Grading standards

[Zanarkand]

Discussion continuously pops up around here regarding grading "standards". CGC's, Overstreet's, you own, whatever. In some cases, it is not exactly clear what Overstreet may mean, or what a defect exactly is, which is how we get variations in interpretation.

 

I'd like to ask all the learned people here how you, specifically, deviate from Overstreet standards, or at least how you personally interpret those standards in cases where there's a little give.

 

I'll start. I believe Overstreet is correct in subtracting for production related defects. Production wrinkles, miswraps, etc are all in a grand sense the same to me - something wrong with the book. I think books slabbed 9.8 - 10 with obvious off-kilter covers look ridiculous.

 

Other comments?

[garthgantu]

Just a couple out of many:

I think Overstreet is correctly harsh on staple rust and foxing... CGC seems to be considerably more forgiving on these points, from my experience. To me, these are significant 'defects' - things that can't really be 'fixed' even through 'acceptable' restoration.

[sfilosa]

Yellowing of a book kills it for me, but CGC and many other dealers don't seem to downgrade much (if any) for this DEFECT.

 

I would much rather have a book with a nice bright cover and a small staple stress line than one with no stress line and a HORRIBLY YELLOWED COVER.

 

This is why I WILL PAY a PREMIUM for most PEDIGREE BOOKS, as most do not exhibit this yellowing DEFECT.

[Rob]

I have bought many nice looking books that have the cover cleanly detached, because Overstreet states that a book can have a detached cover and still be considered Good. I think others would disagree that a detached cover comic would still be a Good. So it allows me to get comics that appear F or VF, for a fraction of Good price.

[Aces]

I have bought many nice looking books that have the cover cleanly detached, because Overstreet states that a book can have a detached cover and still be considered Good. I think others would disagree that a detached cover comic would still be a Good. So it allows me to get comics that appear F or VF, for a fraction of Good price.

 

Qualified grade...

[Rob]

I have bought many nice looking books that have the cover cleanly detached, because Overstreet states that a book can have a detached cover and still be considered Good. I think others would disagree that a detached cover comic would still be a Good. So it allows me to get comics that appear F or VF, for a fraction of Good price.

 

Qualified grade...

 

It would be a Qualified VF, but no need for qualification on a G grade. A detached cover is a solid G, according to Overstreet.

[fantastic_four]

I'll start. I believe Overstreet is correct in subtracting for production related defects. Production wrinkles, miswraps, etc are all in a grand sense the same to me - something wrong with the book. I think books slabbed 9.8 - 10 with obvious off-kilter covers look ridiculous.

 

Well that's a good start, and since you state that you agree with Overstreet on this, allow me to ask you a question. Going by Overstreet, standards, how do you grade an otherwise perfect comic with no defect save an off-kilter cover? Is there a maximum assignable grade, or perhaps a certain amount you deduct for each 1/16" of miswrap?

[FFB]

I follow Overstreet with regard to everything except staple replacement, which I think is restoration (Overstreet does not, and CGC puts the comic in a green label, I think). Although I don't like to downgrade a book based on miswrap or miscut, I will do so begrudgingly if I am giving an "Overstreet" grade to something.

 

I think that the numerical grade should relate only to wear. In other words, if I were God and could wipe all other comic graders from the face of the Earth, leaving only myself as the final arbiter of comic grading (which, if I were truly God, I suppose I could do without wiping all other graders from the Earth), I would not downgrade for miswrap or miscut. I would discount for production wrinkles because they appear to be "flaws" in an otherwise smooth cover. I treat them as creases.

 

I would also come up with a secondary grade (whether numerical, or in the form of graders' notes with specific measurements) that discuss whether a book is miscut, miswrapped, or contains some other problem, such as restoration. I would have the notes contain far more information about the extent of the resto, something along the lines of the certificate you get when you certify a diamond. (It has a "map" of the diamond showing where the inclusions are. The same could be done with resto detection. The certificate could fold up and slide into the slab and could contain a serial number just like the slab does for matching purposes. I would also use invisible ink to put the same serial number on the last page of the comic in the lower corner margin or elsewhere that is unobtrusive.) I would not use a different color label for restored books, but I would use the 9.0R grade instead of 9.0 for a restored book and I'd have it in huge type on the label, just like how they do the numbers on the current label.

 

Discussion continuously pops up around here regarding grading "standards". CGC's, Overstreet's, you own, whatever. In some cases, it is not exactly clear what Overstreet may mean, or what a defect exactly is, which is how we get variations in interpretation.

 

I'd like to ask all the learned people here how you, specifically, deviate from Overstreet standards, or at least how you personally interpret those standards in cases where there's a little give.

 

I'll start. I believe Overstreet is correct in subtracting for production related defects. Production wrinkles, miswraps, etc are all in a grand sense the same to me - something wrong with the book. I think books slabbed 9.8 - 10 with obvious off-kilter covers look ridiculous.

 

Other comments?

[rjpb]

I tend to be less clinical about grading, and more apt to judge a grade by overall impression. I find most reputable dealers & collectors I have bought from are in the ballpark of my own grade, though If it is there is a discrepancy it is usually that I would grade slightly tougher. I'm always pleased when it's the reverse.

 

As to Overstreet standards, I have a some differences. I don't believe that there is any quantifiable difference between 9.8,9.9 & 10.0, and if you read Overstreet's descriptions, it is not clear that they do either - all three grades could describe the same book. If a book is nicer than NM+ then it's Mint.

 

I am not always strict about grade if a book's singular notable flaw exceeds Overstreet's limits for the grade (e.g. if an otherwise VF book has a 2" spine split, I might call it VG+, even though Overstreet limits VG to 1" ss). If the rest of the book were sharp enough, I might consider grading a book with a loose cover a 3.5, especially if it's a single staple book.

 

Certain defects I have more of a problem with than others. I don't believe a 6.0 book can have brown pages. I don't believe a book with transfer stains - especially on whites and yellows can be a 9.4, no matter how flawless otherwise. Anything more than minor foxing, or the faintest dust shadow knocks a book down to a 5.0 or less for me. I don't understand how a comic with marvel chipping could be considered high grade, pieces out are pieces out no matter what you call it.

 

I don't consider glue anymore a defect than tape, and in fact would rather buy a book with an amature tear seal on the inside of the cover than a piece of tape on the outside. LIke most collectors I would knock less off a grade for back cover defects than for front cover ones. I'll even accept a coupon clipped from an ad page in a 2.0 book if it would otherwise grade higher.

 

Beyond technical grade there are other factors that dictate what I would pay for a given copy of a book.Especially with Golden Age, alot books are desirable mainly due to their cover art. In these cases I might pay more for a nice looking copy with an internal defect, like a chunk out of an interior page, than I would for a 2.0 copy with a dull worn cover.

[Zanarkand]

I'll start. I believe Overstreet is correct in subtracting for production related defects. Production wrinkles, miswraps, etc are all in a grand sense the same to me - something wrong with the book. I think books slabbed 9.8 - 10 with obvious off-kilter covers look ridiculous.

 

Well that's a good start, and since you state that you agree with Overstreet on this, allow me to ask you a question. Going by Overstreet, standards, how do you grade an otherwise perfect comic with no defect save an off-kilter cover? Is there a maximum assignable grade, or perhaps a certain amount you deduct for each 1/16" of miswrap?

 

A good question. To start, I'll say that a 10 book must be perfect. No defects at all, production or otherwise. That's sort of the operating definition of a 10. From there it's easy to say that a 9.9 must have a slight defect of some kind, otherwise it would be a 10 too. But, the defect cannot be one disallowed in the grade, such as a stress (however tiny).

 

A 1/16" miswrap is a perfect example. I'd deduct .1 for that easy. Even if it was a progressive miswrap that is only 1/16" wide at its widest point. Reason being, if you put two perfect looking copies of the same book side by side, but one has a slight miswrap, I can't in all honesty call them both "perfect".

 

10 should allow no defects of any kind at all. 9.9 should also not allow any defects, except for a slight miswrap. Seems like kind of a fine line, but both grades are called "mint", yet there's the numerical difference staring at us, right?

 

I'd allow 1/16" miswrap in 9.8 too, the key difference being that 9.8 can have a tiny defect of some other kind, which 9.9 - 10 cannot.

[Zanarkand]

I have bought many nice looking books that have the cover cleanly detached, because Overstreet states that a book can have a detached cover and still be considered Good. I think others would disagree that a detached cover comic would still be a Good. So it allows me to get comics that appear F or VF, for a fraction of Good price.

 

Qualified grade...

 

This is an area in which CGC and I will never see eye-to-eye. Years before CGC came along, one of the most annoying grading habits I'd ever encountered was people "qualifying" their grades. "This book is Near Mint, except for the..." You all know the drill. We laugh at people who list their books with qualifying remarks on Ebay. Yet it's ok when CGC does it?

 

I believe that Overstreet could be a little clearer regarding the highest grade in which certain defects are allowed. I mean, the first mention in the OGG of a cover detached at one staple is in the description of G/VG 3.0, but does that mean 3.0 is the highest grade that allows a cover to be detached at one staple? I think that's a good interpretation, but I'm not 100% sure.

