Newton Rings 17 17

[CGC Comics]

Note: this was originally posted on page 15 of a thread in Comics General on August 31st. We're creating it as an announcement to make it easier to find.

The “rainbow effect” or “Newton rings” are a normal occurrence when two different plastics (which have different refractive indexes) are placed together. It’s what you sometimes see on a smartphone screen protector or on the edges of an LCD screen. 

The rainbow effect has been seen in CGC holders since our first-generation holder was introduced nearly 20 years ago. This is a result of the inner sleeve (which holds the book) contacting the hard-plastic outer shell; the two different plastics have different refractive indexes and that sometimes creates a rainbow effect when they come into contact. A minor rainbow effect has always been within our tolerance. If anyone feels that they have a book that exhibits an extreme rainbow effect, however, we encourage you to contact our Customer Service at submissions@cgccomics.com.

Behind the scenes, we are constantly working to improve the CGC holder. Most recently, we have made a slight modification to the inner dimensions of our standard holder to accommodate the increasing variety of comic book sizes and paper stocks. In our testing, this minor modification was also shown to reduce the presence of the rainbow effect for many books. We did not want to share our findings until our thorough testing was complete, and now that it is, we are pleased to report that these modified holders have been fully integrated into our encapsulation process with very positive results.

CGC continues to research enhancements to its holders, including ones that may further reduce the rainbow effect, and we will keep you updated with any noteworthy developments.

Thanks again.

 

Example of extreme rainbow effect:

[Get Marwood & I]

20 hours ago, CGC Comics said:

Note: this was originally posted on page 15 of a thread in Comics General on August 31st. We're creating it as an announcement to make it easier to find.

Thank you @CGC Comics for restating your announcement about Newton Rings here in the announcements forum. I started the thread you refer to above and worked with @Brittany M. Brittany behind the scenes to get the original announcement posted there. If it's OK, I'll call refer to you as CGC the company in this post as I don't know who you are.

I have some questions on behalf of the membership which I hope you will respond to. They are drawn from the comments I have read in the various threads about the issue. Please if you will keep these two things uppermost in your mind if you do decide to reply:

• 209 members voted in my poll and an overwhelming number indicated that they were dissatisfied with your communication on this issue
• You make a great play about the new 'crystal clear' holders - this screen shot from your own website tells us how you value presentation ('superior optics'):

 

Here are the questions:

1. I have owned over 150 second generation slabs in my time. Of those that I still have, the inner and outer plastics are in full contact and yet none have rings. You say that, and I quote, "two different plastics have different refractive indexes and that sometimes creates a rainbow effect". Why only sometimes? Assuming you use the same plastics, what causes the rings to appear in one book and not another? And why did none of my 150 second generation slabs have rings?
2. Do you think it is right or fair that you decide whether a book is severe enough to be reholdered, and not the paying customer as your announcement suggests? How do you justify that position?
3. What are the scratches on the inner sleeves that are being reported by many members of this forum and are they connected to your Newton Ring resolution?
4. Is it correct that you have imposed a two week window from receipt for members to query issues with their slabs? If so, and I ask because it has been reported as such, how do you justify that position when not all recipients may / will be in a position to open their packages in that time frame (holiday / work commitments etc)?
5. Having admitted, by nature of your offer to reholder 'severely affected books', that Newton Rings are a problem, what compensation are you currently offering to those who contact you and meet the criteria? If you are not, why not?
6. Has your research into solving this problem found any evidence that rings may appear in transit, i.e. they leave your quality control ring free but subsequent shipping movements create the rings?
7. Every reasonable person who has commented on this problem has indicated that the new holder is the problem. Newton Rings may well have existed on previous generations of slabs but in nowhere near the severity we are seeing with the new holders. Why are you the only people who do not acknowledge this? Why do you not revert to the previous holder design while you redesign the new holder? 
8. When do you expect to eliminate the problem?

Thanks for your time. I hope you will feel the need to respond to these points and clear up these areas of confusion and frustration. I hope I speak for the majority when I say that we all want CGC to succeed. No one wins if your product is faulty. Please show us that you are on the same page as the majority of your paying membership.

Kind Regards,

Steve 'Get Marwood & I', RPITA 

[Bomber-Bob]

I think the answer as to why they are appearing more so in the newer generation slab, is pretty obvious. The new slabs are much more snug, resulting in more touching of the two surfaces. I'm not an engineer but if they would just loosen up the sides, like the previous generation, just a little would help. It would also facilitate the 'trick' of slipping a piece of paper through the sides. But as I said, I am not an engineer.

[Gaard]

I'm also not an engineer, so I might be talking out of my backside, Is it possible that the new material (after Borax) has a different 'refractive index' (whatever that is) than Borax and is causing more severe NRs?

[Get Marwood & I]

I'm an engineer. CGC, you've engineered a faulty product. Please engineer it back to the previous version. 

[theCapraAegagrus]

15 hours ago, Gaard said:

I'm also not an engineer, so I might be talking out of my backside, Is it possible that the new material (after Borax) has a different 'refractive index' (whatever that is) than Borax and is causing more severe NRs?

Yes.

[Ditch Fahrenheit]

2 hours ago, TwoPiece said:

17 hours ago, Gaard said:

I'm also not an engineer, so I might be talking out of my backside, Is it possible that the new material (after Borax) has a different 'refractive index' (whatever that is) than Borax and is causing more severe NRs?

Yes.

Borax is the common name for the mineral sodium tetraborate.  Most people are familiar with it as...

And I can assure you that it was NOT used by CGC to encapsulate your comic books.  

