Different shades of VG and Fine

[F For Fake]

When I was originally taught about grading (lo those many years ago), we just used the "basic" system. I'm much more comfortable with the 10 point system these days, but there are still areas where I can get a little stuck. I feel like I have the highs and lows pretty well figured out, but there are some areas that can still leave me scratching my head. Namely:

 

4.5 to 5.5 (VG+, VG/FN, FN-)

 

6.5 to 7.5 (FN+, FN/VF, VF-)

 

and

 

8.0 to 8.5 (VF to VF+)

 

In a lot of instances, when examining books that have come back in those ranges, the differences in grades has seemed almost arbitrary. But I'm thinking that probably just means that I need to do more work in those areas.

 

Are there any "tells" that any of you use to differentiate between books in those ranges? I realize that grading is subjective and that CGC's grade is just an opinion of that grader at that specific moment in time, but in your PERSONAL experience, are there certain things that will always move a book from, say, VG+ to VG/FN, etc., in your opinion?

 

Thanks for your input! The board is an invaluable resource, and I enjoy learning new things.

 

FFF

[VintageComics]

CGC grading is often very different from Overstreet grading.

 

Also on some books / defects CGC grading can also be inconsistent and a given grade on one day has the possibility being a different grade on a different day.

[thunsicker]

The problem with looking for any certain defect to determine a grade is that the grade is due to the accumulation of defects. I think of it more as start from a grade (say 9.8) and start subtracting.

[rjpb]

You're not the only one who has difficulty parsing those grade ranges, sometimes it seems the pros have plenty of trouble as well,as even with CGC it can seem at times arbitrary.

 

Just use these simple guidelines and you'll do okay

 

If it looks better than VG, but that's all you can say about it, it's a 4.5

 

If you feel like calling it a FN is just a little too generous it's a 5.5

 

If you don't know where it it should fall it's a 5.0

 

It's a similar pattern for 6.5 to 7.5

 

As for the difference between 8.0 and 8.5 - if it's a really pretty 8.0, or you feel you could get away with calling it a 9.0, but want to be conservative - that's what an 8.5 is.

 

[makeminemego]

It's pretty foggy these days. Grading wasn't as strict before CGC, but it was simpler.

 

CGC is more of a true "sniff test" from my experience. They don't necessarily abide by OS guidelines, and sometimes deviate significantly.

 

Buy a stack of mid-low raws from Jim Payette or Bob Storms and study up. Best way to learn.

[thunsicker]

Best way to learn is to enter all the grading contests that go on here. Like the one Andy is setting up now.

[FineCollector]

rj's got it about right. Here's how I explain it:

 

1 - choose the major grade first: NM, VF, F, VG, G, FR, PR. Don't try to hit the target right away, put it into one of those buckets.

2 - give a bump to the really nice examples (+), or drop a copy that you're having more trouble justifying (-)

3 - if you're really having trouble deciding on the major grade, I call it an "it is/I wish it was", i.e.: it's VG/I wish it was F.

 

Make sure you calibrate by looking at examples of the major grades once in a while, and you'll be good!

[VintageComics]

FC, I think that's how most people do it.

 

There was a time when there was a huge clash in grading standards between sellers who sold Overstreeet graded books and those who dealt with CGC graded books. Long time sellers who knew how to grade properly acc. to Overstreet standards were taken to task by a new wave of sellers who only bought and sold CGC graded books.

 

CGC changed the landscape and this clash lasted for about a decade from 1999 to the late 2000's (obviously CGC's 1st decade in business).

 

Over time, as the market grew and CGC became more accepted they eventually 'won' the battle of the grading standards and now monopolize the market as far as grading standards are concerned.

 

The way I see CGC deviating significantly from Overstreet is when you have a major defect (like a large crease or a popped staple) which might put an Overstreet book straight into an automatic VG grade regardless of how the rest of the book looks (even if it's NM) but then CGC will allow that defect into somewhat of a middle range because the rest of the book looks so nice.

 

Another rule I've come to learn when grading the way CGC does, is to think like this:

 

Would this defect be allowed in NM range?

Would it be allowed in VF range?

Would it be allowed in Fine range,

 

etc.

 

For example, you have a staple that is completely popped loose on an otherwise awesome looking book so the book would be an automatic VG under Overstreet standards but CGC will push the book to VG/Fine so the book is still in the VG range but pushed to the top of the VG range because the rest of the book is so nice.

 

Anyhow, CGC has certainly made it more complicated as they are trying to please both the submitter / seller as well as the buyer and so they have developed a much more complex grading standard (think algorithm upon algorithm of logic ) but they have come to be accepted as the primary grading standard giving us no option but to learn how they grade.

 

[ft88]

I like to play the game of "which one would I rather have" especially with tough calls.

 

A VG book with a water stain and rusty staple

 

vs

 

A VG books with creases and small piece missing.

 

So if book A is a CGC 4.5 and book B is a CGC 6.0 and I'd rather have my book over A but not B then it's either a 5.0 or 5.5. Could be a 4.5 or 6.0 if its a near ties but one is just a preference. You get the idea.

 

When I do this I also make sure the CGC ones I'm comparing to aren't the outliers of over or undergrading (undergrading usually has some hidden/interior defect like a sub crease you can't see in a scan)

 

I carry this up to about 9.4, at the 9.6 and 9.8 level it can be pretty difficult to catch every ultra minor flaw even with books in hand. Scans it's basically impossible. But mid range it works.

 

[F For Fake]

Wow, thanks everyone for the great input! I wrote the original post before leaving work for the day yesterday, and came back this morning to find a smorgasbord of info! A lot of great information here that I will take to heart. I would individually quote and :thumbsup: all of you, but that would get old quick, so suffice to say I appreciate every word each of you took the time to type.

 

Also, about the grading threads and contests, I do try my hand privately, without posting the results, and I find I'm close. I guess I should put up or shut up and throw my grades into the mix as well. One thing I always thought would be useful in the PGM threads would be if folks put some of the reasoning behind their grade, instead of just throwing out a number. I think I'd learn more that way, for sure.

 

Anyways, thanks again folks!

[Point Five]

You're not the only one who has difficulty parsing those grade ranges, sometimes it seems the pros have plenty of trouble as well,as even with CGC it can seem at times arbitrary.

 

Just use these simple guidelines and you'll do okay

 

If it looks better than VG, but that's all you can say about it, it's a 4.5

 

If you feel like calling it a FN is just a little too generous it's a 5.5

 

If you don't know where it it should fall it's a 5.0

 

It's a similar pattern for 6.5 to 7.5

 

As for the difference between 8.0 and 8.5 - if it's a really pretty 8.0, or you feel you could get away with calling it a 9.0, but want to be conservative - that's what an 8.5 is.

I like this kind of thinking. I think that's why we are so close on our grades in this forum (well, until Andy's contests when you usually rocket past me!).

 

When you're recalibrating your grading to match CGC's, I think one of the main things to internalize is simply that they grade on structure as well as appearance. So a book with spine splits at both ends or a lot of back cover stains or creasing isn't going to be a Fine, no matter how well the front cover presents. I usually ask myself when confronted with a book like that, would I be happy if I bought it sight unseen as a Fine? And the answer is usually, no, I probably wouldn't. How about a VG? So I'll feel it out accordingly, similar to rjbp's suggestions above.

 

 

[rjpb]

 

Anyhow, CGC has certainly made it more complicated as they are trying to please both the submitter / seller as well as the buyer and so they have developed a much more complex grading standard (think algorithm upon algorithm of logic ) but they have come to be accepted as the primary grading standard giving us no option but to learn how they grade.

 

While I'll admit CGC has had some influence on my own grading standards over the years ( in both directions), they also seem somewhat responsive to the community at large ( the changes on tape being a prime example), even if they don't announce it. That they don't just take down "what the heck was CGC thinking" threads indicates they see value in feedback.

 

 

[Bomber-Bob]

Years ago, grades were assigned with a broader stroke. Grades were not as specific but in a category. VG+ or FN/VF were basically viewed the same. Anything in the Fine range was priced the same, no difference between a 6.0 and 6.5 at all. Now we try and grader in a tighter range.Even early Overstreet price guides had only had 3 prices listed. Things were much simpler then !

[VintageComics]

Years ago, grades were assigned with a broader stroke. Grades were not as specific but in a category. VG+ or FN/VF were basically viewed the same. Anything in the Fine range was priced the same, no difference between a 6.0 and 6.5 at all. Now we try and grader in a tighter range.Even early Overstreet price guides had only had 3 prices listed. Things were much simpler then !

 

The reason of course is that as comics have become so expensive, there was a necessity to break down the grading degrees.

