• 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.

Amazing Adventures #12 - Opinions please!

Started by divad,

36 posts in this topic

garthgantu

garthgantu

Posted
Posted

Seems very helpful, Jimm - but I wonder if you're actually exposing defects that CGC wouldn't even spot? If all we're seeing with those 'spine creases' is the "negative" of a slight lack of reflectivity or something, I'm not sure they're even visible with the naked eye?

 

And as one of the 'nattering nabobs of negativity' on these boards, I'm STILL giving this book a 9.6 - how's that? tonofbricks.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
divad

divad

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Seems very helpful, Jimm - but I wonder if you're actually exposing defects that CGC wouldn't even spot? If all we're seeing with those 'spine creases' is the "negative" of a slight lack of reflectivity or something, I'm not sure they're even visible with the naked eye?

 

And as one of the 'nattering nabobs of negativity' on these boards, I'm STILL giving this book a 9.6 - how's that? tonofbricks.gif

 

Woohooooooooooo! acclaim.gif (I want a 9.8 devil.gif)

 

stooges.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimm94

jimm94

Posted
Posted
Seems very helpful, Jimm - but I wonder if you're actually exposing defects that CGC wouldn't even spot? If all we're seeing with those 'spine creases' is the "negative" of a slight lack of reflectivity or something, I'm not sure they're even visible with the naked eye?

 

And as one of the 'nattering nabobs of negativity' on these boards, I'm STILL giving this book a 9.6 - how's that? tonofbricks.gif

 

That's certainly a possibility, which is why I work very hard at honing my skills when it comes to being able to correctly interpret what I see in a scan. As we are all well aware, a scan can magnify defects just as easily as it can hide them. My concept of the "negative scan" is just another way to analyze the given data. Like I said, it's something that I've just started playing around with, so the jury is still out regarding its' usefulness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
garthgantu

garthgantu

Posted
Posted
Seems very helpful, Jimm - but I wonder if you're actually exposing defects that CGC wouldn't even spot? If all we're seeing with those 'spine creases' is the "negative" of a slight lack of reflectivity or something, I'm not sure they're even visible with the naked eye?

 

And as one of the 'nattering nabobs of negativity' on these boards, I'm STILL giving this book a 9.6 - how's that? tonofbricks.gif

 

Woohooooooooooo! acclaim.gif (I want a 9.8 devil.gif)

 

stooges.gif

 

Some people are NEVER satisfied! 893naughty-thumb.gif27_laughing.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
burntboy

burntboy

Posted
Posted
Seems very helpful, Jimm - but I wonder if you're actually exposing defects that CGC wouldn't even spot? If all we're seeing with those 'spine creases' is the "negative" of a slight lack of reflectivity or something, I'm not sure they're even visible with the naked eye?

 

And as one of the 'nattering nabobs of negativity' on these boards, I'm STILL giving this book a 9.6 - how's that? tonofbricks.gif

 

That's certainly a possibility, which is why I work very hard at honing my skills when it comes to being able to correctly interpret what I see in a scan. As we are all well aware, a scan can magnify defects just as easily as it can hide them. My concept of the "negative scan" is just another way to analyze the given data. Like I said, it's something that I've just started playing around with, so the jury is still out regarding its' usefulness.

 

this reminds me of the currencomics debacle many months ago, where he complained about the grading on a SS#4 for days. but he had the contrast turned up so high you couldn't see some of the defects. somebody (valiantman?) took the scan and turned the contrast way, way down and literally dozens of little creases were revealed all over the cover.............893whatthe.gif

 

i think that was the last time he was heard from......... 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
worldsbestcomics

worldsbestcomics

Posted
Posted
Seems very helpful, Jimm - but I wonder if you're actually exposing defects that CGC wouldn't even spot? If all we're seeing with those 'spine creases' is the "negative" of a slight lack of reflectivity or something, I'm not sure they're even visible with the naked eye?

 

And as one of the 'nattering nabobs of negativity' on these boards, I'm STILL giving this book a 9.6 - how's that? tonofbricks.gif

 

I have a CGC graded 9.6 copy of this book and after seeing the inverted image, I went back and re-checked the spine on mine. In the right angle, I can see two invisible indents which might be the same thing that shows up on the inverted image. From straight on, they are virtually invisible to the naked eye.

 

I wondered why my copy didn't get a 9.8. Maybe that's why...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
divad

divad

Posted
  • Author
Posted
this reminds me of the currencomics debacle many months ago . . .

 

Except, of course, that his book HAD "dozens of little creases . . . all over the cover"

 

Even WITH the flouroscope treatment, that is NOT the case here. makepoint.gif893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

stooges.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jayman

Jayman

Posted
Posted
this reminds me of the currencomics debacle many months ago . . .

 

Except, of course, that his book HAD "dozens of little creases . . . all over the cover"

 

Even WITH the flouroscope treatment, that is NOT the case here. makepoint.gif893scratchchin-thumb.gif

 

stooges.gif

 

643400-terminator-3.jpg

643400-terminator-3.jpg.76e479a2f442b3e0a580a3a112e785d7.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing