• 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.

Cgc grading standards based on book age?

29 posts in this topic

Hey guys,

 

I'm new to the fourm here. Iv been lurking for a few years since I started collecting but no posts, until now! So I had a question about cgc grading standards based on book age. Do they grade books diffrently based on the date it was printed? For example would they grade a golden age book to the same standard that they would grade a modern book? If so what are the differences? How much more lax are they with older books? Sorry if this question has already been answered. But I did a Search and couldent find anything.

 

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not formally admitted but grading on a curve is there. Key books also get an unofficial bump. You hope to judge a book's relative merit based upon your experience in the your area of expertise.

 

One can see the battle scars on a Silver Age 6.0 but breath on a Modern and suddenly it's a 4.0.*

 

 

 

* Perhaps I exaggerate somewhat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not formally admitted but grading on a curve is there. Key books also get an unofficial bump. You hope to judge a book's relative merit based upon your experience in the your area of expertise.

 

One can see the battle scars on a Silver Age 6.0 but breath on a Modern and suddenly it's a 4.0.*

 

 

 

* Perhaps I exaggerate somewhat.

 

..... I don't think I've ever seen a Modern in CGC 4.0..... for that matter, I can't recall seeing a 9.0 often. One thing about CGC, the slab hides many defects..... the grader's notes are almost a must have if you want to understand where CGC is coming from..... or deslab the book to see for yourself. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not formally admitted but grading on a curve is there. Key books also get an unofficial bump. You hope to judge a book's relative merit based upon your experience in the your area of expertise.

 

One can see the battle scars on a Silver Age 6.0 but breath on a Modern and suddenly it's a 4.0.*

 

 

 

* Perhaps I exaggerate somewhat.

 

I just find it really odd that there's only one grading scale for all of the comic books ever printed. For instance a modern age 9.8 is going to be far superior in quality to a silver age 9.8 right? Even just from the materials used. Modern paper and ink is far superior to that used in the 60's and 70's. It's just seems like the whole grading process in an unchecked mess. On the cgc website it simple states a 1-10 scale, but no actual details of what a book has to look like to achieve that grade. Also the older the book is (like you said) the more lax they are with giving a higher grade. Personally I think there should be a different grading scale (that is puplic for everyone to see) for each tier of comic, to finally get rid of all the "curves" and key issue bumps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think grading is based on how a book has changed from it's original manufactured state. Older books from the 30's to the 70's were not manufactured to the exacting standards that books today are so a 9.4 from different times may look a lot different from each other. It is obvious CGC goes out of their way to be familiar with different manufacture and quality defects that each book may have and generally does not detract in grading for those issues to be fair to how a book was originally made. The notorious Marvel chipping is just one of those types of problems as most of us are aware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed --- although there is some kind of "slack" given certain eras of books, in general the grades are consistent in that a 9.4 grade represents a near mint book *given the printing technology limitations of that age.* The cutting wasn't done by computer to razor precision, the covers often overlapped the interior pages, the covers were not centered, the staples were often bent. The materials were relatively inferior, and all that has to be taken into account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed --- although there is some kind of "slack" given certain eras of books, in general the grades are consistent in that a 9.4 grade represents a near mint book *given the printing technology limitations of that age.* The cutting wasn't done by computer to razor precision, the covers often overlapped the interior pages, the covers were not centered, the staples were often bent. The materials were relatively inferior, and all that has to be taken into account.

 

Overstreet allows various defects to vary in size based on age. I believe CGC does the same in a similar fashion, although they don't exactly follow Overstreet.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey all, I just got my submission back today and I had a look at the quality of the case along the spine side and page side. Is it normal for there to be some play in the case where I can pinch it together? But however it's not at the point where it is 'open' to allow any damage to the comic.... Anyone else had this problem? Please PM me if you have. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Key books also get an unofficial bump.

 

I always had a feeling this was true, but has anyone ever looked into it? It would be disconcerting to learn that key's get special treatment beyond other books. Grading curve for Golden vs. Modern - O.K. / Keys > non-Keys only helps to create manufactured collectibles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Key books also get an unofficial bump.

