VintageComics

On 12/27/2023 at 12:54 PM, agamoto said:

On 12/27/2023 at 12:52 PM, BrashL said:

I don’t know how you can say that given what we know. For all we know all those 9.8s with 4 spine ticks people have been complaining about for years are all case switches. I think the books go into the thousands at the very least. 

This... A million times this. It's now the most reasonable explanation for 9.8's that everyone objectively agrees aren't even close to a 9.8

As someone who submits a lot of books, I can testify that CGC has been inconsistent and you can get overgraded and undergraded books back from CGC. 

Any high volume submitter can testify to this. In fact, we talk to each other all the time about it and compare notes regularly. 

Let's not start yelling fire in a movie theater just yet. 

On 12/27/2023 at 11:58 AM, MAR1979 said:

On 12/27/2023 at 11:52 AM, namisgr said:

One thing the company plainly should do, which they did with all Jason Ewert submissions, is accept back any and every slabbed book submitted by the perpetrator, and re-grade them free of charge.  I can't see any measure less than that being satisfactory.

So folks will send back their 9.8 labels to get 6.5 Green Labels.  Given the morals and ethics of most Comic Book Dealers, Sellers, Speculators, Flippers I don't foresee that occurring in anything but the tiniest numbers unless there is full FMV remuneration involved. Ain't gonna happen as Blackstone will not pay out a cent.

CGC previously released serial numbers of possibly affected books. If they do the same here, why would anyone want to hang onto a tainted serial number?

On a side note, I asked and got word back from Comiclink regarding that ASM #129 CGC 9.0 from the exchange that was discussed earlier, and that specific book has been checked and is not considered to be a part of this problem. Just relaying info.

So, so far this still seems to be an eBay centric problem. 

On 12/27/2023 at 11:07 AM, Stefan_W said:

Ok, so you are arguing that because CGC did not release a statement fast enough for your satisfaction a video of how to break into slabs needed to be released? As I said earlier, yes scammers already know this stuff but hundreds if not thousands of people watching it will be hearing about it for the first time. 

 

I agree with you that this is a VERY dangerous way to handle things. It reeks of nerd ego. 

This guy should have sent the details to CGC but not exposed them publicly. 

May as well explain to everyone how to build a bomb and trust the cops to catch the bad guys. Does this person dislike CGC?

On 12/26/2023 at 8:46 PM, agamoto said:

Then it's either inconsistency with CGC's procedures, or they only update the graded date when it's a custom label. Who knows at this point, seems to be stuff like changing dates, images in the census and graders notes only get added/changed when it strikes someone's fancy. 

I would say that CGC is not consistent to us on the outside on these things, but internally, they may make sense based on the path the book actually goes through. 

On 12/26/2023 at 8:46 PM, Number 6 said:

On a couple of them the inner well is starting to yellow a bit.  I would think that if I had those reholdered that they would change the inner well as well. 

Any Gen 1 or 2 holder will get an all new holder because they are completely different from the Gen 3 (current) holders. 

On 12/26/2023 at 8:56 PM, paqart said:

How many people on this board have had so much good luck getting 9.8's? From the looks of this, better than 90% of the submissions that were in the running for a high grade were given a 9.8. I sent in 75 moderns and got around 5 9.8's out of the entire group. Also, a lot of these are copper newsstands that aren't well-known for achieving a high grade. Same for Canadians and MJI issues.

There are lots of people that spot raw 9.8s and there always has been. Like anything, some people are just better at it than others and high grade collectors tend to be very picky and train their eyes to spot such things. 

On 12/26/2023 at 3:37 PM, VintageComics said:

What I can actually see, eliminating ALL of this complexity that we're discussing and everyone is having trouble envisioning, is having pre-graders count and grade the interiors, inspect staples and interior covers for defects, maybe do one interior AI shot for estimating page quality, and then CGC can use AI just to grade the outer covers.

