Is your Overstreet Grading Guide falling apart?

[PovertyRow]

I have to say this makes a lot of sense. I'm going to have mine spiral bound even though it is still like new. The beauty of it is, when trying to do some comparisons between the guide and a comic, the guide will now lie flat on a table. I like it a lot!

 

My Gerber GA Guides are falling apart.....

[Forbush-Man]

I have to say this makes a lot of sense. I'm going to have mine spiral bound even though it is still like new. The beauty of it is, when trying to do some comparisons between the guide and a comic, the guide will now lie flat on a table. I like it a lot!

 

My Gerber GA Guides are falling apart.....

 

Two words: Duct Tape !

[kiltman]

Restoration?

[Norrin_Radd]

Hey FM.

 

 

Get my books shipped yet?

[Nefaria]

I don't have a GG but after experiencing such difficulty with the advent of tanned comics I need something to help.

Does the OSGG pictorially depict various tanning levels, after all somebody developed the OWL guide for interior page grading?

With all the controversy revolving around tanning it needs to be addressed. My only other thought on this subject is that OS doesn’t address tanning, but it’s an issue developed by CGC over the years. If that is the case shouldn’t CGC publish a grading guide so people can at least understand what parameters they dwell in?

As a secondary topic, I also think the GG should address sun shadows and their various levels of depth and width.

Clare

[FFB]

I don't have a GG but after experiencing such difficulty with the advent of tanned comics I need something to help.

Does the OSGG pictorially depict various tanning levels, after all somebody developed the OWL guide for interior page grading?

With all the controversy revolving around tanning it needs to be addressed. My only other thought on this subject is that OS doesn’t address tanning, but it’s an issue developed by CGC over the years. If that is the case shouldn’t CGC publish a grading guide so people can at least understand what parameters they dwell in?

As a secondary topic, I also think the GG should address sun shadows and their various levels of depth and width.

Clare

 

What "controversy revolving around tanning"?

 

If you don't have an Overstreet Grading Guide, how do you know that OS does not address tanning as a defect?

 

P.S. Tanning is addressed both in the grading guide and in the OSPG grading section.

[Nefaria]

No the PG does not cover tanning, and if it does I've misinterpreted their terminology because they don’t address "tanning" 'per say.

Controversy is the fact that I can not find any info to direct me towards any given guidelines to help derive grades that are consistent with what CGC grades.

 

 

If you don't have an Overstreet Grading Guide, how do you know that OS does not address tanning as a defect?

I don't have a guide as I stated, So I asked a question "Does the guide address this issue."? Then I made an observation that if the OSGG doesn’t address this issue. Then it was possibly an issue created by CGC over the years that they kept tweaking (as noted by other board members) to our present day state.

While I directed my post mostly towards you, and I wanted to take this issue up directly with you. I didn't want to be on the defense. I'm only inquiring as to what's in the GG concerning tanning and secondly shadowing. My observations made implications towards CGC for setting the standards for tanning because I felt the OSGG didn't. Where I struggle is to convey what I want.

 

[FFB]

The OSPG grading section does address tanned paper. I just looked. It is in there.

 

The OGG also addresss tanning, but does not have a pictorial representation of the various levels of tanning, to answer your other question.

 

No the PG does not cover tanning, and if it does I've misinterpreted their terminology because they don’t address tanning.

Controversy is the fact that I can not find any info to direct me towards any given guidelines to help derive grades that are consistent with what CGC grades.

 

 

If you don't have an Overstreet Grading Guide, how do you know that OS does not address tanning as a defect?

I don't have a guide as I stated, So I asked a question "Does the guide address this issue."? Then I made an observation that if the OSGG doesn’t address this issue. Then it was possibly an issue created by CGC over the years that they kept tweaking (as noted by other board members) to our present day state.

While I directed my post mostly towards you, and I wanted to take this issue up directly with you. I didn't want to be on the defense. I'm only inquiring as to what's in the GG concerning tanning and secondly shadowing. My observations made implications towards CGC for setting the standards for tanning because I felt the OSGG didn't. Where I struggle is to convey what I want.

[Nefaria]

The OSPG grading section does address tanned paper. I just looked. It is in there.

 

The OGG also addresss tanning, but does not have a pictorial representation of the various levels of tanning, to answer your other question.

 

No the PG does not cover tanning, and if it does I've misinterpreted their terminology because they don’t address tanning.

Controversy is the fact that I can not find any info to direct me towards any given guidelines to help derive grades that are consistent with what CGC grades.

 

 

If you don't have an Overstreet Grading Guide, how do you know that OS does not address tanning as a defect?

I don't have a guide as I stated, So I asked a question "Does the guide address this issue."? Then I made an observation that if the OSGG doesn’t address this issue. Then it was possibly an issue created by CGC over the years that they kept tweaking (as noted by other board members) to our present day state.

While I directed my post mostly towards you, and I wanted to take this issue up directly with you. I didn't want to be on the defense. I'm only inquiring as to what's in the GG concerning tanning and secondly shadowing. My observations made implications towards CGC for setting the standards for tanning because I felt the OSGG didn't. Where I struggle is to convey what I want.

 

Then your copy differs from mine. I purchased the ecopy over the internet by downloading a pdf copy. any search I create comes back negative for tannish, tanning, tanned etc. I've read the grading section through and through. Where do you find a referance to tanning?

[dc eng]

Nefaria, you wrote: My only other thought on this subject is that OS doesn’t address tanning, but it’s an issue developed by CGC over the years.

 

Are you referring to the interior pages? If so, yes, the grading guide does cover it. I've taken the liberty to copy some text for you. It's from page 128:

 

While we continue to use familiar terminology in describing interior paper quality, such as "white," "off-white," "cream," and so on, we must qualify our use of the word "white." Due to the wildly diverse paper stocks employed by the various comic book publishers over the years, the highest possible color quality of the paper in a given comic book may differ markedly from that of another comic from another company or era. Therefore, we use the term "white" loosely in all cases to refer to the highest quality color and freshness of the paper stock used in any given comic regardless of the actual color that may be evident. Subsequent descriptions of "off-white," "cream," "tan" and others should then be interpreted in relation to the "white" starting point of any given book.

 

There is also a paper quality statement for each grade.

 

10.0 Paper is white, supple and fresh.

9.9 Paper is white, supple and fresh.

9.8 Paper is white, supple and fresh.

9.6 Paper is off-white, supple, and fresh.

9.4 Paper is off-white to cream, supple and fresh.

9.2 Paper is off-white to cream, supple and fresh.

9.0 Paper is off-white to cream and supple.

8.5 to 7.5 Paper is cream to tan and supple.

7.0 Paper is cream to tan, but not brown.

6.5 to 5.5 Paper is tan to brown and fairly supple with no signs of brittleness.

5.0 Paper is tan to brown with no signs of brittleness.

4.5 to 3.5 Paper is brown but not brittle.

3.0 Paper is brown but not brittle.

2.5 to 1.8 Paper is brown but not brittle.

1.5 Paper is brown and may show brittleness.

1.0 Paper is brown and may show brittleness around the edges but not in the central portion of the pages.

0.5 Paper exhibits moderate to severe brittleness (where the comic book literally falls apart when examined).

 

Although paper quality is indeed an important component of grading, I wouldn't go overboard and try to overanalyze it. When you look at CGC grades, whiteness level and grade don't always go hand in hand.