 |
 |
Removing china marker from a photocopy?
|
 |
|
 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: retired
Status:
Offline
|
|
OK, I got some documents under freedom of information, blah, blah, blah and so on. They are photocopies of the originals. So what they did to parts (for some reason) they didn't want me to see was obliterate it with a china marker (grease pencil for you knobheads).
I tried the looking up against the light trick but no luck.
Since photocopies are very easy to destroy, the print that is. Is there any way to uncover enough of the china marker to not affect what's underneath at least too much?
Maybe red colored glasses or some such or x-ray specs?  Beat you to the joke.
Any CSI fans out there? Maybe it was on one their shows.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Brake cleaner will do it, and probably WD-40. Just spray it on then lay it down on a towel to let it dissolve. It may take a long time, and it may ruin the paper -- but that's all I know to try.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Washington DC
Status:
Offline
|
|
Maybe you should make a photocopy of something and mark it up with a grease pencil yourself so you can experiment with different ways of doing it?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2006
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster
OK, I got some documents under freedom of information, blah, blah, blah and so on. They are photocopies of the originals. So what they did to parts (for some reason) they didn't want me to see was obliterate it with a china marker (grease pencil for you knobheads).
I tried the looking up against the light trick but no luck.
Since photocopies are very easy to destroy, the print that is. Is there any way to uncover enough of the china marker to not affect what's underneath at least too much?
Maybe red colored glasses or some such or x-ray specs?  Beat you to the joke.
Any CSI fans out there? Maybe it was on one their shows.
It was obliterated for a reason.
You don't need to see it.
Get over it.
Move on (.ugh)
|
America should know the political orientation of government officials who might be in a position to adversely influence the future of this country. http://tinyurl.com/4vucu5
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: BFE
Status:
Offline
|
|
Search teh intarweb. I'm sure there's a way to do it without removing the toner from the copies.
How about removing it with an iron and a paper towel?
|

I'm a bird. I am the 1% (of pets).
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Dadgummit, just do what I said and all will be well with the world.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: :ИOITAↃO⅃
Status:
Offline
|
|
Just make sure you practice with some sample photocopies before you try the documents themselves!
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Washington DC
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by RAILhead
Dadgummit, just do what I said and all will be well with the world.
But you said that your method might ruin the paper which, in turn, would probably destroy the information that he's trying to uncover...
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status:
Offline
|
|
Its called redaction, and generally speaking the type of marker they use generally does not allow any type of removal. Unless the folks doing the redaction were n00bs I'd not waste the time trying to undo it.
Lawyers and the government do this sort of thing all of the time, so I suspect they know a thing or too about covering up stuff you're not supposed to see.
As Abe said they did it for a reason, just move on and not worry about it.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: retired
Status:
Offline
|
|
Zzzank you.

|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Administrator 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: California
Status:
Offline
|
|
What you want to do isn't possible, the information isn't present. Unless the copy guys made a serious error.
• Original document, with classified info present.
A. Make a photocopy of the original. (Copy #1)
B. Return the original to storage.
C. Whip out the grease marker, and blot out the interesting stuff.
D. Make a photocopy of the the marked-out Copy #1.
E. Destroy Copy #1, the one that had the grease marker on top of the interesting stuff.
F. Pass out Copy #2 to Atomic Rooster.
You'd need to have Copy #1 in order to remove the marker blots. But in fact, you have Copy #2, which doesn't contain the info on the illegal government conspiracy. In order to extract anything, the copy guys would have to have screwed up and given you Copy #1 by mistake.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: retired
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by nonhuman
But you said that your method might ruin the paper which, in turn, would probably destroy the information that he's trying to uncover...
I think that's he wanted me to do thinking I'm a complete doofus like his self.

|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: BFE
Status:
Offline
|
|
Just let us know what you did and whether or not it works.
|

I'm a bird. I am the 1% (of pets).
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by reader50
What you want to do isn't possible, the information isn't present. Unless the copy guys made a serious error.
• Original document, with classified info present.
A. Make a photocopy of the original. (Copy #1)
B. Return the original to storage.
C. Whip out the grease marker, and blot out the interesting stuff.
D. Make a photocopy of the the marked-out Copy #1.
E. Destroy Copy #1, the one that had the grease marker on top of the interesting stuff.
F. Pass out Copy #2 to Atomic Rooster.
You'd need to have Copy #1 in order to remove the marker blots. But in fact, you have Copy #2, which doesn't contain the info on the illegal government conspiracy. In order to extract anything, the copy guys would have to have screwed up and given you Copy #1 by mistake.
I don't know, just knowing some local government offices, you'd be surprised how amateurish people can be.
|
|
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Portland, Oregon
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by olePigeon
AHHAHAHAH. The original CSI was the best. Then they came out with the other shows, including miami, with a HORRIBLE lead actor who can't deliver a line to save his life.
I hate CSI now, they have ruined it for me. Toodles!
|
|
24" iMac 2.16GHz c2d ~ 3G ram ~ 250G ~ Superdrive ~ Pure Sexiness
15" Powerbook G4 ~ 1.5GHz ~ 1.5G ram ~ 160G ~ Combo
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: PDX
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by olePigeon
Geez, its just a TV show. Fiction. You know, stuff that really isn't true. How entertaining would it be to watch 60 minutes of actual CSI investigations?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status:
Offline
|
|
Really
Seems olePigeon seems wrapped a little too tight on tv shows. Relax, its all fiction anyways 
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|

|
|
 |
Forum Rules
|
 |
 |
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|