Should the Trimmed/Restored Registry include pressed books?

[THE_BEYONDER]

How would we confirm that the books were pressed?

[comicwiz]

I guess I'm saying that grade improvements of 1.0 or higher can be called out as pressed books. Nothing arbitrary about grading that would allow that type of grade improvement on a resub.

 

We've done it so often on these boards by posting a before/after link with noted grade improvement... wasn't much doubt in the posts about whether pressing was the reason -- more a back and forth on whether pressing is/isn't restoration, those bothered by it, and those well versed in Jimmy crack corn's school of thought.

[Aman619]

I think its a great idea. If I were looking for a HG BB28 6 months ago and saw the 9.0 on Comiclink, Id jump at it. And I would certainly have wanted to know that it had been an 8.0 just a month prior!! Even if you dont mind pressing, the information should be collected and made public.

[tth2]

I guess I'm saying that grade improvements of 1.0 or higher can be called out as pressed books. Nothing arbitrary about grading that would allow that type of grade improvement on a resub.

 

We've done it so often on these boards by posting a before/after link with noted grade improvement... wasn't much doubt in the posts about whether pressing was the reason -- more a back and forth on whether pressing is/isn't restoration, those bothered by it, and those well versed in Jimmy crack corn's school of thought.

I voted yes, but I think for a book to be labeled as pressed, it should be based on something more than just a grade jump. Preferably some kind of evidence that defects previously there have been pressed away. Also, when you say only grade improvements of 1.0 or higher, does that mean nothing above 9.0, since all grade increments are only 0.2 and there are no grade improvements of 1.0 (except a 9.0 to a 10.0 )?

 

However, I would love to also see a registry showing all known CGC resubs that resulted in different grades (either higher or lower). It could show the original grade, and then the new grade, and people could judge for themselves whether the change is the result of pressing, some other form of restoration, or just CGC's subjectivity.

 

I can even start it off with a few high profile ones, and I know there've been more than a few Church books that have been upgraded:

 

JLA #1--before: 9.2 (0112024003); after: 9.4 (0098364008)

JLA #7--before 9.2 (0112537001); after: 9.4 (0099267004)

JLA #9--before: 9.4 (SN unknown); after: 9.6 (0625360003)

Flash #105--before: 9.2 (0000910001); after: 9.4 (0098364007)

X-Men #1--before: 9.6 (SN unknown); after: 9.8 (0631963001)

[comicwiz]

I guess I'm saying that grade improvements of 1.0 or higher can be called out as pressed books. Nothing arbitrary about grading that would allow that type of grade improvement on a resub.

 

We've done it so often on these boards by posting a before/after link with noted grade improvement... wasn't much doubt in the posts about whether pressing was the reason -- more a back and forth on whether pressing is/isn't restoration, those bothered by it, and those well versed in Jimmy crack corn's school of thought.

I voted yes, but I think for a book to be labeled as pressed, it should be based on something more than just a grade jump. Preferably some kind of evidence that defects previously there have been pressed away. Also, when you say only grade improvements of 1.0 or higher, does that mean nothing above 9.0, since all grade increments are only 0.2 and there are no grade improvements of 1.0 (except a 9.0 to a 10.0 )?

 

However, I would love to also see a registry showing all known CGC resubs that resulted in different grades (either higher or lower). It could show the original grade, and then the new grade, and people could judge for themselves whether the change is the result of pressing, some other form of restoration, or just CGC's subjectivity.

 

I can even start it off with a few high profile ones, and I know there've been more than a few Church books that have been upgraded:

 

JLA #1--before: 9.2 (0112024003); after: 9.4 (0098364008)

JLA #7--before 9.2 (0112537001); after: 9.4 (0099267004)

JLA #9--before: 9.4 (SN unknown); after: 9.6 (0625360003)

Flash #105--before: 9.2 (0000910001); after: 9.4 (0098364007)

X-Men #1--before: 9.6 (SN unknown); after: 9.8 (0631963001)

 

Nice

 

I have a few examples myself. Its actually what prompted me to throw the idea out on the table.

 

I agree that we do need to excercise good judgement, but hopefully there will be enough in the before and after pics to determine this with some degree of certainty (ie. dry erasure signs, pressed out corners, etc.).