 

I always had a feeling this was true, but has anyone ever looked into it? It would be disconcerting to learn that key's get special treatment beyond other books. Grading curve for Golden vs. Modern - O.K. / Keys > non-Keys only helps to create manufactured collectibles.

 

How would anyone 'look into it' ? I would think it's probably true, especially on a high grade tweener. It's only human nature to be in awe of high grade key. However, I don't think the CGC graders officially give the nod to keys = it's not part of the process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Key books also get an unofficial bump.

 

I always had a feeling this was true, but has anyone ever looked into it? It would be disconcerting to learn that key's get special treatment beyond other books. Grading curve for Golden vs. Modern - O.K. / Keys > non-Keys only helps to create manufactured collectibles.

While I'd like to believe CGC grades every book the same, they seem not to. If anything, I'd say the opposite is true about them being easier on key books. They get so many key books for grading, the graders probably know what to look for more often than not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Key books also get an unofficial bump.

 

I always had a feeling this was true, but has anyone ever looked into it? It would be disconcerting to learn that key's get special treatment beyond other books. Grading curve for Golden vs. Modern - O.K. / Keys > non-Keys only helps to create manufactured collectibles.

While I'd like to believe CGC grades every book the same, they seem not to. If anything, I'd say the opposite is true about them being easier on key books. They get so many key books for grading, the graders probably know what to look for more often than not.

 

There are certain production defects that might get ignored or not penalized much but they'd look like defects to those that don't recognize them as such, and in cases like that certain books might look overgraded.

 

A few examples would be

 

DD #7 - book is marred with many different production defects that rarely affect the grade unless you're in the stratosphere grade range

 

Iron Man #1, Sub-Mariner #1 and some other '1968 intro books' often have a chip missing from the back cover or loose but CGC doesn't seem to ding the grade for at, at least not up to 9.6

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bump!

 

Not making excuses for the grades but it's really impossible to accurately grade microdefects from a small scan. Scanners often introduce or remove certain defects when the transfer info from a 3D pic into digital code and sometimes you can see things that aren't there. A classic example is the grading contests where sometimes books look to have 'spine stress' that isn't actually on the book when held in hand.

 

That's not to say that these books are not overgraded, just that judging from a scan is pretty much impossible when we're talking about the upper NM range and defects the side of a pinhead and we're looking at scans that are smaller than the actual book.

 

Also, that little bit on the top left of the Iron Man #1 is a very common defect on the 1968 'intro' books. They may not have taken off for it. I don't agree with it but hey, their rules.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have noticed that CGC's new trend is to be harsh towards printer's creases.

Books that used to be 9.4 - 9.6 just came back 8.5 and 9.0 with grader's notes stating printer's creases.

These were bronze age books.

I don't recall CGC ever hitting books so harshly for printer's creases.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have noticed that CGC's new trend is to be harsh towards printer's creases.

Books that used to be 9.4 - 9.6 just came back 8.5 and 9.0 with grader's notes stating printer's creases.

These were bronze age books.

I don't recall CGC ever hitting books so harshly for printer's creases.

 

Printer/roller creases are a production defect and have never really been factored into the grade, even on NM & above books.

 

If this has suddenly changed, it's a major shift in the grading process - are you 100% sure this is the case?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have noticed that CGC's new trend is to be harsh towards printer's creases.

Books that used to be 9.4 - 9.6 just came back 8.5 and 9.0 with grader's notes stating printer's creases.

These were bronze age books.

I don't recall CGC ever hitting books so harshly for printer's creases.

 

Printer/roller creases are a production defect and have never really been factored into the grade, even on NM & above books.

 

If this has suddenly changed, it's a major shift in the grading process - are you 100% sure this is the case?

 

'If' CGC has changed their stance on Printer's creases, I am for it. Subtle, back cover printer's creases are fine but those front cover ones, often nearly the full length of the cover, ruin the eye appeal for me. Production or not, IMO, they should downgrade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites