessories and sold the body through ebay recently. According to the serial number it was a 1983 or 1984 body. Had a nice looking "Inspected" sticker, but I haven't seen any stickers that didn't say "Passed"?<br /> <img src="http://hull534.smugmug.com/photos/1238734209_vFnDi-L.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>I'm looking for cameras with "FAILED" stickers.</p>

<p>I always took the stickers off new gear I bought. Recently acquiring again some of these older cameras as souvenirs of days gone by, many did still have the stickers mounted. I removed them all, and as it has been said, some left oval discolorations showing where they once were. Doesn't bother me a whole lot though, I do think camera gear looks better without them.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Leave them on, I would rather look at a sticker than a discolored oval on a camera. Unless of course edges are lifting or they're otherwise interfering with function.</p>