 

When even the most expensive comic was only worth a few $100 the grade spread didn't matter as much, but when you're dealing with so many books worth $1000's, $10,000, $100,000's and even $1MILs then the Good - Fine - Mint spread is just too coarse.

 

And I know you know this, Bob. I'm just spelling it out for people who may not.

[PovertyRow]

When I was originally taught about grading (lo those many years ago), we just used the "basic" system. I'm much more comfortable with the 10 point system these days, but there are still areas where I can get a little stuck. I feel like I have the highs and lows pretty well figured out, but there are some areas that can still leave me scratching my head. Namely:

 

4.5 to 5.5 (VG+, VG/FN, FN-)

 

6.5 to 7.5 (FN+, FN/VF, VF-)

 

and

 

8.0 to 8.5 (VF to VF+)

 

In a lot of instances, when examining books that have come back in those ranges, the differences in grades has seemed almost arbitrary. But I'm thinking that probably just means that I need to do more work in those areas.

 

Are there any "tells" that any of you use to differentiate between books in those ranges? I realize that grading is subjective and that CGC's grade is just an opinion of that grader at that specific moment in time, but in your PERSONAL experience, are there certain things that will always move a book from, say, VG+ to VG/FN, etc., in your opinion?

 

Thanks for your input! The board is an invaluable resource, and I enjoy learning new things.

 

FFF

 

In my day it was common for either the +- OR the / to be used but not mixed together. For example, where one person would use VG/FN another would use VG+. One explanation favoring the +- was that one could then have a twofold split: VG, VG+, F-, F. In this example a VG+ was a bit better than a VG and a F- was a bit worse than a Fine but better than a VG+.

 

I never liked the +- system as breaking things down that far was too subjective, especially in the lesser grades. I wrote about it to, as I recall, CBM. IOr maybe I was just talkig to Gary carter about it. But I always tended to the VG, VG/FN, FN which seemed to make a lot more sense.

[Amadeus Arkham]

50 Shades of Grade.

[rjpb]

When I was originally taught about grading (lo those many years ago), we just used the "basic" system. I'm much more comfortable with the 10 point system these days, but there are still areas where I can get a little stuck. I feel like I have the highs and lows pretty well figured out, but there are some areas that can still leave me scratching my head. Namely:

 

4.5 to 5.5 (VG+, VG/FN, FN-)

 

6.5 to 7.5 (FN+, FN/VF, VF-)

 

and

 

8.0 to 8.5 (VF to VF+)

 

In a lot of instances, when examining books that have come back in those ranges, the differences in grades has seemed almost arbitrary. But I'm thinking that probably just means that I need to do more work in those areas.

 

Are there any "tells" that any of you use to differentiate between books in those ranges? I realize that grading is subjective and that CGC's grade is just an opinion of that grader at that specific moment in time, but in your PERSONAL experience, are there certain things that will always move a book from, say, VG+ to VG/FN, etc., in your opinion?

 

Thanks for your input! The board is an invaluable resource, and I enjoy learning new things.

 

FFF

 

In my day it was common for either the +- OR the / to be used but not mixed together. For example, where one person would use VG/FN another would use VG+. One explanation favoring the +- was that one could then have a twofold split: VG, VG+, F-, F. In this example a VG+ was a bit better than a VG and a F- was a bit worse than a Fine but better than a VG+.

 

I never liked the +- system as breaking things down that far was too subjective, especially in the lesser grades. I wrote about it to, as I recall, CBM. IOr maybe I was just talkig to Gary carter about it. But I always tended to the VG, VG/FN, FN which seemed to make a lot more sense.

 

I remember back in the 90s when it was a ongoing debate in the letter pages of CBM as to whether both the +/- and the split grades should be used, or just one or the other. I've since lost or misplaced it, but at the time I had stumbled across an old inventory/value list I'd made of my meager GA collection back in the mid 70s, and I had used both, though that may have been a reflection of the grades assigned at purchase. Even so, I don't recall feeling that it was an either or situation, and am pretty sure I used both when selling off my collection in the late 70s/early 80s.

 

What has gone out of vogue ( except sometimes on ebay) is the hyphenated grade, like VG-F, or VF-NM, not to describe a grade range for multiple issues, but for a single book. I recall seeing that in the 70s, and it always seemed like the seller was saying, "Well, you might think it's only a VG, but others might call it a FN, some I'm asking closer to the FN price".