• 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.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Tape vs. Color Touch

Started by Mr. Zipper,

12 posts in this topic

rob_react

rob_react

Posted
Posted
How is it a book with tape on the spine can come back 5.5 Blue, yet a tiny color touch will get a restored grade? Curious as to the reasoning behind this... confused.gif

 

If it's scotch tape, they don't consider it restoration. Archival tape would be a different story. I know that doesn't make perfect sense, but I can see the reasoning.

 

Color touch is obviously restoration. I'm not sure what that has to do with tape.

 

I can't really read it, but does it read "ONE SMALL PIECE OF TAPE ON SPINE?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darthdiesel

Darthdiesel

Posted
Posted

actually scotch tape on newer books have earned PLOD's if my memory is correct. I may need to dig up some PLod's on Heritage's archives to prove this...

 

The small print on the back of the CGC label alludes to the point that CGC can make the judgement call on restored low grade Golden Age on whether to blue or purple label it based on extent of restoration factored against how low the grade is...now as for 5.5 restored getting a blue label confused-smiley-013.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Zipper

Mr. Zipper

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Color touch is obviously restoration. I'm not sure what that has to do with tape.

 

I can't really read it, but does it read "ONE SMALL PIECE OF TAPE ON SPINE?"

 

Seems to me that mending a tear or reinforcing a spine with tape is no more or less "restoration" than a marker touch on a small spine crease. In both cases you are altering the book for the purposes of preserving or improving appearance.

 

Yes, the CGC label reads as you say. You can see the tape on the gray area of the spine above the green box. In the high res scan, you can see it is sealing up a hole or tear near the staple. foreheadslap.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rob_react

rob_react

Posted
Posted
actually scotch tape on newer books have earned PLOD's if my memory is correct. I may need to dig up some PLod's on Heritage's archives to prove this...

 

The small print on the back of the CGC label alludes to the point that CGC can make the judgement call on restored low grade Golden Age on whether to blue or purple label it based on extent of restoration factored against how low the grade is...now as for 5.5 restored getting a blue label confused-smiley-013.gif

 

To my mind, this isn't even like restoration, especially it's a tiny piece of tape. If it really is that small it'd be like a price sticker or something. Take the spine split into account on the grade, and be done with it.

 

Not that I ever think of scotch tape work as "restoration." I mean, to my mind, tape is a defect, like staining, and I downgrade for it accordingly. If I have a book with a spine held together by scotch tape, I'm not going to call the book a "restored" FN or VG factoring the ugly, destructive tape in as "restoration" analogous to professional repairs applied with some precision. It's not even analogous to Amateur color touch or something like that since scotch tape obviously makes the book look WORSE. I'm going to call it FR or GD and be done with it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zonker

Zonker

Posted
Posted

Yeah, the tape policy seems to be:

 

1) Archival tape improves the book, certainly improves the book's appearance, and therefore runs the risk of going undetected. So it gets the PLOD to call attention to the restoration.

 

2) Scotch tape is a defect, it gets factored into the grade, and is disclosed on the Blue label because it might be non-obvious (certainly so in the case of interior tape.)

 

Now we may think it is nuts to PLOD good archival tape and Blue-label Scotch tape, but I'm sure CGC feels it's not their responsibility if the market values a mid-grade Blue-labelled book more than a very fine PLOD. confused-smiley-013.gif

 

Likewise, I hate it that Overstreet has begun allowing Scotch tape on books up to and including Very Good, but that's the way it goes... sign-rantpost.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PovertyRow

PovertyRow

Posted
Posted

Now we may think it is nuts to PLOD good archival tape and Blue-label Scotch tape, but I'm sure CGC feels it's not their responsibility if the market values a mid-grade Blue-labelled book more than a very fine PLOD.

 

Yes, I think it is nuts! Tape is tape and the intent of tape is the intent of tape - to seal something. Now we can seal something with [!@#%^&^] tape that will ultimately destry the paper it resides on or we can use archival quality tape that will not.

 

What I want to know is why CGC sees fit to make a distinction between the types of tape. Simple announcing on the label "scotch tape" or "archival tape" and the tape's location should be sufficient. It is, to my mind, one of the greatest flaws in CGC's philosophy. That thinking has absolutely no basis in reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dc eng

dc eng

Posted
Posted

Likewise, I hate it that Overstreet has begun allowing Scotch tape on books up to and including Very Good, but that's the way it goes... sign-rantpost.gif

 

Actually, even the 1992 1st Edition Overstreet Grading guide allowed tape repair in VG books. If anything, the requirements have gotten more restrictive over the years:

 

1992 in the description page for VG:

"Minor tape repair on an otherwise better copy."

 

2002 in the description page for VG:

"Only minor unobtrusive tape and other amateur repair allowed on otherwise high grade copies."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shield

Shield

Posted
Posted
Now we may think it is nuts to PLOD good archival tape and Blue-label Scotch tape, but I'm sure CGC feels it's not their responsibility if the market values a mid-grade Blue-labelled book more than a very fine PLOD.

 

Yes, I think it is nuts! Tape is tape and the intent of tape is the intent of tape - to seal something. Now we can seal something with [!@#%^&^] tape that will ultimately destry the paper it resides on or we can use archival quality tape that will not.

 

What I want to know is why CGC sees fit to make a distinction between the types of tape. Simple announcing on the label "scotch tape" or "archival tape" and the tape's location should be sufficient. It is, to my mind, one of the greatest flaws in CGC's philosophy. That thinking has absolutely no basis in reality.

 

 

Hmmm...This is all sounding familiar... 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=226205&page=4&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1

 

thumbsup2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing