• 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 Graded art?

Started by StuporMan,

69 posts in this topic

StuporMan

StuporMan

Posted
Posted

Is there any desire and/or plans for CGC to grade art? The reason I ask is due to reading some threads recently about faked art. I am thinking CGC grading would have the same impact on this that it did with signed comics w/CoA. The logistics of it seem daunting, but then I thought they would never grade magazines or sketches either...Your thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
StuporMan

StuporMan

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Been discussed before. If I remember correctly, most collectors didn't approve of the idea. Certainly not a service I'd ever use.

 

I try to search the boards before I post, but I didn't really see much on this. Did I just post the equivalent of a "Pressing" or "legal size scanner" question to the OCA ppl? :facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
▫️

▫️

Posted
Posted

CGC's authentication service for signatures and sketches are primarily based on them actually witnessing the process so no, I don't see them ever attempting to authenticate published artwork. Grading published art is pointless. Every example is one-of-a-kind with no others to compare or measure against.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jjonahjameson1

jjonahjameson1

Posted
Posted
CGC's authentication service for signatures and sketches are primarily based on them actually witnessing the process so no, I don't see them ever attempting to authenticate published artwork. Grading published art is pointless. Every example is one-of-a-kind with no others to compare or measure against.

 

With ongoing advances in technology, the reprise are becoming increasingly more difficult to identify. As much as I detest saying it, I think there will be a need for this service fairly soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
StuporMan

StuporMan

Posted
  • Author
Posted
CGC's authentication service for signatures and sketches are primarily based on them actually witnessing the process so no, I don't see them ever attempting to authenticate published artwork. Grading published art is pointless. Every example is one-of-a-kind with no others to compare or measure against.

 

Good point hm

Link to comment
Share on other sites
StuporMan

StuporMan

Posted
  • Author
Posted
CGC's authentication service for signatures and sketches are primarily based on them actually witnessing the process so no, I don't see them ever attempting to authenticate published artwork. Grading published art is pointless. Every example is one-of-a-kind with no others to compare or measure against.

 

With ongoing advances in technology, the reprise are becoming increasingly more difficult to identify. As much as I detest saying it, I think there will be a need for this service fairly soon.

 

That's what made me think of this topic. Maybe they should just have an ungraded authentication service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vodou

vodou

Posted
Posted
Maybe they should just have an ungraded authentication service.

This is an okay idea, but they would be opening themselves up to a lot of litigation risk. (Consider the difference in value between: authenticated and "???", and then incorrect authentication or the reverse!) At approximately the same time that many well-established authentication groups (in fine are) are disbanding due to the same risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
All-Star Squadman

All-Star Squadman

Posted
Posted
CGC's authentication service for signatures and sketches are primarily based on them actually witnessing the process so no, I don't see them ever attempting to authenticate published artwork. Grading published art is pointless. Every example is one-of-a-kind with no others to compare or measure against.

 

With ongoing advances in technology, the reprise are becoming increasingly more difficult to identify. .

 

What is meant by "the reprise" ?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
All-Star Squadman

All-Star Squadman

Posted
Posted
its probably autocorrect and Yoram probably meant reprints/fakes

 

Malvin

 

That makes sense. My .02; Forgeries or counterfeits are probably better terms when it comes to art than "reprints" or "fakes". Nothing like a language that has nigh infinite ways of stating the same thing :)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
All-Star Squadman

All-Star Squadman

Posted
Posted
CGC's authentication service for signatures and sketches are primarily based on them actually witnessing the process so no, I don't see them ever attempting to authenticate published artwork. Grading published art is pointless. Every example is one-of-a-kind with no others to compare or measure against.

 

With ongoing advances in technology, the reprise are becoming increasingly more difficult to identify. As much as I detest saying it, I think there will be a need for this service fairly soon.

 

I do feel that the acumen required to authenticate art represents a huge skills mismatch for CGC. That aside, the main issue is; as "large" as the comic art community has grown the last 10-15 years it is still at best a small if not tiny niche hobby. Then you factor in that only a subset of that tiny niche would use an authentication service there is simply not enough potential usage to make a business model viable at least for a corporation such as CGC.

 

There are a plethora of other valid logistical issues of which many have been noted in this topic but bottom line is any current perceived need is soundly defeated by fiscal mathematics

 

Of course all above represents only my opinion.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
StuporMan

StuporMan

Posted
  • Author
Posted
CGC's authentication service for signatures and sketches are primarily based on them actually witnessing the process so no, I don't see them ever attempting to authenticate published artwork. Grading published art is pointless. Every example is one-of-a-kind with no others to compare or measure against.

 

With ongoing advances in technology, the reprise are becoming increasingly more difficult to identify. As much as I detest saying it, I think there will be a need for this service fairly soon.

 

I do feel that the acumen required to authenticate art represents a huge skills mismatch for CGC. That aside, the main issue is; as "large" as the comic art community has grown the last 10-15 years it is still at best a small if not tiny niche hobby. Then you factor in that only a subset of that tiny niche would use an authentication service there is simply not enough potential usage to make a business model viable at least for a corporation such as CGC.

 

There are a plethora of other valid logistical issues of which many have been noted in this topic but bottom line is any current perceived need is soundly defeated by fiscal mathematics

 

Of course all above reprints only my opinion.

 

 

Hrm, sounds like someone has the opportunity to compete in this niche hm

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oceans11

oceans11

Posted
Posted

While I can see that some might like this for the authentication purposes, I don't see that CGC is set to handle that aspect. And probably not a service that is needed for a lot of pages of art out there; thus narrowing down the need for the service even more.

 

As far as grading and slabbing of art.. I don't see that being embraced by the hobby and the collectors in it.. First... as stated earlier in this thread, each page is unique. I don't think anyone is going to care if that Kirby page of art is graded as 3.0 or a 9.0, because the content of the page will often matter more. Plus how would one go about even grading the page? Stats, whiteout, blue line corrections; word balloons, writing in margins, etc. Would things that we see as giving the page character be perceived as flaws and nock the grade down?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
All-Star Squadman

All-Star Squadman

Posted
Posted
CGC's authentication service for signatures and sketches are primarily based on them actually witnessing the process so no, I don't see them ever attempting to authenticate published artwork. Grading published art is pointless. Every example is one-of-a-kind with no others to compare or measure against.

 

With ongoing advances in technology, the reprise are becoming increasingly more difficult to identify. As much as I detest saying it, I think there will be a need for this service fairly soon.

 

I do feel that the acumen required to authenticate art represents a huge skills mismatch for CGC. That aside, the main issue is; as "large" as the comic art community has grown the last 10-15 years it is still at best a small if not tiny niche hobby. Then you factor in that only a subset of that tiny niche would use an authentication service there is simply not enough potential usage to make a business model viable at least for a corporation such as CGC.

 

There are a plethora of other valid logistical issues of which many have been noted in this topic but bottom line is any current perceived need is soundly defeated by fiscal mathematics

 

Of course all above reprints only my opinion.

 

 

Hrm, sounds like someone has the opportunity to compete in this niche hm

 

 

Only if the startup costs + operating expenses are estimated to be less than the potential revenue. Then you have to factor in the lack of trust and acceptance factor. I mean who has the requested knowledge to do the certification that can be trusted? I mean no offense but any dealer would be immediately suspect. There is enough "market manipulation" in play already.

 

I am not saying if grading or authentication is "good","bad", "needed" or "unneeded", my opinion is this is a money loosing proposition. The lack of numbers due to tiny hobby size are paramount.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing