holy miscut... 0

[vheflin]

Worst miscut I've seen.  Shame, because other than a back cover tear, this one is 9.0+.  Sharp corners!

I think the miscut affected the grade despite it being 'production related'.

It's in the Sunday night Heritage sale, curious to see where it ends.

[William-James88]

58 minutes ago, vheflin said:

Worst miscut I've seen.  Shame, because other than a back cover tear, this one is 9.0+.  Sharp corners!

I think the miscut affected the grade despite it being 'production related'.

It's in the Sunday night Heritage sale, curious to see where it ends.

I would be really surprised if the miscut affected the grade, especially for a golden age book where miscuts were more common.

As evidence, I present to you a pretty bad miscut on a more recent book (relatively speaking) that still got a "high" grade

Since I've never seen a bad tear like that on a 7.0, I think it's fair to say that it's the main defect bringing down the book. I mean, what grade would you give a book with a tear like that?

Edited June 2, 2021 by William-James88

[theCapraAegagrus]

I don't think that the miscut effected grade here.

[Jeffro.]

11 hours ago, vheflin said:

Worst miscut I've seen.  Shame, because other than a back cover tear, this one is 9.0+.  Sharp corners!

I think the miscut affected the grade despite it being 'production related'.

It's in the Sunday night Heritage sale, curious to see where it ends.

Not bad enough to fail Charlton quality control.

[Trifisherjoe]

"Employee of the Month Award"

[vheflin]

11 hours ago, William-James88 said:

I would be really surprised if the miscut affected the grade, especially for a golden age book where miscuts were more common.

As evidence, I present to you a pretty bad miscut on a more recent book (relatively speaking) that still got a "high" grade

Since I've never seen a bad tear like that on a 7.0, I think it's fair to say that it's the main defect bringing down the book. I mean, what grade would you give a book with a tear like that?

Yeah 6.0 sounds right.  There's also what might be a scuff above the G in THING.

[vheflin]

1 hour ago, Jeffro. said:

Not bad enough to fail Charlton quality control.

Summon the resident Charlton quality expert!

@kav

[kav]

30 minutes ago, vheflin said:

Summon the resident Charlton quality expert!

@kav

That character will never get hot.

[vheflin]

2 hours ago, GPCEE said:

 

[djzombi]

5 hours ago, Jeffro. said:

Not bad enough to fail Charlton quality control.

Ah, yes, Charlton - the absolute zenith of comic book publishing quality!  

[Lazyboy]

7 hours ago, Jeffro. said:

Not bad enough to fail Charlton quality control.

 What is this gibberish? Typo? Auto-correct?

[Jeffro.]

3 minutes ago, Lazyboy said:

7 hours ago, Jeffro. said:

Not bad enough to fail Charlton quality control.

 What is this gibberish? Typo? Auto-correct?

 Sorry. I meant to say CGC quality control

[Lazyboy]

17 hours ago, William-James88 said:

As evidence, I present to you a pretty bad miscut on a more recent book (relatively speaking) that still got a "high" grade

That's miswrap, not miscut. Miscut generally refers to a book not being cut squarely or the dimensions being abnormal.

[William-James88]

15 minutes ago, Lazyboy said:

That's miswrap, not miscut. Miscut generally refers to a book not being cut squarely or the dimensions being abnormal.

I see, so the comic the OP showed is both miswrapped and miscut?

[Jeffro.]

1 hour ago, William-James88 said:

2 hours ago, Lazyboy said:

That's miswrap, not miscut. Miscut generally refers to a book not being cut squarely or the dimensions being abnormal.

I see, so the comic the OP showed is both miswrapped and miscut?

I'd call it a miscut. There should NOT be all that white at the top.

Edited June 2, 2021 by Jeffro.
forgot the word 'not'. I'm a insufficiently_thoughtful_person

[Lazyboy]

3 minutes ago, William-James88 said:

I see, so the comic the OP showed is both miswrapped and miscut?

Miswrap concerns how the cover is aligned with the spine. The OP's example is misaligned in the less common way, with the vertical alignment not being within normal variance, suggesting a miscut rather than a miswrap.