• 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.

Need some help on this one: ASM #61

Started by divad,

23 posts in this topic

FFB

FFB

Posted
Posted
Looks nice.

 

9.0/9.2

That upper spine ding would prevent a 9.4 I think. shy.gif

 

Same here. Probably not a 9.4. There is a spot or two on the back that will also keep it out of 9.4 IMO, plus the rounding of some of the corners on front and back, the small staple-hole fraying on the bottom staple, a couple of small spine stresses in the top third of the spine, and what looks like a tiny edge tear near the bottom right corner on the front cover. Nice book though!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fan4Fan

Fan4Fan

Posted
Posted
9.0-ish...

 

Both spine corners looks a bit stressed. Is the LLC on the back cover dinged?

 

Thanks,

Fan4Fan

 

I would say no, but check out these links to even larger scans:

 

Front Cover

 

Back Cover

 

thanks 893applaud-thumb.gif

 

After reviewing the larger back scan, I'd have to say no higher than 9.0. That LLC definitely shows some a bit missing (folded inwards?) at the corner and another fold inboard of that.... at least to my eyes.

 

That said, it is still a nice book!

 

Thanks,

Fan4Fan

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Murph

Murph

Posted
Posted

Can't imagine this getting above an 8.5, all the corners are rounded and some blunting on a few, couple other marks as well. Unless CGC lowered their standards quite a bit, this one won't get 9.0-9.2

 

Brian

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sckao

sckao

Posted
Posted
Can't imagine this getting above an 8.5, all the corners are rounded and some blunting on a few, couple other marks as well. Unless CGC lowered their standards quite a bit, this one won't get 9.0-9.2

 

Brian

 

 

I agree. 8.0 - 8.5

Link to comment
Share on other sites
divad

divad

Posted
  • Author
Posted
With further review of the larger scans my 8.5 is not nearly as solid and hinges to 8.0 that is a small stain on the back top isnt it? If not 8.5 if so 8.0

 

Davidking623

 

I'm starting to think if I post a reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally big scan, we can get this book down to at least a 7.0 !!! 893frustrated.gif (yuk, yuk!) BTW DK, I think that's a digital error (if there is such a thing!) It certainly isn't a water mark.

 

Thanks to all,

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FFB

FFB

Posted
Posted
With further review of the larger scans my 8.5 is not nearly as solid and hinges to 8.0 that is a small stain on the back top isnt it? If not 8.5 if so 8.0

 

Davidking623

 

I'm starting to think if I post a reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally big scan, we can get this book down to at least a 7.0 !!! 893frustrated.gif (yuk, yuk!) BTW DK, I think that's a digital error (if there is such a thing!) It certainly isn't a water mark.

 

Thanks to all,

 

Actually, if you can put up a 300 dpi scan at double size, I could probably go as low as 1.8 GD- because that tiny corner scuff would be three inches wide, the spine stresses would go from nearly invisible hairline fractures to two-inch monsters, and that small dot of stain on the back would become "extensive water damage." 27_laughing.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sckao

sckao

Posted
Posted

 

I'm starting to think if I post a reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeally big scan, we can get this book down to at least a 7.0 !!! 893frustrated.gif (yuk, yuk!) BTW DK, I think that's a digital error (if there is such a thing!) It certainly isn't a water mark.

 

Thanks to all,

 

I was downgrading for the possible water stain mark in the upper right corner on the back cover actually. (And for some other staining/weird marks in the upper left.)

 

Plus, I've seen a fair share of 8.5's so I have a pretty good baseline of what constitutes an 8.5 (from my limited experience.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimm94

jimm94

Posted
Posted

Hi Shin,

 

It's certainly possible it would score that low, but I'll defend my 9.0/9.2 grade by saying that I am judging it in comparison to two ASM 8.5's I happen to have sitting at my desk today.

 

Slightly OT - One thing I've observed is that CGC's grading is as subjective in nature as the well trained collector/dealer. They are extremely accurate and consistent, but you can get away with X flaw and still achieve a given grade, as long as it doesn't also have flaw Y or defect Z, etc...

 

Case in point: One of the books I just got is an ASM #77, with an accumulation of minor defects that downgrade it to a pretty killer looking 8.5. The other 8.5 comic, an ASM #99 (Pacific Coast - thanks 4GemWorks!), otherwise appears as 9.2, but has URC impact damage that is visible primarily on the interior pages and back cover that bring it down to a 8.5 overall. So, many minor flaws vs. one bigger flaw. The point is, I just feel that Diva's book has few enough minor flaws to still warrant 9.0/9.2.

 

Not sure why I brought this up. I guess I just wanted to talk about my new comics. sorry.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
divad

divad

Posted
  • Author
Posted

probably 8.5 , there is a stain from rusted staple on bc.

 

That's what it looks like doesn't it? But I for the life of me figure out how that happened!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sckao

sckao

Posted
Posted
Not sure why I brought this up. I guess I just wanted to talk about my new comics. sorry.gif

 

No problem. It may not be a water stain per se.. but humidity foxing on the ULC on the back cover with light foxing across the back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing