Phill the Governor

Hey everyone, I understand grading can be subjective (to a point). But can someone please explain to me how this copy of Detective Comics 166 is a 9.6? With only the few spine stress lines, I could see a 9.6: this book is incredibly sharp. But a dust shadow along the spine and top of the book and a tear on the upper left back cover is acceptable in 9.6? In addition to the defects that were already present, the inner well of the case has also created a impact crease (and small tear) on the upper back cover, which is unfortunate. Considering CGC uses the 9.0/9.2/9.4/9.6/9.8/9.9 and 10.0 scale in high grades, because every little defect is important, can anyone lend an opposing opinion how this grade was reached? Can CGC lend an answer of how this grade was reached? I don't believe this grade can be rationalized at all and is fairly damning given the vast difference in price for the next few lower grades down the scale. Link: https://comics.ha.com/itm/golden-age-1938-1955-/detective-comics-166-the-promise-collection-pedigree-dc-1950-cgc-nm-96-off-white-to-white-pages/a/7244-93075.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515#

Still can't believe I have this. Picked it up at Heritage few months back. I took a risk letting the page (in sequence) before this go thinking I had a shot at this one. Sometimes the risk is worth the reward! From probably the most well known issue of the series.. Invincible vs. Omni-Man fight... CAF Link

That's one big, beautiful, and nostalgic cover!

Gotcha. I also think that many (including myself) go by their own anecdotal evidence in situations like this, and because of that the "looks fine after 10 years" scenario is all we need to feel comfortable that no damage or problems are occurring. While there is definitely situations where art can be framed touching the glass with no issue, I'd personally advise against any original art being framed this way; ever. Aside from the fact the glass on the Mainstay's doesn't seem to be UV glazed (which is in itself an issue), everyone lives in a variety of climate conditions and what is okay for one person probably won't be fine for another. Not to mention changes outside our control that can and will happen in an undetermined amount of time. The consensus in the art community is that there should be an air space between the art and glass for several reasons: it reduces the chance for condensation and fungal growth, scraping or scuffing, and in some cases having it stick to the glass . There's also a much higher chance of the paper warping. All it takes is one or two incidents over time to cause an effect that likely wouldn't even be noticed until the damage already occurred - and we have 0 control over these types of incidents happening. Having a print or piece of art actually touching the glass is really only okay with inexpensive and replaceable poster art- but in there lies the spectrum of standards everyone has. To some a $100 piece is worth enough to justify extra framing costs, but to other's it's cheap enough to say "this way is okay". I personally think of a higher quality frame as added "insurance" in case the conditions for display change. https://www.amazon.com/Artcare-Bainbridge-Archival-Collection-WD19A41/dp/B002E54BUY/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8 The above link is the type of frame I've been using for the last (almost!) 15 years. The Nielsen Bainbridge line has the best, most affordable options for OA in my experience. They are cheap enough to do by yourself and be able to switch out pieces if you so choose, but expensive enough to be in a frame that, with outside forces, won't be susceptible to damage occurring easily. You can still find them in stock on other websites, but I don't want to give my main source away since I still buy new ones from time to time. You can usually get them for anywhere between 40-70 dollars for the 16x20 frames that will fit most pieces and you can buy mats and have them cut to size for a fairly modest price. Not only does it protect the art with the acid-free mat and UV acrylic/glass, the mat gives each piece an established, elevated aesthetic; it's more protected and it looks better. I think that it ultimately comes down to cost for many, which is understandable. In a hobby where pieces are generally worth $100-$200 minimum, I personally don't feel comfortable being cheap when it comes to frames. I'd rather drop $$ on one nice frame that conforms to high-quality standards than 3 cheaper frames that can and will eventually lead to problems occurring, even if everything seems fine with a piece after 10 years. Just my .

Forgive me if you explained it, but re-reading your responses about the Mainstays frames I didn't seem to see a specification about the art touching the glass or not. I have a few of these types of frames I use for inexpensive prints, but (at least in my own use) they don't provide space to put a mat, so the paper objects inside touch the glass. Is that how your pieces are?

Yup! One of the last issues with the hand-lettered balloons affixed to the art before they were done digitally.

Not a problem! Cap 46 is such a cool, historically important book. Choosing the best condition parts is also a consideration. Definitely a few different ways to go, none of which are the wrong decision, but it ultimately depends on your desired end result.

As mentioned above, the real question is what the production cut of the two copies looks like. What you're showing in regards to the damage to the first wrap is not that big of a deal and can be remedied under a conso label with leafcasting, or have the minimum amount of tear seals/reinforcement done if looking from a cost perspective (not factoring in a technical grade difference). The decision to leave it "completely untouched" is a personal preference. Without seeing the cover you'd be looking at a qualified green label with no work done, or a much higher conserved grade no matter what, which notates the work, isn't trying to misrepresent the condition in any way, and is becoming more and more accepted on GA books because of overall age: especially in the case of book that are 1.8 or lower in grade, or have married parts.

I sincerely appreciate the shoutout! I'm Phantom Restoration. One thing that no one has mentioned is, without having all the pieces in hand, there's no way to know how the production cut of each copy is. That may swing one option over the other. In my experience it's almost always better to put a complete interior with a loose cover instead of marrying one interior page to another copy missing one page. Leaving it qualified and together, but not conserved, will likely open the door for damage to occur over time; even if graded. With conservation not only will the technical grade bump up, but the preservation of the book will be taken into account and help the book to cover and interior to retain condition. And remember, conservation has a focus on reversibility: it can always be undone (except for washing which wouldn't be necessary here). As time goes on, the market has begun to see and will see more conserved books. Especially since the average age of Golden Age books is pushing 70-80 years now.

It feels like car companies in the 1950s saying: "so what if people die in car accidents, do you know how much it costs to put seat-belts in them?? Far more than the settlements from people dying!" Equally, it sounds like CGC's stance is: "so what if books are damaged inside the cases that people pay to keep them protected, do you know how much it would cost to change that? It's impossible! What? You want the book to retain the specific grade we assigned it, too? We have no idea what you're talking about, sounds like a mechanical error!". @CGC Mike This can't possible be something that the higher-up aren't aware of.

Despite all the other issues, I've come to the conclusion that the the wedges at the top of the cases, and the space that's given to the book to move around in the slab has to be purposeful; it has to be. There's no case that can be made (no pun intended) that the way the inner wells are made to keep the book protected: it appears they are made to "mostly" protect, but purposefully allow for enough superficial (and unfortunately more in some cases) damage to occur. There's no reason this would be allowed, other than CGC wanting to collecting more money for regrading, reholdering, and pushing books to CCS to be damaged, I mean pressed. How this problem hasn't been fixed is beyond my comprehension.

Not intending to get the thread derailed, here's one of the few hand-lettered pieces I have. Hard to believe that in just a few short months it'll be 20 years old. CAF link

Don't get me started on the hydrogen peroxide baths. The patience it requires to stay and keep up with pressing to the degree you do, long term, is admirable!

"While there are other pressers I have a "special recipe" that I use", that's my favorite line when seeing new pressers pop up. There's no secret recipe, the book allows for whatever is possible, period. It's not magic to turn a 8.0 into a 9.6 if it were a 9.6 that experienced pressable defects to bring it down to a 8.0 to begin with.

In this case, this is not true. This copy doesn't have a spine roll, it has a slight mis-wrap due to the production cut. Which is totally normal. Spine rolls are mostly exhibited by the fanning out of interior pages looking at the back cover, and this one is flush and in line where it should be. Many collectors would be thrilled to have this copy, and no one in their right mind would advise doing anything other than putting it in a bag/board or grading it and enjoying it as is.

In a certain light I agree about the Scooby-Doo, since it does cover up art and is a little busy. I try not to do it for all pieces, but in this case I intended to display it next to the book and having the context (I think) gives it that little extra.

I think that's it in a nutshell: I don't think most people set expectations for winning (I know I didn't); by and large regardless of what you collect there's universal acknowledgement that virtually any Killing Joke, Watchmen or Dark Knight page will 99/100 times get chosen over something less desirable. If that's the case, why not segment those types of pieces into one category, so they can compete together, and all of the other art that is submitted competes separately. Maybe I'm alone, but if there's all this talk about using this as a way to discover and see new art that was missed being posted over the last year, I think this separation would be beneficial to seeing and viewing all other non-classic pieces differently. Otherwise it feels like those pieces can be unfairly compared to the likes of those they can never compete against. @Brian Peck is right in saying that it's impossible to police by price. However, objectively it feels odd that such a significant amount of comic art conversations revolve around price, but one categorical separation of above or below one value is something that can be dismissed as impossible. Everyone that submits their art into the public sphere, and the people behind CAF, overall, make it the great thing that it is. And for that I am grateful.

Based on the above list that @The Voord was kind enough to share (I must admit) I too choose some of the above, which got me thinking.... Looking at previous years, would it be safe to say that most people that even enter in pieces don't vote because we all know (for the most part) which pieces will get the most votes? It's not really a surprise that winning pieces were almost definitely purchased for the most $$ relative to the other selections. Not to poo poo the process because it is what it is. Maybe if there were one thing to change about the process from a categorical standpoint, entries separated by (let's say) a $10,000 threshold would do wonders to separate art into two categories: the average collector (probably most) and the BSDs who have no problem dropping 10k and above on pieces. Maybe we just have Olympians competing with high-schoolers, and everyone's like "yeah, we know the Olympians will crush them, why bother voting" and that's just the way it is. Probably just overthinking. I do that a lot.

