namisgr

It's not an opinion to state what I did, that both movies were bombs, or that The Marvels had a bigger opening weekend than Aquaman 2.

I didn't imply anything, wrote nothing about 'a more logical clunker', and explicitly stated that both movies were bombs. What I distinguished in an earlier post is that only one was subjected to a specific type of Forum sturm und drang.

I don't know, and never wrote such a thing.

With a $47 million opening, it had a lot more business than this clunker. But ultimately, they're both bombs. My family saw Wonka yesterday. It was a fun film.

What do you advise when it's a nut with issues that's done the 'engagement'?

While that is true, there was much more to it than that, as the discussion thread on that movie and this one have made plain.

Aquaman 2 is deserving of all the love that the Forum showed The Marvels before it. But I'm not yet seeing the same sociological breakdown.

Snow White in a blizzard?

I think it'll be roughly a decade for the economics to be favorable. The example from Neuroscience that's orders of magnitude greater in complexity than comic book grading would made clear the AI capabilities already exist for it.

Figured it would be clear which pic once solved?

I'd paraphrase you that since we can map brain function, we can map comic book grading. As Donut has pointed out already, the robotics and image capturing are not examples of artificial intelligence. Also, requisite technologies already exist for handling and imaging comics. The part that CAHokie's post addresses is the role for machine learning. Neuroscience has already successfully done the following with it: by implanting an ~300 microelectrode array on a part of the neocortex that oversees facial muscle movements that are required for speech, and using a machine learning algorithm to translate the ensemble of nerve cell activities recorded as a person thinks of speaking a syllable, a computer can be 'taught' to make speech for a person suffering facial muscle paralysis who has lost the ability to speak. Brain-reading devices allow paralysed people to talk using their thoughts By contrast, it would be much, much easier to use machine learning and series of digitized images to develop a grading algorithm that could closely align with the comic book numerical grades assigned by a team of CGC graders. Such a system would need development, and it may be awhile before the approach could be cost effective (i.e., cheaper per comic book than the cost per comic from a panel of graders). But it's probably not decades away.

cab on a slab

It wasn't a scam. It was a systematic problem with overzealous pressing at the CGC pressing partner CCS of early Silver Age Marvels that ruined the eye appeal of hundreds of exceptional high grade books, by causing their covers to markedly shrink, the top edges to become like shirt collars with too much starch, the interior pages to stick out badly beyond the cover, ink pen arrival dates to run, maverick staples to become badly impacted, and the cover to sometimes appear rotated counterclockwise. Despite the resultant books looking substantially worse than they did before being overzealously pressed, they received higher grades from CGC. Having started the thread on it, it's not a topic that I'd consider especially relevant to the present one, which is why I never made mention of it. This is an example of what happened to one of the nicest high grade SA comic collections known, when the books were bought by an auction house, overzealously pressed, graded 'favorably', and then put up for auction:

I'm thinking it's the men and women who lived here. Incredibly well preserved, and without the need for slabbing!

It's been in use for a long time now, for instance in medical imaging and biological research involving microscopy. After head on images are captured of the front and back covers along with the pages, angled images could be easily obtained, adjusting the angle between the image sensor and the book either by tilting the sensor or the book.

I'd be much more concerned about the seller's horrendous e-bay feedback, and would never buy from such a seller no matter how great of an apparent deal was being offered.

This one has me confused. If in fact the 9.2 was graded AFTER the 9.8, how can it have been used in a scam to generate the 9.8 label?

A computerized and robotic system could run around the clock. Humans program upcoming activities, and load the hopper with books to be graded. Encapsulation, labeling, and quality control also have the potential to be automated.

It would need to be a much more deft robot, since the pages of aged comic books are much thinner and more fragile than those of hardback books. But it can be done and for considerably less than 'millions'. Then, if all potential wear and flaws can be detected using images of every page both head on and at a couple of angles, a program that automates and quantifies as it moves through the grading decision tree, mimicking the systematic processes used now by graders, could complete the task.

Robotics is used in several types of surgeries. But the robots are controlled and manipulated by the surgeon, and not working autonomously. The main hurdle with automating comic book grading is the need to generate or capture high resolution images of every page, each viewed both head on and at an angle, in order to reproduce procedures used by a grader.

I don't think the matter of loose slabs relates to changing whether or not the label is tethered to the top part of the inner well.

I know they changed it several years ago to supposedly make it more difficult to switch labels without damaging the inner well. In the early years of encapsulation, labels weren't held in place at all. I don't remember specifically when they switched, though.

Interesting conjecture that I can't rule out, although it seems highly unlikely.

Then when switching a reholder order over to one of their new custom labels, they'd have to open the inner well to recover the comic, then seal it in a new inner well along with the new custom label. Hulk head hurt.

But reholders retain the same certification number. So I remain confused over this situation.