• 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.

Show Us Your Ducks!
15 15

8,448 posts in this topic

I agree with tth2. Visible browning of a cover would affect grade much quicker than page quality. And I speak as a person that likes nice quality.

 

In any event, enjoy the book!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice book!

 

Technically, it is probably close to that but it has the usual browning on the interior covers that kills books at CGC. I expect it would get an 8.0 or so if I were to submit it.

Actually, I don't think CGC penalizes books very much for that at all. Without having the book in hand it's hard to tell if it's browning or just dust shadows.

 

I think CGC's emphasis on paper quality is a really good thing. 10 years ago, I suspect grading a book like this NM- or NM would have been widely accepted in the market.

CGC only factors paper quality into its structural grade for the very highest grades. Unless the pages were tan or brittle, I don't think it would prevent CGC from giving the book a structural 9.4 grade (assuming that structurally it IS a 9.4).

 

Actually, significant tanning on the cover of a NM book does get downgraded into the VF range (as opposed to page quality, where cream to off-white pages can be found up to 9.6 on some books). I don't get why CGC is so harsh on cover tanning but lenient on the effect of page quality on the highest grades, but it's apparently true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice book!

 

Technically, it is probably close to that but it has the usual browning on the interior covers that kills books at CGC. I expect it would get an 8.0 or so if I were to submit it.

Actually, I don't think CGC penalizes books very much for that at all. Without having the book in hand it's hard to tell if it's browning or just dust shadows.

 

I think CGC's emphasis on paper quality is a really good thing. 10 years ago, I suspect grading a book like this NM- or NM would have been widely accepted in the market.

CGC only factors paper quality into its structural grade for the very highest grades. Unless the pages were tan or brittle, I don't think it would prevent CGC from giving the book a structural 9.4 grade (assuming that structurally it IS a 9.4).

 

Actually, significant tanning on the cover of a NM book does get downgraded into the VF range (as opposed to page quality, where cream to off-white pages can be found up to 9.6 on some books). I don't get why CGC is so harsh on cover tanning but lenient on the effect of page quality on the highest grades, but it's apparently true.

I've seen 9.6 books with edges just like the FC 147 that tb posted. confused-smiley-013.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who can identify the artist? Thanks in advance...[/img]
I'm guessing Horvath, although the image of donald in the hammock seems a bit Taliaferro. confused-smiley-013.gif

 

That's interesting!

Is that "Ferdinand Hustzi Horvath"? He's mostly identified in GCD with text story illustration in early WDCS, but of course funny animal books are scarcely indexed.

 

His INDUCKS page shows him as an animator and illustrator of secondary features for WDCS.

 

this feature in Donald Duck #264 Gladstone, July 1988 is intriguing. I'll have to find a copy.

 

Who Drew the Duck?

(Sequence 3 - Text Article , 2 pages )

Credits:

Bruce Hamilton (-script), Ferdinand Hustzi Horvath (Pencils), Ferdinand Hustzi Horvath (Inks), ? (Colors), typeset (Letters).

Character appearances:

Donald Duck

Indexer notes:

reprints a classic Donald Duck model sheet (1933 or 1934 ?)

 

Does anyone know much about him?

 

The reason I'm so interested is that Horvath is a name in my family tree -- a common Hungarian last name.

 

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So are you picking up 25cent slabbed Scrooges?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I was slabbing some sundry BA books (mostly horror and war) in anticipation of a sale later this year and decided to pull out a few of my later US's and add them to the mix to see if they'd garner any worthwhile grades. I was actually hoping for a 9.6 on this particular book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another recently slabbed Duck book. Sometimes CGC and I don't really don't see eye-to-eye on things! mad.gif

 

US116.jpg

 

OUCH! 893whatthe.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another recently slabbed Duck book. Sometimes CGC and I don't really don't see eye-to-eye on things! mad.gif

 

US116.jpg

They probably saw that loose thread from the rug and downgraded as a result.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I only have one duck. Don't zing me, it's from 1980.

 

Said he posting a US 179 893applaud-thumb.gifthumbsup2.gif

 

Another worthless reprint. tongue.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I only have one duck. Don't zing me, it's from 1980.

 

Said he posting a US 179 893applaud-thumb.gifthumbsup2.gif

 

Another worthless reprint. tongue.gif

 

Yup. In fact, I'll trade him for it straight up for a copy of the original issue. That can't be a bad deal, can it? 893crossfingers-thumb.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
15 15