For a company that prides itself on distinguishing high grade copies by minuscule defects, you just described how seriously troubling it is when inconsistency meets subjectivity. When the people at the top of a company have high enough wages to casually say "whatever" to a cost benefit analysis of maintaining consistency and quality control we get where we are today. Not to mention the grading scale as it sits was created for profit not for any realistic collecting uniformity. Grades should go 8.5, 9.0, 9.5 and 10.0. The current grading system in place was created by selfish, greedy people who purposefully wanted a system that could suited to their needs of squeezing as much out of every sale of higher grade books as possible. The Blackstone purchase caused the stage 2 cancer in CGC to escalate to stage 4, very quickly.

When you said CCS "opened" a split, the connotation I see is that there's something to "open". If you said CCS "caused a 1 1/2 spine split" it would infer completely new damage; based on your words. I asked if it were raw before sending in because certain things could easily be remembered and other things could certainly be overlooked. Do you still happen to have the label for the book prior to re-subbing? You said the graders notes on the 1st time around mentioned creasing to the cover, but I would be incredibly surprised if that was all the notes said. The "moderate tanning interior cover" is very apparent just from looking at the book and included with the notes this time around; I would think the cover tanning notes would be there the first time too since it couldn't have occurred in a 2 years period between grading. There are also notes about light staining.. Cover tanning is one of those things that is insidious. It can be fine, sometimes pressed okay with no issue (carefully), but from what I'm seeing from the one pic is a (structurally beautiful copy!) that has moderate cover tanning (and definitely concentrated on the edges and entire spine) and is delicate to handle let alone perform work on. Curiously.. did you get this on ebay from someone in Long Island??

To clarify, was the book ever viewed or handled raw, or was it graded the entire time and then re-subbed for a press?

Woof, I somehow missed this part. While CGC has their share of blame and problems with grading, new people beginning to learn to press on their own and then being surprised with grades, even a few years into pressing (most of these people have only been pressing for weeks at the least and a year at most) is exhausting. You shouldn't be surprised by books you're submitting if you're clearly still learning how to press. The learning curve for grading alone is higher than most people think, and most people routinely over estimate their ability to grade, let alone press properly. Not trying to be mean, but unless you plan on making a career out of working with books, or have an elevated sense of patience (which most of us don't), it takes more time to perfect this than almost anyone is willing to put in. In short, save the grief and just pay someone else that has a good reputation to do it.

As a collector involved with graded books for well over a decade now I can unequivocally state: The financially motivated sale of CGC to Blackstone in 2021 has completely impacted the quality of every aspect of CGC's grading- to such a negative degree that.. Long time collector's who have been a CGC Premium member have, for the first time in a long time, decided that there is too great of a risk that CGC will damage or incorrectly grade books and are not renewing their memberships. The letter from Mark Salzberg is the canary in the coal mine. This is the line that does CGC in: " Blackstone was different. We saw that they recognized our vision and were willing to invest in building a stronger company that adds even more value and vibrancy to the collectibles markets." Considering the reality of how absolutely insane the lack of quality control has been since the acquisition, we are literally being gaslit into being told that the Blackstone purchase was a good thing for CGC and it's customers. I like collecting a very small amount of Modern or Bronze high grade books. And I can say that 100% of the books I've purchased (already graded 9.8s) not a single one looks like a 9.8 in the case because it was either over-graded or the case itself caused new damaged to the book. There's absolutely no way I'm the only one that thinks this. Not sure where we go from here, but considering how hard it is to simply buy an already graded high grade book and have it retain it's grade (or even be graded properly to begin with) submitting books with expected high grades is too high a risk. It's not worth it. Even if, somehow, the book was graded properly and not damaged by the case, there is an incredibly high likelihood there will be scratches and scuffs on the inner well/case which will impact the aesthetics. Edit: Just wanted to add (since this has received several likes over the last few days) that Matt Nelson has been absolutely awesome throughout the above. Any time I've had a specific issue, reaching out to him directly has resulted in a fast, courteous response/remedy of the issue. He, as an individual, definitely should be acknowledged.

Would it be fair to assume that this was signed near the end of Stan's life? If so he was being pushed to sign so much stuff (so frequently) at his age he was on auto pilot and probably couldn't even clearly see the surface of everything he was signing. We see another signature under his, but he probably just saw some grass in the image (if even spending the time to assess it). It was probably put in front of him, rushed, and 10 minutes later he had already signed 30 more things and this was just one in a huge pile he had to get to. The signature itself looks like a struggle.

2D Galleries. In my experience, unless you speak or post in French, you'll be met with little to no interaction from other users. And the pool is a pin drop in an ocean compared to the site activity on CAF.