seanfingh

Thanks, Royh I look good in a top hat. What about the fishnets? he pictures the leg hair poking through ... The black and gray curls spilling out of the top hat weren't enough?

Thanks, Royh I look good in a top hat. What about the fishnets?

Thanks, Royh

It's important to also realize that it's easy to see something like restoration removal as being like trimming. Trimming and restoration removal are similar in that they're both intentional attempts to manipulate a comic that leave no explicit non-original materials like restoration does. However, where they differ is that trimming is detectable in the state of a comic, whereas restoration removal isn't. There is no normal usage of a comic within which a straight-edge and an exacto knife is used along an entire edge of a comic, so if you see the evidence in the paper that could have only come from this trimming, you know it was trimmed. Of course all comics are trimmed at the press, but if the trim pattern is different than production cuts or the color of the trimmed edge differs from the color of the remaining paper, that's the evidence of an intentional trim. If you remove restoration, it's almost the same act that caused the damage the restoration was there to cover up in the first place, albeit more expertly done than the likely-accidental damage that caused the original defect. You can't tell from the state of the comic what caused that damage--could have been removal of resto or not, you just don't know. It seems simple and logical enough. Maybe Zatannah can help with this one too. Maybe she can read it to me backwards so it appears germane to anything. It's absolutely germane to the discussion of what responsibilities the graders have. Whether they should be giving their impartial opinion to the book as it sits in front of them or whether they should look for intent. I guess that makes sense. FF deserves a groin punch for quoting and responding to himself. But they still don't have to look for intent to know that they are seeing a ________ Pedigree book that has had defects pressed out.

It's important to also realize that it's easy to see something like restoration removal as being like trimming. Trimming and restoration removal are similar in that they're both intentional attempts to manipulate a comic that leave no explicit non-original materials like restoration does. However, where they differ is that trimming is detectable in the state of a comic, whereas restoration removal isn't. There is no normal usage of a comic within which a straight-edge and an exacto knife is used along an entire edge of a comic, so if you see the evidence in the paper that could have only come from this trimming, you know it was trimmed. Of course all comics are trimmed at the press, but if the trim pattern is different than production cuts or the color of the trimmed edge differs from the color of the remaining paper, that's the evidence of an intentional trim. If you remove restoration, it's almost the same act that caused the damage the restoration was there to cover up in the first place, albeit more expertly done than the likely-accidental damage that caused the original defect. You can't tell from the state of the comic what caused that damage--could have been removal of resto or not, you just don't know. It seems simple and logical enough. Maybe Zatannah can help with this one too. Maybe she can read it to me backwards so it appears germane to anything.

The only thing this thread needed was a discussion of TATs. 2007's bugaboo = Pressing 2012s bugaboo = TATs Two great tastes that taste great together.

Kick save, and a beauty!

There is no way to remove the human aspect of grading. You know it. I know it. Rules are set in place in any place of business to control what can be controlled as much as possible. You can't remove humanity from the equation. Exactly. Embracing reality will allow all apologists, no matter how extreme, to maintain a modicum of logic.

Do they have Zatanna handle the mindwipe duties?

Joseph, was this book purchased in a CGC purple holder initially? The reason I ask is because it's not CGC's or the insider's (or the resto remover's for that matter) fault that the market puts an extremely unrealistic and irrationally low value on restored books, opening up the gap and therefore the market for people to remove restoration. Unfortunately, that fault can squarely be placed on the shoulders of the open market and it's lack of education and understanding of how to understand restoration and how to value a book based on the amount and type of resto. If a book goes cheap because everyone shuns resto even though it's just one dot of colour touch that is the real shame. I respectfully disagree Roy, and a lot of the reasoning pertains to the particular context of the situation. Suffice it to say that if the book had dislcosed "colour touch removed" - and in this particular case, there was no reason it couldn't except for the reason that the people involved knew full well about the repercussions - the book would NEVER have attained the same price. Ironically, it's evolved to the point where the "apparent" designation better suits blue label with hidden and/or deliberately undisclosed work than on a purple label. I get where you're coming from. My point was that if the market had valued the book with a dot of colour touch at the same value as it did with the colour touch removed (where it realistically should have been valued - that is how I would have valued it) then you wouldn't have that price gap and therefore that ability to remove colour touch and increase the price. This is just wrong. The graders job is to grade the book as it is in hand. Period. If a book had a tear seal that is unsealed, or a piece added to the corner, and the piece is removed, the book should be graded "as is". You don't want graders speculating as to what might have been done to a book, with absolutely zero evidence present. I agree with you. I think that Joseph may be implying that CGC knew that the resto was removed and should have pro-actively notated it on the label but I do agree that the grader should really only knows what they see in front of them - ie the condition of the book and paper and nothing really more. These guys remember books that they have graded, especially if they have seen them many times. I had a book signed by Robert Crumb and Art Spiegelman. It was a purple label 9.8 Funny Aminals. After the fact, I hated that purple label. I sent it to Matt Nelson to have the CT removed. It came back 9.6 Purple Yellow. I wasn't real happy I called Haspel about it to see if he could give me any insight. He said that that particular book had been graded by CGC at least 6 times and that there was a swab of India ink an inch by an inch that had been applied copiously as though with someone's fingers. He didn't need any prompting or an invoice number because he knew the exact book I was talking about. These guys remember the books that they see. The fact that they remember books is completely irrelevant. They can't grade on memory. They have to grade what is in their hands in front of them. It is relevant to the part of the quote I was interested in. I underlined it above. My point is that they don't have to speculate what was done if they can tell what was done since the last time they graded that particular book. The graders' mandate must be to grade the book in front of them, not to draw from any previous knowledge of the book. Mandate induced amnesia. Brilliant!!!!!

Joseph, was this book purchased in a CGC purple holder initially? The reason I ask is because it's not CGC's or the insider's (or the resto remover's for that matter) fault that the market puts an extremely unrealistic and irrationally low value on restored books, opening up the gap and therefore the market for people to remove restoration. Unfortunately, that fault can squarely be placed on the shoulders of the open market and it's lack of education and understanding of how to understand restoration and how to value a book based on the amount and type of resto. If a book goes cheap because everyone shuns resto even though it's just one dot of colour touch that is the real shame. I respectfully disagree Roy, and a lot of the reasoning pertains to the particular context of the situation. Suffice it to say that if the book had dislcosed "colour touch removed" - and in this particular case, there was no reason it couldn't except for the reason that the people involved knew full well about the repercussions - the book would NEVER have attained the same price. Ironically, it's evolved to the point where the "apparent" designation better suits blue label with hidden and/or deliberately undisclosed work than on a purple label. I get where you're coming from. My point was that if the market had valued the book with a dot of colour touch at the same value as it did with the colour touch removed (where it realistically should have been valued - that is how I would have valued it) then you wouldn't have that price gap and therefore that ability to remove colour touch and increase the price. This is just wrong. The graders job is to grade the book as it is in hand. Period. If a book had a tear seal that is unsealed, or a piece added to the corner, and the piece is removed, the book should be graded "as is". You don't want graders speculating as to what might have been done to a book, with absolutely zero evidence present. I agree with you. I think that Joseph may be implying that CGC knew that the resto was removed and should have pro-actively notated it on the label but I do agree that the grader should really only knows what they see in front of them - ie the condition of the book and paper and nothing really more. These guys remember books that they have graded, especially if they have seen them many times. I had a book signed by Robert Crumb and Art Spiegelman. It was a purple label 9.8 Funny Aminals. After the fact, I hated that purple label. I sent it to Matt Nelson to have the CT removed. It came back 9.6 Purple Yellow. I wasn't real happy I called Haspel about it to see if he could give me any insight. He said that that particular book had been graded by CGC at least 6 times and that there was a swab of India ink an inch by an inch that had been applied copiously as though with someone's fingers. He didn't need any prompting or an invoice number because he knew the exact book I was talking about. These guys remember the books that they see. The fact that they remember books is completely irrelevant. They can't grade on memory. They have to grade what is in their hands in front of them. It is relevant to the part of the quote I was interested in. I underlined it above. My point is that they don't have to speculate what was done if they can tell what was done since the last time they graded that particular book.

Alright, let's not paint all 2 Million books that CGC have graded with the same brush. Just like you, or me or anyone will, they will remember the books or even defects if they stand out in their minds for whatever reason. That doesn't mean in any way that they remember all books. I remember most books that have passed through my hands. Not always immediately but I remember defects on books, etc and eventually can recall most of them. Most of the time though, I'd call to ask about a particular book I had graded and they couldn't recall it unless it was within a few hours of seeing the book. There are always going to be books that stand out in memory. That doesn't mean they remember every book. I was unable to find Funny Animals by Crumb on either the GCD or the census. Is it a rare book? Sometimes certain books just stick out for whatever reason. I do believe Mark has an above average memory though. It's just a part of who he is. The guy is a virtual encyclopedia when it comes to comics. I wouldn't suggest that they did. But they remember the PC Hulk #1, my Funny Aminals (you couldn't find it because you are looking up "Animals") and countless other remarkable books that they have seen time and time and time again. I am not making a value judgment or connecting any dots, real or imagined. Merely stating that I absolutely believe that many of the books that are multiple CPR or CR books are well known.