 

Then a finalizer would look at the AI estimate, the pregrader's notes and come up with a finalized grade. 

THAT is how I can see AI being used very soon. 

And this idea is an evolution of this very discussion. I literally just came to that thought as I was typing up this post. 

It's quick, cost effective, easy to implement, efficient and makes grading FAR more accurate. 

I believe THAT is the route CGC will likely go soonest. 

To get back on track, does anyone else agree that this is the most likely scenario?

On 12/26/2023 at 5:03 PM, CAHokie said:

Vintage Comics said what….

 

So this is what the heartless moderators look like! 

It just tickles me sexy that @jimjum12 is reacting to posts and even laughing. 

Love you, buddy! 

On 12/26/2023 at 5:00 PM, CAHokie said:

As humans we have made machines to travel the world by land or sea and to fly to the moon. Sadly though, we reached the limits of our capability when trying to design a machine to handle a comic book. 

You're a horrible human. 

On 12/26/2023 at 4:07 PM, Buzzetta said:

Either way, it is coming possibly sooner than certain people profess that they want. 

Nobody professed a want. 

The biggest problem with online discussions is when people who choose to make things personal, intentionally twist the discussion to mean the most negative thing they can in order to mischaracterize what someone else said or meant, and that affects everyone in the community.

It's unnecessary and disruptive for everyone and people who care about their community should be speaking out against it rather than stand for it because this is everyone's community. It is, quite literally what you make of it. If you choose or ignore the negativity, it will be negative. If you choose or act on positive actions, it will be positive. The choice is a community effort, and pre 2020 it used to be treated as such. Somehow, after 2020 everyone just became numb to wrongdoing. 

Also, you're welcome. I think CGC will soonest implement something along the lines of what I described a few posts above. 

On 12/26/2023 at 3:11 PM, drporkchop said:

Sorry for the late reply, this thread keeps going even during xmas.

I paid by credit card as the Paypal exchange to Canada is unfavorable. I looked through the ebay Invoice and there is no address or name as the seller is in the US. I only remembered being upset at the 9.8 with multiple spine ticks, so looked at the box and saw his name Brees, just like @silent06 confirmed, and then messaged him directly for refund. The ebay return label was for DHL shipping direct to their eBay international hub at Glendale Heights IL, which I presume got forwarded to his home in Forest Hills, NY.

Who knows if Brees Riva/Rivas is his real full name. Might be a pseudonym or nick name just like how Richards go by , or Roberts go by Bob. He could be using his girlfriend Brees Riva the flight attendant someone found and using it to hide his true alias

All good.

At this point, I believe it's safe to say, based on what I know, that the BR name is an alias or a relative of some sort and not the actual, alleged person at the center of this.

We live in a strange age, and the reason I'm stating this is so that people out in the real world don't start searching down and hounding BRs out in the real world. 

On 12/26/2023 at 4:31 PM, PovertyRow said:

Again not uncommon. A finished film goes through so many iterations from editing to sound to editing again to studio input to after focus input back to editing an sound and director input and scenes can end up quite different than originally storyboarded/scripted. I'm sure there is a clause in most contracts allowing the studio et al to make changes as they see fit. A seasoned actor like Cage should not be surprised at this.

The point you quoted earlier came out of a discussion that spanned various threads, and the point I was specifically making was about how corporate influence affects the final artform. 

I think audiences are surprised at this. I am. 

On 12/26/2023 at 11:28 AM, Stefan_W said:

I agree when looking at the front but the back makes me far less sure. The staining looks much worse in the blue label version which would be post-switch. There is also pronounced creasing on the back cover that is not in the green label. This could just be a function of the (updated) picture of the green label being at a lower resolution, but while the front cover looks like a match I am not seeing a slam dunk when taking the back into account. I dunno, and I am sure people will disagree with me on this, but I am seeing a "maybe" with this one specific book. The others shown so far were more convincing. 

Lighting and equipment can make books look dramatically different, especially small tonal changes. 

We've proven this in previous grading contests where 9.4's can look like 7.5's and visa versa. Looking for the unequivocal markers and 'fingerprints' which are much more objective than subjective, subtle things. 

On 12/26/2023 at 10:04 AM, Heronext said:

On 12/26/2023 at 9:56 AM, THE_BEYONDER said:

I think a separate thread tracking all the green to blue Hulk 181s is a great idea.

@comicwiz

Someone who posted on page 1 could volunteer to create an index of sorts (by editing one of those posts)

They would need to index specific post links and not just pages, because I believe some people's page settings are different, aren't they?

On 12/26/2023 at 9:04 AM, Steven Valdez said:

The book looks like it's incurred bonus water damage at the bottom, in the transition from green to blue label.

That waviness is from someone doing a terrible pressign job. They're probably pressing their own books and doing it poorly. 

On 12/26/2023 at 3:56 PM, shadroch said:

A machine that takes six minutes a book does ten books an hour and 240 books in a day. 1680 books in a week.   Does CGC have a grader who can grade 1,000 books a week? Three such machines would be grading close to 4800 books a week.   I've no idea how many books they currently do per week. Does anyone know?

I'd say a grader takes at most, 30 second a book on average. Factor in 3 graders at 90 seconds a book, so 1.5 mins a book total and work from there and that would be on the long end IMO. 

If you only have two graders a book then it's even shorter at 60 seconds a book.

Using your math, you'd have a robot grading a book 24 hours a day. Did you stop to think how the books would get in and out of the robot? You'd be paying employees to serve a robot that works slower than the humans. See what I mean about thinking things through. Oy vey!   

On 12/26/2023 at 3:34 PM, PovertyRow said:

On 11/23/2023 at 4:36 PM, VintageComics said:

So, he was under the impression that he was filming something completely different than the end product? Wow.

Honestly, that is not a new thing, especially in these times of AI and CGI..

My point was directed at the intent of the people involved.

If the director or producer can change the intended purpose of the artist entirely from what it was originally intended to be then that is very disturbing. 

On 12/26/2023 at 3:16 PM, CAHokie said:

hat’s not his intended design purpose though.

Neither is namisgr's robot. 

On 12/26/2023 at 3:16 PM, CAHokie said:

I got lost in this thread a while back so I may have missed the key points. Is it your opinion that we don’t have the tech, either by hardware or software to do it, or it’s just not cost effective? 

To get the entire job done, you have to factor in all of it.

The conversation has evolved from "let's use AI to fix the #252 scam" to "how do we use AI to grade comics" and now, in this thread it's evolved into "what else would we need to change to accomodate AI in grading comics".

The software is one complex problem with it's own limitations and obstacles. 

The hardware is another complex problem with it's own limitations and obstacles. 

How to implement the two (and in which combination, because there are many ways to do it) is something that must be addressed. How does the final product look?

And then, cost of all of this has it's own set of problems and limitations. 

Each new factor multiplies the complexity by a factor.

I believe we have the tech to do it on a NASA level enterprise if cost and profitability is not a factor but factoring in cost and profitability changes the entire discussion much like scaling the cost / complexity from doing surgery on a living baby in the womb to simply doing surgery on a textbook on a desk. 

Finally, I don't think MOST people who were calling for AI to solve the grading problem thought through all of these factors, which is obvious from all of the replies. 

On 12/26/2023 at 3:04 PM, FlyingDonut said:

On 12/26/2023 at 2:11 PM, VintageComics said:

What experience do you have in imaging? 

A great deal. Hardware exists to do this. Like anything it is expensive for quality, but this is not an AI issue. I've used this one - this is a medium-level non-destructive book scanner. You could do a comic book on here in maybe a minute at 600 DPI. A higher-end one would get much higher DPI at the same resolution.

Amazing how quickly a discussion can progress once everyone chooses to focus on the message rather than the messenger. Nice robot that's 'not a robot'. 

Now we're getting somewhere. 

------------------------------------------------------

I personally don't believe that particular machine can be used safely and effectively. I'm spitballing for problems as someone experienced in mechanical tech and diagnostics to uncover possible impediments and complications:

It's very slow. It takes 10 seconds per page image. That actual machine is probably going to take 300 seconds or 5 minutes to scan the average 32 page comic book - plus covers and 20 minutes for a square bound 64 pager, so very time consuming.

It's still not very gentle looking. How do you adjust the pressure and how deep that angled lense drops down? Is it stopped by pressure from the book once it touches? I'd be very worried about that pressure on open folios. 

You do that to ANY page on a square bound and you're 'effed so useless against anything squarebound.

You do that to ANY page on a brittle book and you're 'effed, so useless against brittle books. 

Do you really want that angled lense pressing every open folio wrap down? Tearing wraps at staples? Cracking brittle pages?

Speed it up and risk increases dramatically. 

So likely useless against ALL comic books, unless you can image the comic efficiently without pressing the folios all the way down. 

And then, after ALL that, you'll still need a manual inspection of the book for areas you can't image. 

------------------------------

As someone who has extensive experience in tech and diagnostics, how reliable would it be?

They'd need multiple machines, but they'd also need backup machines. 

Could it grade, say...10,000's of books a year / per machine? Not at that speed.

Without breaking down or needing service? You'd need backup machines if one went down and needed repair or you'd immediately get a backlog. 

------------------------------

What I can actually see, eliminating ALL of this complexity that we're discussing and everyone is having trouble envisioning, is having pre-graders count and grade the interiors, inspect staples and interior covers for defects, maybe do one interior AI shot for estimating page quality, and then CGC can use AI just to grade the outer covers.

Then a finalizer would look at the AI estimate, the pregrader's notes and come up with a finalized grade. 

THAT is how I can see AI being used very soon. 

And this idea is an evolution of this very discussion. I literally just came to that thought as I was typing up this post. 

It's quick, cost effective, easy to implement, efficient and makes grading FAR more accurate. 

I believe THAT is the route CGC will likely go soonest. 

The complexity, delicacy, accuracy and cost effectiveness of robots turning pages or machines getting good enough images is where all of this falls apart...in the near future. 

On 12/26/2023 at 2:22 PM, namisgr said:

Page turning device that's just a wee bit simpler than the work NASA or an endovascular or prenatal surgeon does:

And, to head off any suggestion at the pass, the idea of posting this video is not to suggest that this device could be used as part of an automated comic book grading system.  Instead, the idea is to illustrate how little sophistication and cost would be involved in developing a system sufficiently gentle, reliable, programmable, and cheap to turn pages and partner with an imaging and book positioning system to readily capture all the images required for an algorithm developed by machine learning from the output of professional CGC graders to devise an automated grading system.

I'm certain if I'd posted this in this discussion, I'd have 43 people hitting the laughing emoji and at least 12 notifies to moderation about it including Matt Nelson himself.

But to build on this great discussion in the spirit of cooperation, may I suggest we use this to safely deliver comics between departments?

Finnegan asks very little and does so much! 

On 12/26/2023 at 2:49 PM, CAHokie said:

On 12/26/2023 at 2:07 PM, VintageComics said:

CAHokie addressed cost issues with his experience in the parent industry

I did? Now I’m lost….

It was a dad joke.

I thought maybe your experience with dental had to do with getting braces for your kids or something along those lines, as I paid for all my kid's braces and it wasn't cheap. 

On 12/26/2023 at 1:40 PM, FlyingDonut said:

Based on my understanding of the technology, the software, and the implementation of AI across multiple industries, if a grading company wanted to use AI and wanted to invest in the hardware required that company would, after about 12 months at the absolute outside, have a grading system that could do many multiples of the throughput that grading companies do now at a significant cost savings. There would also be a very added benefit of no subjectivity in grading - the AI would grade everything the same. There wouldn't be the "Golden Age" bump, for example (unless that was built into the algos by the information at the beginning). 

