Does it look like a 9.4 to you ??

[VintageComics]

One last thing I want to post.

 

People keep asking for grading scale or a formula.

 

Buy yourself a 2nd Edition of the Overstreet Grading Guide and memorize these 4 pages. They are your grading standards. They are not 'CGC proof', they are not perfect, but they are the closest you will ever get to a written formula. It's a very condensed and well put together article.

 

On these 4 pages you get

 

a) Grading Scale

b) Graph with number of allowable defects per grade

c) Relationship of size of defects to number of allowable defects

d) Where defects are allowed/to be found

 

It's not perfect but these 4 pages along with lots of looking at graded books will get you 'into the ball park' of how CGC grades comics.

 

 

[nik]

You guys and gals need to remember a few things...grading from a scan is difficult.

 

Nuff said.

 

Everyone is a critique when its someone else's book

[Old Fashion PB and J]

One last thing I want to post.

 

People keep asking for grading scale or a formula.

 

Buy yourself a 2nd Edition of the Overstreet Grading Guide and memorize these 4 pages. They are your grading standards. They are not 'CGC proof', they are not perfect, but they are the closest you will ever get to a written formula. It's a very condensed and well put together article.

 

On these 4 pages you get

 

a) Grading Scale

b) Graph with number of allowable defects per grade

c) Relationship of size of defects to number of allowable defects

d) Where defects are allowed/to be found

 

It's not perfect but these 4 pages along with lots of looking at graded books will get you 'into the ball park' of how CGC grades comics.

 

 

 

Is this as created by Metropolis?

[VintageComics]

 

The TOS #52 has a corner crease that breaks colors and slight bends on the top edge of the back cover. It rather looks like a 9.0 to me, 9.2 at the very best. Show me both books raw and unslabbed and I would choose the Hawkman #1 without any hesitation. We could argue which one is the best 9.0 but it is a matter of different taste and preferences. Problem is that the TOS #52 is a 9.0 book in a 9.4 slab. I would never buy a book like that.

 

Patrick, take a look at the chart I just posted.

 

If you look at the NM grade on the graph, you'll see that you are allowed 2-3 defects and according to the second chart the defects can range in individual size from 1/16" to 1/8". If we take the one spine stress to be a 1/16" (it is a tiny little stress), that allows us a total of two more defects left that can be between 1/16" to 1/8". Since 1/8" twice is 1/4" it is allowable to have up to a 1/4" crease as a defect. I know this is extreme but I'm just going by what is printed.

 

I doubt this crease is more than 1/4" long so this book falls well within the 9.4 standards published in the Overstreet Grading Guide.

 

The number of defects do not take into account freshness of a book, gloss, color strike, smell or any other defect that is not experienced by sight. That's why Ped's seem to get a "bump"...because they feel and look and smell fresher in hand than a non ped book, all defects aside.

 

You can't grade from a scan...you can only get close.

 

R.

 

 

[VintageComics]

Is this as created by Metropolis?

 

Doesn't say who it was credited to. I just love it because it's in black and white for everyone to read.

[Flaming_Telepath]

It's funny....the whole slabbing concept was INVENTED to facilitate sight-unseen trading.

 

'Funny' is one way of putting it.

 

I now find myself in the position where the only books I would buy sight unseen are raw from certain dealers whose grading I trust.

 

 

If I were getting back into the hobby, there are two guys I would buy raw from, sight unseen; the Blazing one, and some dude named Nick from the U.K. I only hope he's back to selling whenever I get back to buying.

 

 

[Flaming_Telepath]

You guys and gals need to remember a few things...grading from a scan is difficult.

 

Sure is. Especially all those tiny, fuzzy scans you get on eBay.

 

But I have to ask...why should we have to grade a CGC book from a scan?

 

Wasn't the whole point of grading & encapsulation to give the market the ability to buy sight-unseen?

 

Mind you, to be able to do that, you'd have to know what you're potentially getting...and that would mean the publication of very specific grading guidelines.

 

Ah, well...looks like we're back to square one. (thumbs u

[supapimp]

i just feel bad for whomever the seller of that book is, because the book is getting slammed, and if i was a buyer on the fence, i wouldn't buy it now.

[pickycollector]

 

If you look at the NM grade on the graph, you'll see that you are allowed 2-3 defects and according to the second chart the defects can range in individual size from 1/16" to 1/8". If we take the one spine stress to be a 1/16" (it is a tiny little stress), that allows us a total of two more defects left that can be between 1/16" to 1/8". Since 1/8" twice is 1/4" it is allowable to have up to a 1/4" crease as a defect. I know this is extreme but I'm just going by what is printed.

 

I doubt this crease is more than 1/4" long so this book falls well within the 9.4 standards published in the Overstreet Grading Guide.

 

The number of defects do not take into account freshness of a book, gloss, color strike, smell or any other defect that is not experienced by sight. That's why Ped's seem to get a "bump"...because they feel and look and smell fresher in hand than a non ped book, all defects aside.