 

I have a number of sweet looking books, apparent VF at least, that have centerfolds detached at one or both staples. I am fairly sure these books would get a Q from CGC. But I don't think that's correct at all.

 

I used to just average the apparent grade and highest grade in which the defect is allowed. This worked pretty good for awhile, but I started running into too many exceptions. A pristine NM 9.4 book with the cf neatly detached (2.5 tops in the OGG) could still get a 6.0 from me that way, which is just plain wrong. A detached cf called Fine?? No way. I wouldn't buy that! I'd complain to the seller about overgrading.

 

In grading as in any other process, if you have a system that's keeps producing exceptions, you have a bad system. Change it.

 

So I adopted a system of automatic deductions, deciding based on experience and the OGG how I could consistently account for defects. Regarding the cf problems again, VG 3.5 - 4.5 is the highest grade range that begins to describe serious structural problems, so I decided that a cf detached at one staple should automatically warrant a 5.5 point deduction, that way it would never score higher than VG+ no matter how pretty it looked. Detached at both staples loses 6 points, automatic VG. So far, this has been a good system, and I haven't had to "qualify" anything.

[Zanarkand]

Certain defects I have more of a problem with than others. I don't believe a 6.0 book can have brown pages. I don't believe a book with transfer stains - especially on whites and yellows can be a 9.4, no matter how flawless otherwise. Anything more than minor foxing, or the faintest dust shadow knocks a book down to a 5.0 or less for me. I don't understand how a comic with marvel chipping could be considered high grade, pieces out are pieces out no matter what you call it.

 

Good stuff. How should page quality be factored into grading? Overstreet mentions it, CGC apparently doesn't count it unless there's brittleness involved.

 

I think that off white, yellowed, and light tan pages should not be considered a defect. I hold that a defect is damage done to the book, by anyone, at any point including production. Page quality (usually) isn't damage. It's not from mishandling, abuse, or some production flaw. It's just old paper.

 

Dark tan to brown pages often indicate neglect or a lack of any attempt at preservation. That might be considered a defect.

 

On the flipside, white pages does not mean to book is any more defect-free than the exact same book with darker pages, it just means that it was lucky and has experienced extraordinary preservation. The market rewards this, but I don't factor it into my grade.

 

I don't consider glue anymore a defect than tape, and in fact would rather buy a book with an amature tear seal on the inside of the cover than a piece of tape on the outside. LIke most collectors I would knock less off a grade for back cover defects than for front cover ones. I'll even accept a coupon clipped from an ad page in a 2.0 book if it would otherwise grade higher.

 

Another good point. I also often deduct less for a back cover defect than a front cover defect. Purely because creases, tears and whatnot on the front cover interfere with the art. On the back they don't. A crease that goes right through the Hulk's face is to me a whole different kind of crease than one that goes through an ad for an Aurora model kit, though they may be in the same place and of the same length.

[ArnoldTBlumberg]

"I mean, the first mention in the OGG of a cover detached at one staple is in the description of G/VG 3.0, but does that mean 3.0 is the highest grade that allows a cover to be detached at one staple?"

 

Generally, YES. If a defect is not stated in any higher grade and then specifically described in a particular grade, that's the highest grade in which it is allowed. BUT, that does not take into account a caveat also noted in the book - that in certain situations, when a book is otherwise so much higher in quality on every other account, one single defect that would otherwise exist only in a much lower grade might not necessarily drag it all the way down to that level. OK?

 

Arnold

[Rip]

When do you expect the new guide to come out this year?

[Zanarkand]

Thanks Arnold!

 

That jibes well with my system. I guess it's also important to keep in mind that each defect stated in the grade descriptions don't exist in a vacuum. They are present along with other defects listed in that grade description. So a cover detached at one staple doesn't automatically earn you a 3.0, unless it is present with other defects typical of the 3.0 grade. Although I personally wouldn't go higher than 4.0, and that's if the book looked real spiffy.

 

While I've go Arnold's ear (eye?), I'd like to ask another question. Open to everyone else too. What counts as "one" defect? Is each individual spine stress a defect, or is the presense of spine stresses the defect? If you have an edge impact resulting in multiple little creases and a small edge tear, does that mean you have 4 or 5 little defects, or does the impact count as one defect? Does rounded corners count as a defect, or does it count as 4 if all corners are slightly rounded?

 

I ask because I haven't really made any sense out of the defect count graph contained in the OGG. It seems like the pictures show books with numerically more defects than the graph says they should have. I figure I'm overcounting. How does everyone else count?

[Aces]

When do you expect the new guide to come out this year?

 

Ditto