Thank you for your opinion on the theory. I too would LOVE consistency in grading. 

What experience do you have in fine robotics?

What experience do you have in imaging?

How much do YOU think it would cost to implement a hardware system that could turn pages and image them to grade comic books?

Do you believe it would be cost efficient enough to implement in 12 months?

Did you want us to stop discussing these things? 

On 12/26/2023 at 1:40 PM, FlyingDonut said:

On 12/26/2023 at 1:02 PM, VintageComics said:

One of my daughter runs a dental office. 

Again, not saying it's impossible. I'm saying it's not feasible at this point. 

How much does it cost? 

You didn't ask how much it cost.

You're confusing the discussion with this post. 

I was asking CAHokie how much the dental work and the dental machines cost. 

On 12/26/2023 at 1:40 PM, FlyingDonut said:

You asked if it could be done in an economically feasible manner. It is completely impossible to answer either of those questions because no one knows how much it would cost to purchase the hardware required - which has nothing to do with the AI - nor does anyone know what the actual software would cost. You are arguing an angels on the head of a pin argument that cannot be answered.

They entire point of having the discussion is to discuss the various facets of the potential use of AI in grading comics. 

I'm not arguing angles on a pinhead because from my end, so far it's been a discussion about beliefs: what is possible and what isn't. I didn't state any absolutes within the context of this discussion. 

I specified a belief that it's too costly to do right now. I also stated it will likely be possible in the future but not the near future. I still stand by those beliefs unless someone shows me a better way. 

Discussions expand over time. 

To clarify for you:

Discussing whether AI can grade comic book or not and whether CGC will be able to use AI or not are two different discussions now. 

They've branched off into theory and implementation.

The AI discussion alone is software. Everyone knows that. I always knew that. 

The application of AI to grade comic books is a discussion about MULTIPLE facets of the application, including AI, robotics, cost, feasibility, practicality, efficiency and a zillion other things. Myriad. 

Which part of the discussion being address is important. 

JC25427N addressed the software problems from his experience in software.

namisgr addressed some hardware problems with his experience in the health industry. 

CAHokie addressed cost issues with his experience in the parent industry.

If you want to start a discussion about angels on a pinhead, that room is down the hall.

On 12/26/2023 at 1:13 PM, shadroch said:

If a robot can be trained to perform brain surgery in the womb, I'm fairly confident one can learn how to turn pages. 

Are you sure? This expert disagrees with you:

On 12/22/2023 at 7:59 PM, namisgr said:

Robotics is used in several types of surgeries.  But the robots are controlled and manipulated by the surgeon, and not working autonomously.

On 12/22/2023 at 8:41 PM, namisgr said:

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.  

-----------------------------------------------

On 12/26/2023 at 1:13 PM, shadroch said:

The problem here is pretty simple. Someone starts threads about AI without understanding what it is and doesn't want to let that get in the way. 

It's a discussion about both capability and feasibility.

Are you sure? 

On 12/26/2023 at 12:44 PM, CAHokie said:

I still don’t see it being that far fetched.  
 

Dental offices can now use a small camera that can take hundreds of pictures and make a perfect mold by splicing the photos together. (At least that’s how I understood it. Dentists can weigh in).  It is not an x-ray and prevents having to do that gel mold. 

I could envision cameras doing the same thing as the pages are turned. It can then be analyzed and details listed. I don’t really see it an issue of could they do it, but more of would they want to. 

One of my daughter runs a dental office. 

Again, not saying it's impossible. I'm saying it's not feasible at this point. 

How much does it cost? 

On 12/26/2023 at 12:44 PM, FlyingDonut said:

Roy - you keep moving the goalposts.

Which goal posts did I move? Be more specific.