• 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.

JIM 89 Grading Opinion Please HUGE scans

Started by LordRahl,

52 posts in this topic

Mr. Zipper

Mr. Zipper

Posted
Posted
I agree with FFB - there is absolutely no way in hell this book grades under an 8.0. I give it an easy 8.5. sumo.gif

 

Can I have some of what you are smoking? stooges.gif I count 33 edge creases / tears on the front and back as well as 7 edge chips. Have you looked at the bottom of the back cover? In addition to the torn and creased overhang, there is a HOLE in the bottom of the back cover.

 

I think you are being hypnotized by the superior center portion of the book and glossing over the perimeter. Doesn't make you a bad guy though... flowerred.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Murph

Murph

Posted
Posted

I agree, I don't know how ppl are coming up with anything above 7.5 for this book. The overflash along the bottom alone (not to mention the tears and the creases) keeps it out of anything 8.5 or above.

 

Brian

Link to comment
Share on other sites
divad

divad

Posted
Posted
I agree with FFB - there is absolutely no way in hell this book grades under an 8.0. I give it an easy 8.5. sumo.gif

 

Can I have some of what you are smoking? stooges.gif I count 33 edge creases / tears on the front and back as well as 7 edge chips. Have you looked at the bottom of the back cover? In addition to the torn and creased overhang, there is a HOLE in the bottom of the back cover.

 

I think you are being hypnotized by the superior center portion of the book and glossing over the perimeter. Doesn't make you a bad guy though... flowerred.gif

 

Zip,

I seriously doubt you and I would see eye-to-eye on anything . . . doesn't make you a bad guy though . . . devil.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
burntboy

burntboy

Posted
Posted
I agree with FFB - there is absolutely no way in hell this book grades under an 8.0. I give it an easy 8.5. sumo.gif

 

Can I have some of what you are smoking? stooges.gif I count 33 edge creases / tears on the front and back as well as 7 edge chips. Have you looked at the bottom of the back cover? In addition to the torn and creased overhang, there is a HOLE in the bottom of the back cover.

 

I think you are being hypnotized by the superior center portion of the book and glossing over the perimeter. Doesn't make you a bad guy though... flowerred.gif

 

Zip,

I seriously doubt you and I would see eye-to-eye on anything . . . doesn't make you a bad guy though . . . devil.gif

 

WOW - talk about some grading differentials!!!! this book is running from a low of 6.5 to a high of 8.5.

 

i'm squarely in the 6.5 - 7.0 corner on this one with Murph and Zipper thumbsup2.gif

 

i think Zipper has stated it quite well; the number of tears and color breaking creases is way too high for anything resembling an 8.0. ( i can't believe my favorite grader out there , FFB, picked this as an 8.5!!)

 

in fact, i'm going with Murph at 6.5 although i think he's typically tough, but this book has so much little damages on it. i think Zip is also correct in saying that folks are being hypnotized by the beautiful intererior colors, etc......

 

here's a true CGC 8.5 (it's my copy). while it does have it's flaws (small color loss ULC, some minor spine/staple wear, etc.) i don't think there is any comparison between the two books. (and this ain't a "mine is better than yours post").

 

compare and then please let us have your revised opinions devil.gif

 

1090998965864_JIM_89_001.jpg

 

1092886727879_JIM_89.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FFB

FFB

Posted
Posted
This book compares favorably. And this copy is a 6.5, if you want to make the argument the 6.5 has a little more wear that's fine. 7.0 then

 

Murph, those two books are nothing alike. The 6.5 has three long creases that are more than a half inch long and a LOT more edge, spine, and corner wear (not to mention some nasty grease pencil writing). LR's book looks nothing like this one in terms of wear. The only significant damage to the book at all is to the top and bottom overflash. The most severe damage is to the back cover, so it'll be discounted somewhat. I stand by my 8.5 and I think at WORST this book is an 8.0. No way will it grade lower. And if LR wants to sell it at 8.0 guide, he's got an immediate buyer right friggin' here. hi.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FFB

FFB

Posted
Posted
I agree with FFB - there is absolutely no way in hell this book grades under an 8.0. I give it an easy 8.5. sumo.gif

 

Can I have some of what you are smoking? stooges.gif I count 33 edge creases / tears on the front and back as well as 7 edge chips. Have you looked at the bottom of the back cover? In addition to the torn and creased overhang, there is a HOLE in the bottom of the back cover.

 

I think you are being hypnotized by the superior center portion of the book and glossing over the perimeter. Doesn't make you a bad guy though... flowerred.gif

 

Zip,

I seriously doubt you and I would see eye-to-eye on anything . . . doesn't make you a bad guy though . . . devil.gif

 

WOW - talk about some grading differentials!!!! this book is running from a low of 6.5 to a high of 8.5.

 

i'm squarely in the 6.5 - 7.0 corner on this one with Murph and Zipper thumbsup2.gif

 

i think Zipper has stated it quite well; the number of tears and color breaking creases is way too high for anything resembling an 8.0. ( i can't believe my favorite grader out there , FFB, picked this as an 8.5!!)

 

in fact, i'm going with Murph at 6.5 although i think he's typically tough, but this book has so much little damages on it. i think Zip is also correct in saying that folks are being hypnotized by the beautiful intererior colors, etc......

 

here's a true CGC 8.5 (it's my copy). while it does have it's flaws (small color loss ULC, some minor spine/staple wear, etc.) i don't think there is any comparison between the two books. (and this ain't a "mine is better than yours post").

 

compare and then please let us have your revised opinions devil.gif

 

 

Harry, unless there is something wrong with your book that I can't see, you got robbed. I've got some 9.2s that look like that. Your book looks like a 9.0 at least to me. 893applaud-thumb.gif

 

There is no way you can tell me that LR's book looks like the 6.5 that Murph linked to from Heritage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
burntboy

burntboy

Posted
Posted
This book compares favorably. And this copy is a 6.5, if you want to make the argument the 6.5 has a little more wear that's fine. 7.0 then

 

Murph, those two books are nothing alike. The 6.5 has three long creases that are more than a half inch long and a LOT more edge, spine, and corner wear (not to mention some nasty grease pencil writing). LR's book looks nothing like this one in terms of wear. The only significant damage to the book at all is to the top and bottom overflash. The most severe damage is to the back cover, so it'll be discounted somewhat. I stand by my 8.5 and I think at WORST this book is an 8.0. No way will it grade lower. And if LR wants to sell it at 8.0 guide, he's got an immediate buyer right friggin' here. hi.gif

 

ok Scott, then what would you grade mine at (knowing that it was already graded at 8.5) in just comparing the two books??? 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Murph

Murph

Posted
Posted

There's tears on the front cover, tears on the back. The overflash has more folds in it then I'd care to see. LRC has a crease. Sure the spine looks nice, but I don't give bonus points because one particular part of the book seems extra nice.

If this book is an 8.5, then BB's copy should at least be a 9.4 (is it is MUCH nicer) and it's not.

 

Brian

Link to comment
Share on other sites
divad

divad

Posted
Posted

OK, just for comparison's sake, let's put them side by side at the same size:

 

here's a true CGC 8.5 (it's my copy). while it does have it's flaws (small color loss ULC, some minor spine/staple wear, etc.) i don't think there is any comparison between the two books. (and this ain't a "mine is better than yours post").

 

compare and then please let us have your revised opinions devil.gif

 

1090998965864_JIM_89_001.jpg

 

Jim89S.jpg

 

1092886727879_JIM_89.jpg

 

Jim89backS.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FFB

FFB

Posted
Posted
There's tears on the front cover, tears on the back. The overflash has more folds in it then I'd care to see. LRC has a crease. Sure the spine looks nice, but I don't give bonus points because one particular part of the book seems extra nice.

If this book is an 8.5, then BB's copy should at least be a 9.4 (is it is MUCH nicer) and it's not.

 

Brian

 

I think the overflash looks worse in the scan than it does in person. Anyway, Harry's copy is better, but it also looks undergraded by at least one grade level. Unless there's something I can't see on his copy, I'll bet he'd have at least a 50/50 chance of a 9.0 on a resub.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
burntboy

burntboy

Posted
Posted
OK, just for comparison's sake, let's put them side by side at the same size:

 

here's a true CGC 8.5 (it's my copy). while it does have it's flaws (small color loss ULC, some minor spine/staple wear, etc.) i don't think there is any comparison between the two books. (and this ain't a "mine is better than yours post").

 

compare and then please let us have your revised opinions devil.gif

 

1090998965864_JIM_89_001.jpg

 

Jim89S.jpg

 

1092886727879_JIM_89.jpg

 

Jim89backS.jpg

 

i think i need to go back and crank up the brightness and contrast to compete for the visual impact.

 

but there are no tears and no creases in the cgc graded book.

 

 

LR's shows beautifully acclaim.gif, but the overflash on both the top and bottom have a ton of creases and tears. i agree with everyone that's it's a stunner but since CGC grades on structural beauty foremost, i think zip, murph and i are closer to the grade that they would assign it.

 

LET THE GRADING CONTEST BEGIN devil.gif

 

and we know how Diva overgrades books (and i mean everybody's) grin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
drbanner

drbanner

Posted
Posted

What a great thread - we get to see multiple images of one of the great covers of the Marvel SA!!

 

Humongous scans like the original can play tricks on the eyes, at first I was thinking 9.0...9.2...9.4, but then when I got down to looking at the bottom I was hurtin' inside! The same-size comparison scans are telling, but I agree that the bottom overflash damage on this book precludes it from 8.0 or better. I've not actually seen many early SA Marvels with that degree of overflash on the bottom however, so I'm not sure how CGC would treat it...it's pretty rough though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aces

Aces

Posted
Posted

Looks they were though on that one burnt...

 

I'd have said 9.0 just like the Sgt. Fury 13 I sent in I thought for sure was a 9.0.

It got an 8.5 too. frown.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
divad

divad

Posted
Posted
Looks they were though on that one burnt...

 

I'd have said 9.0 just like the Sgt. Fury 13 I sent in I thought for sure was a 9.0.

It got an 8.5 too. frown.gif

 

Aces,

You should be pleased with a half point variance . . . 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aces

Aces

Posted
Posted
Looks they were though on that one burnt...

 

I'd have said 9.0 just like the Sgt. Fury 13 I sent in I thought for sure was a 9.0.

It got an 8.5 too. frown.gif

 

Aces,

You should be pleased with a half point variance . . . 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

But it was $100-150 difference when I sold it... tonofbricks.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LordRahl

LordRahl

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Boy Burnt, when you scale my scan down to the same size as yours, the book sure does look a lot better. I still don't think that the it will grade higher than an 8.0 and it was sold to me as a higher grade than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing