• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Gabriel Contreras

Member
  • Posts

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Just discovered a misprint. As you know now I own a nice copy of Strange tales 113? or is it? I was browsing through ebay and noticed a ST 113 listed on the bay under ST112 listings page. Also advertised that it was rare due to the fact that the indicta shows it being ST 112 clearly. So this in fact is a misprint. I went into OS and found no mention of a MP for ST 113. Back to Ebay. I browsed under ST113 andfound about 11 or 12 listing (raws and slabbed )with NO mention whatsoever about the misprint. Here is my question. How many currently listed have the misprint? And have not mentioned? the only listing mentioning a misprint is going for 700.00 raw @ 7.0 with 1 watcher and "misprint" as the reason why he is asking for that amount. Wouldn't it make sense that those listings with 113 on the cover would make at least minimal mention of the indicta having an error? Or is it just a few that were misprinted? I just don't know? thanks
  2. there are 2 very faint vertical lines that come down from the outer top right edge parallels down along the first (index) blade very faint. also on the shoulder in the black area. Im wondering if the artist meant for the shoulder line to disappear into the black back ground as well as the glove fading into the black. If exposure was lightened would they separate and would one see any defects. in doing so MHO
  3. 4.5 considering it's age and it's high grade golden. Nice book indeed!
  4. Hard to say overall gut feeling is 5.0 if the tear "qualifies" "Grebal was right describes as a 7.0 in almost every other sense. But that tear just throws it in every direction. Don't press.
  5. I just had a thought. In another forum a book was submitted PGM and the owner mentioned that the book he posted seems to look much worse than in person. We upload scans for grading and depending on your scanner settings "artifact" defects appear that would not normally appear with the naked eye . After all we read the books at about less than a foot away and that's how it was intended to present and be read at. . Many times I have seen my book uploaded with ghost text coming through the front from the backside print because of thin and cheap paper, or a staple about an inch in size? dust particles that would not be seen normally. Shouldn't a book be judged by the naked eye ? Or do graders use a magnifying glass? help because I really do not know. At what point is it graded at the size it was originally intended to be viewed at (a bit less than 30" away) and now the perceptable realistic
  6. Thanks all. is it a candidate for"slabbing"? Givin the fact that it meets all other criteria? All the best! Gman
  7. being new that was my mistake. since I have taken wise counsel from another member and have adhered to protocol. thanks again!
  8. 4.5 After looking at all of the interior stuff and edges. you really have to go back 4.5 one has to go back to the front cover after looking at so much detail photos and not forget that this book really presents nicely 4.5 IMHO!!
  9. Does anyone have any thoughts about adding the small silica bags usually found to absorbe moisture inside your collections AF storage box? I mean they are there to protect and the bag seems pretty tough as far as breaking open. Just a thought. all the best