CGC used to use the polymer polyacrylonitrile (PAN) for the inner tray; the licensed brand name for which is Barex.

But thanks for the giggle.  

[ADAMANTIUM]

It's worth noting that my reholder, done for free, due to "excessive Newton Rings" was first deemed NOT EXCESSIVE by the "submissions@cgccomics.com"

Which was wrong and it was obvious that my book WAS EXCESSIVE, Brittany was kind enough to provide a way to do the reholder...

@CGC Comics so while I am thankful concessions were made for me, it might be a prerogative to educate those at the email stated above of your announcement and for them to take it seriously, or at least, give some thought to what is deemed "excessive"   

[Black_Adam]

I was also informed by CGC that "there is a 14 day time frame for getting any corrections like this back to us." Any issues with Newton rings brought to their attention outside of that time frame will not be reholdered for free.

I was also told by the first customer service rep I contacted at CGC (immediately after receiving the slab a few months ago) that the Newton rings were not excessive. It wasn't until I kept going back to them after reading the results other boardies had with the same issue that I finally found a rep that agreed the Newton rings on my slab were excessive. Of course, that was outside the 14 day window so I am being billed by CGC for the reholdering. 

Edited October 11, 2018 by Black_Adam

[Artboy99]

2 hours ago, ADAMANTIUM said:

It's worth noting that my reholder, done for free, due to "excessive Newton Rings" was first deemed NOT EXCESSIVE by the "submissions@cgccomics.com"

Which was wrong and it was obvious that my book WAS EXCESSIVE, Brittany was kind enough to provide a way to do the reholder...

@CGC Comics so while I am thankful concessions were made for me, it might be a prerogative to educate those at the email stated above of your announcement and for them to take it seriously, or at least, give some thought to what is deemed "excessive"   

a single newton ring is more than there should be in my opinion.

[Artboy99]

11 minutes ago, Black_Adam said:

I was also informed by CGC that "there is a 14 day time frame for getting any corrections like this back to us." Any issues with Newton rings brought to their attention outside of that time frame will not be reholdered for free.

I was also told by the first customer service rep I contacted at CGC (immediately after receiving the slab a few months ago) that the Newton rings were not excessive. It wasn't until I kept going back to them after reading the results other boardies had with the same issue that I finally found a rep that agreed the Newton rings on my slab were excessive. Of course, that was outside the 14 day window so I am being billed by CGC for the reholdering. 

I wonder how a customer from a different country is handled. I don't even have my books yet and it is well beyond 14 days.

[Black_Adam]

3 minutes ago, Artboy99 said:

I wonder how a customer from a different country is handled. I don't even have my books yet and it is well beyond 14 days.

I'm also a Canuck. They send my books FedEx which only takes a couple of days. 

[Artboy99]

1 minute ago, Black_Adam said:

I'm also a Canuck. They send my books FedEx which only takes a couple of days. 

Mine are coming via Joeypost who does pressing for us. I don't know how he shipped them.

[Black_Adam]

Just now, Artboy99 said:

Mine are coming via Joeypost who does pressing for us. I don't know how he shipped them.

I would guess as soon as Joe picks them up from CGC the 14-day clock starts ticking. Might be helpful to have him check your slabs for Newton rings in the CGC lobby so he can hand them right back if necessary!

[SBRobin]

I appreciate the official update, but I will be letting my membership expire and not submitting anything else until this is resolved. My comics can wait until I can get a clear holder.

[theCapraAegagrus]

16 hours ago, Artboy99 said:

a single newton ring is more than there should be in my opinion.

I disagree.

More than 1 Newton Ring, however, is excessive.

[Black_Adam]

One silver lining to the Newton ring issue is the money it's saved me from spending at the big auction houses (and here on the boards). I find myself avoiding comics in the new slabs like they have the plague (which, ironically, is kind of what the Newton rings look like) knowing I won't be happy once I have them in hand.

[Brittany M.]

18 hours ago, Black_Adam said:

I was also informed by CGC that "there is a 14 day time frame for getting any corrections like this back to us." Any issues with Newton rings brought to their attention outside of that time frame will not be reholdered for free.

I was also told by the first customer service rep I contacted at CGC (immediately after receiving the slab a few months ago) that the Newton rings were not excessive. It wasn't until I kept going back to them after reading the results other boardies had with the same issue that I finally found a rep that agreed the Newton rings on my slab were excessive. Of course, that was outside the 14 day window so I am being billed by CGC for the reholdering. 

Please email me, I can get that refunded for you.  You shouldn't have been charged.  brittany@cgccomics.com

[Ride the Tiger]

So I e-mailed CGC a while back about the newton rings but was told they weren't bad enough for CGC to give me a reholder. While they aren't as bad as some of the books shown in Marwoods thread they are still bad enough that I can't in good conscience sell them without alerting the potential buyer first. I certainly wouldn't buy these books from someone so am I stuck with them because of the time frame involved? I have since gotten another book back which is pictured in the original NR thread. It has No NR. No scratches. It is what I expect from the company that leads the comic grading industry. So do I have to settle for the 3 ugly books I subbed only a few months before my ":fixed" book?

[All-Star Squadman]

"Ride the Tiger"

Given the contents of the first post in this thread that seems to be  incongruous customer service with CGCs statement.

BTW Brittany and folks, The 14 day policy is rather stingy given the shipping time itself of the books reaching the customer can be 5-7 days depending on time of year, distance etc...Is there no room or interest in your business model for a more realistic 21 days and the increased customer satisfaction it would yield?

Edited October 14, 2018 by 35CentEra