Joseph, was this book purchased in a CGC purple holder initially? The reason I ask is because it's not CGC's or the insider's (or the resto remover's for that matter) fault that the market puts an extremely unrealistic and irrationally low value on restored books, opening up the gap and therefore the market for people to remove restoration. Unfortunately, that fault can squarely be placed on the shoulders of the open market and it's lack of education and understanding of how to understand restoration and how to value a book based on the amount and type of resto. If a book goes cheap because everyone shuns resto even though it's just one dot of colour touch that is the real shame. I respectfully disagree Roy, and a lot of the reasoning pertains to the particular context of the situation. Suffice it to say that if the book had dislcosed "colour touch removed" - and in this particular case, there was no reason it couldn't except for the reason that the people involved knew full well about the repercussions - the book would NEVER have attained the same price. Ironically, it's evolved to the point where the "apparent" designation better suits blue label with hidden and/or deliberately undisclosed work than on a purple label. I get where you're coming from. My point was that if the market had valued the book with a dot of colour touch at the same value as it did with the colour touch removed (where it realistically should have been valued - that is how I would have valued it) then you wouldn't have that price gap and therefore that ability to remove colour touch and increase the price. This is just wrong. The graders job is to grade the book as it is in hand. Period. If a book had a tear seal that is unsealed, or a piece added to the corner, and the piece is removed, the book should be graded "as is". You don't want graders speculating as to what might have been done to a book, with absolutely zero evidence present. I agree with you. I think that Joseph may be implying that CGC knew that the resto was removed and should have pro-actively notated it on the label but I do agree that the grader should really only knows what they see in front of them - ie the condition of the book and paper and nothing really more. These guys remember books that they have graded, especially if they have seen them many times. I had a book signed by Robert Crumb and Art Spiegelman. It was a purple label 9.8 Funny Aminals. After the fact, I hated that purple label. I sent it to Matt Nelson to have the CT removed. It came back 9.6 Purple Yellow. I wasn't real happy I called Haspel about it to see if he could give me any insight. He said that that particular book had been graded by CGC at least 6 times and that there was a swab of India ink an inch by an inch that had been applied copiously as though with someone's fingers. He didn't need any prompting or an invoice number because he knew the exact book I was talking about. These guys remember the books that they see.

CGC 'guarantees' nothing other than your book was viewed by three people. Apparently, even the amount of people viewing the book has recently been contested (at least to my knowledge) that when inquiring about graders notes, they no longer provide the once "democratic" and peer reviewed process of using three graders opinions to arrive at a final (mean) grade. The finalizer was the autocratic grade giver. There was no democracy, nor any determination of a "mean" grade.

PLOD CPR for a lower grade Old label crackout resub Fingh squarebound submissions

The ones that say "Robert Bell" on the flap. This is a baseball thread; don't you mean Albert Belle. I have no clue who either of you are talking about, so I'm just gonna throw Bell Biv Devoe out there and walk away. It's long overdue but now Philly is slammin' Boyz II Men, ABC, BBD The east coast family

The ones that say "Robert Bell" on the flap. This is a baseball thread; don't you mean Albert Belle.

This is awesome.

Congratulations. Congratulations for breaking my heart Congratulations for tearing it all apart Congratulations you finally did succeed Congratulations for leaving me in need This morning I looked out my window and found A bluebird singing but there was no one around At night I lay alone in my bed With an image of you goin' around in my head Congratulations for bringing me down Congratulations now I'm sorrow bound Congratulations you got a good deal Congratulations how good you must feel I guess that I must have loved you more than I ever knew My world is empty now cause it don't have you And if I had just one more chance to win your heart again I would do things differently but what's the use to pretend Congratulations for making me wait Congratulations now it's too late Congratulations you came out on top Congratulations you never did know when to stop Congratulations

Well, obviously not. Hmm. What could have possibly prompted me to respond in kind to a snarky comment? I wonder... According to CGC they do. According to me, they aren't that significant. That's the whole point. Now my opinion is an "opinion"... again proving that it's obviously isn't "welcome". BTW-- you already have bought books from me... you just don't know it. You get them from dealers who buy them from me, mark up the grades, or have them upgraded from CGC, and you happily pay a lot more from them than you ever would from me. Just sayin'...

my man Alan Moore

Took me two books to do it, but here are all 4 Y:TLM creators.

Had to give this one its own post. George Perez signed back in 2008 with his regular sig. Then Adonis got him to sign again with his artist sig!

My books back from Heroes, my Econs from god knows when and a couple of recent purchases:

Bakula and Stockwell Kelly Hu (Lady Deathstrike from X2)