Let's see those raw 9.8s!

[1904 Comics]

Been interested in all of the grading opinions everyone has but never really see people give 9.8s

 

I figured this would be a good post to see what many if you who have been so kind to grade for others believe a 9.8 is? If you have scans or past post images, I'd love to see some great raw 9.8 candidates!!

[vaillant]

Very hard to tell a 9.6+ from scans – I think even doing great scans there will be always something which eludes the eye.

[timfinz]

Very hard to tell a 9.6+ from scans – I think even doing great scans there will be always something which eludes the eye.

That is why I always grade with one eye shut!

But seriously I would like to see more 9.8 raw books on here too! I think given a large enough scan and some details like you do is enough to test the 9.8 waters IMHO.

[vaillant]

Well, if some "heroic" boardie has deslabbed certified Mints it would surely be nice to see them…

[Hado]

This is my WD 1, most graded it 9.6 some 9.8

 

 

 

Here's where it lives now

 

 

[The-Collector]

Dont have BC scans but both of these got 9.8

 

 

 

 

 

[The-Collector]

Very hard to tell a 9.6+ from scans – I think even doing great scans there will be always something which eludes the eye.

That is why I always grade with one eye shut!

But seriously I would like to see more 9.8 raw books on here too! I think given a large enough scan and some details like you do is enough to test the 9.8 waters IMHO.

 

I think you are correct. These books look great in scans but there are factors that are not present in scans. Like gloss.

[The-Collector]

This was also a 9.8

 

 

 

[timfinz]

Very hard to tell a 9.6+ from scans – I think even doing great scans there will be always something which eludes the eye.

That is why I always grade with one eye shut!

But seriously I would like to see more 9.8 raw books on here too! I think given a large enough scan and some details like you do is enough to test the 9.8 waters IMHO.

 

I think you are correct. These books look great in scans but there are factors that are not present in scans. Like gloss.

But that is why a brief description is so important and helpful in making an educated guess.

[The-Collector]

Very hard to tell a 9.6+ from scans – I think even doing great scans there will be always something which eludes the eye.

That is why I always grade with one eye shut!

But seriously I would like to see more 9.8 raw books on here too! I think given a large enough scan and some details like you do is enough to test the 9.8 waters IMHO.

 

I think you are correct. These books look great in scans but there are factors that are not present in scans. Like gloss.

But that is why a brief description is so important and helpful in making an educated guess.

 

I was agreeing with you...

[timfinz]

Very hard to tell a 9.6+ from scans – I think even doing great scans there will be always something which eludes the eye.

That is why I always grade with one eye shut!

But seriously I would like to see more 9.8 raw books on here too! I think given a large enough scan and some details like you do is enough to test the 9.8 waters IMHO.

 

I think you are correct. These books look great in scans but there are factors that are not present in scans. Like gloss.

But that is why a brief description is so important and helpful in making an educated guess.

 

I was agreeing with you...

Oh foolish me!

[timfinz]

Dont have BC scans but both of these got 9.8

 

Did you post these here for the boardies to grade? And if so what kinds of response did you get?

[The-Collector]

I didn't post either of those. I posted the ASM 194. Which got responses in the 9.6 range lots saying 9.6+, I think that most are hesitant to give a 9.8.

 

This also got a 9.8 and is a good demonstration that CGC don't care about printers creases until 9.9. This one had a gnarly PC on the FC.

 

 

[Peter Loves Gwen]

I didn't post either of those. I posted the ASM 194. Which got responses in the 9.6 range lots saying 9.6+, I think that most are hesitant to give a 9.8.

 

This also got a 9.8 and is a good demonstration that CGC don't care about printers creases until 9.9. This one had a gnarly PC on the FC.

 

...[/url]

 

That one has a little odd cut to the bottom edge too.

 

ASM 100 has lots of copies with that printer crease, I've had a few of them.

 

 

 

I have an ASM 188 that was a 9.6 book. I removed it long ago because it was a brown label(I needed to practice before cracking out my AF 15). That copy I have has no obvious flaws, and being an all black cover, it could be a 9.8 yet.

[timfinz]

I didn't post either of those. I posted the ASM 194. Which got responses in the 9.6 range lots saying 9.6+, I think that most are hesitant to give a 9.8.

 

This also got a 9.8 and is a good demonstration that CGC don't care about printers creases until 9.9. This one had a gnarly PC on the FC.

 

But the overall book is great. Now from the scans I can see one spine stress - no colour break - and some bindery corners. My understanding is that if you have minimum number of defects certain defects that we thought would keep it from grading at 9.8 are permissible. The PC is just that and is not considered a flaw or defect until 9.9 and 10.0 from what I understand. Awesome book! (thumbs u

[1904 Comics]

Glad to hear there are printer creases that have made it! Gives me hope for some of my books now.

 

Keep em coming!

[vaillant]

Love the sharp corners on your NM books, Collector.

 

Yes, definitely people are scared to give a NM+ and above, but that’s simply because, as it has been said, there are factors which will always be missing in a scanned image.

Sometimes taking also a picture helps, but for example certain stains or water damage aren’t always visible, and gloss, as the Collector said.