 

You can't grade from a scan...you can only get close.

 

R.

 

 

Well, if I read the latest NM 9.4 grading definition in 2009 Overstreet Comic Book Price Guide, at page 159, I can read, among other things:

 

"Corners are cut square and sharp with ever-so-slight blunting permitted. A 1/16" bend is permitted with no color break. No creases. "

 

Clearly the TOS #52 has a corner crease that does break colors. Therefore it cannot be a 9.4.

 

The Overstreet standards are the only standards that I use to grade books and I wish CGC could always do follow these grading standards.

 

 

 

 

[FlyingDonut]

That big number in the left hand corner certainly looks like a 9.4 to me!

 

Which simply means that in someone's opinion, it's a '9.4'...whatever the hell that might be.

 

CGC's opinion, and that's whose slab it is. If you don't agree with the opinion, don't buy the book.

 

I have no intention of doing so, as you well know, so your point is...what, precisely?

 

Does the Big Number mean that people can't actually question CGC's grading standards, given that we seem to rip to pieces every other er's opinion on grades?

 

Of course not. My point is that it IS a 9.4 - whether we agree on the grade or don't, that is a CGC 9.4. Something to put into the database to use for later reference.

[Flaming_Telepath]

i just feel bad for whomever the seller of that book is, because the book is getting slammed, and if i was a buyer on the fence, i wouldn't buy it now.

 

So, we just turn a blind eye and concentrate solely on that BIg Number?

 

I think that's how we got into this current mess...

[VK]

Just makes me think that...."Gee, CGC graders are human......I guess someone had a bad day at grading....". It really isn't that hard to believe....

[VintageComics]

Look gang, a 9.4 is not an absolute thing.

 

It's going to look one way on one book and another way on another book.

 

It's also going to look different between two people.

 

We're all evolving in the way we grade.

 

30 years ago this would have been a mint book. Now it's a CGC 9.4 and a disputed NM grade by others.

 

One person's NM is different than another's.

 

It's just like in politics. You can take it or leave it. Not everyone will be pleased.

 

Most people are not savvy enough to differentiate between 9.4's. They're just happy to own a copy in the grade they can afford.

 

All they care about is the label. That is still 'usually' enough for me.

 

R.

[Flaming_Telepath]

30 years ago this would have been a mint book. Now it's a CGC 9.4 and a disputed NM grade by others.

 

Roy, this is the whole point. 30 years ago it wouldn't have been a Mint, 20 years ago it wouldn't have been a NM. By my own criteria, I'd be hard-pressed giving it a NM-.

 

A corner crease is one of those defects that always had a ceiling...and that ceiling wasn't at NM.

 

I don't give a rat's arse about number of flaws with this...it's the nature of the flaw that has given rise to this outcry.

[Flaming_Telepath]

Most people are not savvy enough to differentiate between 9.4's. They're just happy to own a copy in the grade they can afford.

 

All they care about is the label.

 

And you don't think that that's a very, very sad state of affairs?

[NewWorldOrder]

I am pretty sure Stephen Fishler came up with the 10 point Grading Scale.

 

The book looks like a solid 9.2, but if three graders gave it a 9.4 I doubt it would go down on a resub.

 

Just make sure your grading standards matches the label plus the actual book and you will be a happy comic collector.

 

 

I have passed on many CGC books that made the label but not my book grade.

 

 

[VintageComics]

30 years ago this would have been a mint book. Now it's a CGC 9.4 and a disputed NM grade by others.

 

Roy, this is the whole point. 30 years ago it wouldn't have been a Mint, 20 years ago it wouldn't have been a NM. By my own criteria, I'd be hard-pressed giving it a NM-.

 

A corner crease is one of those defects that always had a ceiling...and that ceiling wasn't at NM.

 

I don't give a rat's arse about number of flaws with this...it's the nature of the flaw that has given rise to this outcry.

 

Well I wasn't an avid grader in the 70's but I do hear stories all the time about an 'old school NM' being a new school VF.

 

Again, there have always been different "schools" of though just as you have different schools of though for everything.

 

R.

 

 

[Flaming_Telepath]

Just make sure your grading standards matches the label plus the actual book and you will be a happy comic collector.

 

 

I have passed on many CGC books that made the label but not my book grade.

 

 

(thumbs u

 

I agree.

 

But as I said earlier, allegedly the whole point of CGC was to allow the purchasing of comics sight-unseen.

 

Doesn't like they got there, really, does it?

[nik]

Depends if you are sitting in the sellers seat or not

[Flaming_Telepath]

Depends if you are sitting in the sellers seat or not

 

 

Unfortunately 100% correct. (thumbs u

 

And this is my problem...I don't think the consumer has actually received what they were allegedly supposed to receive.

 

In this and a few other respects.