CGC Grading ? 0

[fifties]

THIS is "Cream to off-white pages"?

https://comics.ha.com/itm/golden-age-1938-1955-/horror/venus-17-timely-1951-cgc-gd-25-cream-to-off-white-pages/a/122131-12056.s?ic2=mytracked-lotspage-lotlinks-12202013&tab=MyTrackedLots-101116

Or is that accurate?  Looks brown to brittle to me (but what do I know?).

[jimbo_7071]

On 7/26/2021 at 7:33 PM, fifties said:

THIS is "Cream to off-white pages"?

https://comics.ha.com/itm/golden-age-1938-1955-/horror/venus-17-timely-1951-cgc-gd-25-cream-to-off-white-pages/a/122131-12056.s?ic2=mytracked-lotspage-lotlinks-12202013&tab=MyTrackedLots-101116

Or is that accurate?  Looks brown to brittle to me (but what do I know?).

The cover is clearly brittle, but I don't think that the cover factors into the page quality designation. The pages may not be brittle. (They do look awfully dark, though.)

[fifties]

On 7/26/2021 at 6:26 PM, jimbo_7071 said:

The pages may not be brittle. (They do look awfully dark, though.)

That was my point.  Judging from the upper right corner, the page color certainly doesn't look anywhere near cream or off white.

[Pantodude]

It could be that the internal pages, particularly the text bubbles and other originally white areas in the art, are C/OW.  The scans only show the exposed top right corner of the first page (due to the missing piece of the fc), the exposed profile of the internal pages, and the back cover. 

[fifties]

On 7/26/2021 at 7:31 PM, Pantodude said:

It could be that the internal pages, particularly the text bubbles and other originally white areas in the art, are C/OW.  The scans only show the exposed top right corner of the first page (due to the missing piece of the fc)

All we can go by is the worst appearance, in judging the page quality.  And if that's their idea of cream/offwhite, sorry it don't fly with me.  Now if they had stated, "browning around the edges", that would have been the responsible way of grading.

[Professor K]

Slightly cream perhaps? I know there's no such thing. Without seeing the entire page there's no way to tell. But if you judge by the back cover it looks more light tan to off-white.

Edited July 27, 2021 by Professor Chaos

[fifties]

On 7/26/2021 at 9:53 PM, Professor Chaos said:

Slightly cream perhaps? I know there's no such thing. Without seeing the entire page there's no way to tell. But if you judge by the back cover it looks more light tan to off-white.

Covers seem to age differently than interior pages, so the BC is hardly an indicator.  And the upper corner is definitely not Cream to off-white, so even if the interior of the page(s) are in that upper grade, the perimeters aren't, and it should have been noted.

[jimbo_7071]

On 7/27/2021 at 4:46 AM, fifties said:

Covers seem to age differently than interior pages, so the BC is hardly an indicator.  And the upper corner is definitely not Cream to off-white, so even if the interior of the page(s) are in that upper grade, the perimeters aren't, and it should have been noted.

Have you seen what they're calling off-white now? The page quality designations were relaxed around the end of '05, and I think they've been relaxed again. I no longer bid on books with off-white pages unless they're in old-label slabs.

[Pantodude]

On 7/27/2021 at 4:46 AM, fifties said:

Covers seem to age differently than interior pages, so the BC is hardly an indicator.  And the upper corner is definitely not Cream to off-white, so even if the interior of the page(s) are in that upper grade, the perimeters aren't, and it should have been noted.

I disagree.  It is OBVIOUS that the corner is not C/OW, along with the bc. Does it really need to say it on the label comments? Nah.  It also looks like the result of sun shading, not the aging we expect from internal pages.  Anyway, assuming the book is otherwise C/OW (the interior pages, particularly the originally white areas within the text bubbles and the art) the label comments of this book reflect the norm.  For example, when the front cover is clearly missing a piece and the book gets a 4.0, the label comment never says “piece out fc”, does it?  No, not that I have ever seen on a blue label.  Neither when the cover has a stain that weighed on the grade.  

Also, FWIW, the back cover looks like sun shading that is not limited to edges, so something that need not imply brittle.  Sun shading to any degree is also never mentioned in the label comments.  

Because nothing we can see about this book detracts from the norm when CGC says C/OW, the non-visible interior pages could be, and should be presumed to be, consistent with whatever CGC refers to as C/OW.   So there’s no problem.   Unless there is one, of course.  🤡

Edited July 27, 2021 by Pantodude

[Mr. Lady Luck]

Part of it has to do with the imaging. The incredibly bright background is causing the comic to look darker. I really wish they would stop imaging slabs on light-boxes.

[Professor K]

On 7/27/2021 at 5:57 AM, jimbo_7071 said:

Have you seen what they're calling off-white now? The page quality designations were relaxed around the end of '05, and I think they've been relaxed again. I no longer bid on books with off-white pages unless they're in old-label slabs.

Yeah I try to stick to at least off white white with anything from around 1964 and White from 1970 on.

A few months ago I procured a Avengers 4 6.0 Cream to Off-White for a good price, slabbed in 2001, with the intention of re-subbing and hoping for a 7.0.

Cracked it, sent it in on the second highest tier, came back a 5.0 but with Off-White to White. I know thats just one book but it seems to go with what you said.

[LDarkseid1]

[jimbo_7071]

On 7/27/2021 at 5:12 PM, Professor Chaos said:

Yeah I try to stick to at least off white white with anything from around 1964 and White from 1970 on.

A few months ago I procured a Avengers 4 6.0 Cream to Off-White for a good price, slabbed in 2001, with the intention of re-subbing and hoping for a 7.0.

Cracked it, sent it in on the second highest tier, came back a 5.0 but with Off-White to White. I know thats just one book but it seems to go with what you said.

I'm not surprised with respect to the page quality. They are really hammering pressable defects now—which is why pressing is profitable—so the grade drop doesn't surprise me too much, either. I think they also hit books harder now for tanning of the inside covers—and they've completely changed how they treat tape.

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

Take a slab from back in the day, say a few years in from the 'old' new label, say about the beginning of the 2010s.

Crack it.

I used to do it regularly when I collected SA.

Pandora's box.

I stopped doing it. It was really that bad.

[Professor K]

On 7/27/2021 at 9:43 PM, jimbo_7071 said:

I'm not surprised with respect to the page quality. They are really hammering pressable defects now—which is why pressing is profitable—so the grade drop doesn't surprise me too much, either. I think they also hit books harder now for tanning of the inside covers—and they've completely changed how they treat tape.

You really know your stuff. After I cracked the 6.0 I noticed a lot of finger bends on the cover that weren't that noticable while in the holder. Pressable defects like you said. Which is why I suppose 20 years ago when it was first graded it was a 6.0 but came back in 2021 a 5.0. Grader notes even said multiple finger bends. I've cracked and re-subbed twice. One I got pressed and it went up a grade, one I didn't and it went down a grade. 

Edited July 28, 2021 by Professor Chaos
added something

[lou_fine]

On 7/27/2021 at 6:43 PM, jimbo_7071 said:

They are really hammering pressable defects now—which is why pressing is profitable—so the grade drop doesn't surprise me too much, either.

 

On 7/27/2021 at 11:22 PM, Professor Chaos said:

You really know your stuff. After I cracked the 6.0 I noticed a lot of finger bends on the cover that weren't that noticable while in the holder. Pressable defects like you said. Which is why I suppose 20 years ago when it was first graded it was a 6.0 but came back in 2021 a 5.0. Grader notes even said multiple finger bends. I've cracked and re-subbed twice. One I got pressed and it went up a grade, one I didn't and it went down a grade. 

Yeah, that's why I call them "additional revenue generating" defects which are meant only to increase both the top and bottom lines for the CCG (and now Blackstone) ownership group.  

Sadly, I believe this whole game started when Heritage first arrived on the scene back in 2002 and then picked up steam from that point onwards, before going fully ballistics starting in 2016 when the current grading regime at CGC came into place.  

And as I have stated here many times before, that's why there's no point to even get your book graded now unless you are at least willing to pay for a pre-screen for pressing at a minimum, because if you don't, you will end up "paying" anyways when you receive your graded book back in the mail from CGC.  

 

[rjpb]

A few thoughts.

The scan itself is highly saturated which may make the exposed page look more tan than it is in hand.

CGC's definition of "cream" is closer to what I used to call light tan than the yellowing off-white I thought it meant. 

The exposed corner may have oxidized darker than the rest of the pages.

 

 

[jimbo_7071]

On 7/28/2021 at 3:40 PM, rjpb said:

CGC's definition of "cream" is closer to what I used to call light tan than the yellowing off-white I thought it meant. 

I don't know where the CGC graders buy their cream, but I'll be taking my coffee black if I'm ever at one of their houses.

[rjpb]

On 7/29/2021 at 10:04 AM, jimbo_7071 said:

I don't know where the CGC graders buy their cream, but I'll be taking my coffee black if I'm ever at one of their houses.

I'm thinking the designation should be changed from "cream" to "butterscotch"

Flavor based descriptions would be more accurate anyway.

Vanilla

French Vanilla

Eggnog

Custard

Butterscotch

Toffee

Tell me those aren't easier to accurately visualize than the current page color designations.

 

[JollyComics]

Meh pages.