 

I also think keeping track of grade jumps in general could prove to be a worthwhile excercise. I used the 1.0 example, but I actually think its much more difficult to eke out a 0.2 grade improvement in the 9.0 range or higher.

 

With the passage of time, we may learn something about the grade improvement by tracking it (ie. some forum member notices that the book is starting show signs of warping that weren't there when s/he first purchase the book).

 

Maybe we can use the notion "pressed" in the r field if its something that can be determined with some degree of certainty. For books that just improved through resub alone, or there isn't enough conclusive evidence, we can just make a note that the "grade jumps" or something... keeping in mind that making notations on records only help us search all records with that notation.

[tth2]

I guess I'm saying that grade improvements of 1.0 or higher can be called out as pressed books. Nothing arbitrary about grading that would allow that type of grade improvement on a resub.

 

We've done it so often on these boards by posting a before/after link with noted grade improvement... wasn't much doubt in the posts about whether pressing was the reason -- more a back and forth on whether pressing is/isn't restoration, those bothered by it, and those well versed in Jimmy crack corn's school of thought.

I voted yes, but I think for a book to be labeled as pressed, it should be based on something more than just a grade jump. Preferably some kind of evidence that defects previously there have been pressed away. Also, when you say only grade improvements of 1.0 or higher, does that mean nothing above 9.0, since all grade increments are only 0.2 and there are no grade improvements of 1.0 (except a 9.0 to a 10.0 )?

 

However, I would love to also see a registry showing all known CGC resubs that resulted in different grades (either higher or lower). It could show the original grade, and then the new grade, and people could judge for themselves whether the change is the result of pressing, some other form of restoration, or just CGC's subjectivity.

 

I can even start it off with a few high profile ones, and I know there've been more than a few Church books that have been upgraded:

 

JLA #1--before: 9.2 (0112024003); after: 9.4 (0098364008)

JLA #7--before 9.2 (0112537001); after: 9.4 (0099267004)

JLA #9--before: 9.4 (SN unknown); after: 9.6 (0625360003)

Flash #105--before: 9.2 (0000910001); after: 9.4 (0098364007)

X-Men #1--before: 9.6 (SN unknown); after: 9.8 (0631963001)

 

Nice

 

I have a few examples myself. Its actually what prompted me to throw the idea out on the table.

 

I agree that we do need to excercise good judgement, but hopefully there will be enough in the before and after pics to determine this with some degree of certainty (ie. dry erasure signs, pressed out corners, etc.).

 

I also think keeping track of grade jumps in general could prove to be a worthwhile excercise. I used the 1.0 example, but I actually think its much more difficult to eke out a 0.2 grade improvement in the 9.0 range or higher.

 

With the passage of time, we may learn something about the grade improvement by tracking it (ie. some forum member notices that the book is starting show signs of warping that weren't there when s/he first purchase the book).

 

Maybe we can use the notion "pressed" in the r field if its something that can be determined with some degree of certainty. For books that just improved through resub alone, or there isn't enough conclusive evidence, we can just make a note that the "grade jumps" or something... keeping in mind that making notations on records only help us search all records with that notation.

I`m in agreement with everything you`ve said. I think it`s high time that we tracked changes in grades, and changes in grade through pressing or other improvements. Maybe you could have a column where we note the "improvement", whether it`s pressing or otherwise. The Flash 105 I noted above, for example, doesn`t appear to have been pressed, but some gunk was cleaned off from the spine somewhere in its transition from a 9.2 to a 9.4.

[drbanner]

...I actually think its much more difficult to eke out a 0.2 grade improvement in the 9.0 range or higher.

 

From the looks of things, Jason's "target audience" was eking(sp?) out 0.2 or 0.4 grade increment improvements on 9.0+ books via pressing (and whatever other unscrupulous methods he could sneak by CGC). A bit dangerous to consider 9.0 and better books to be safe from the pressing game...these are exactly the kind of books where the work would be worth it ($$$).

[THE_BEYONDER]

...I actually think its much more difficult to eke out a 0.2 grade improvement in the 9.0 range or higher.

 

From the looks of things, Jason's "target audience" was eking(sp?) out 0.2 or 0.4 grade increment improvements on 9.0+ books via pressing (and whatever other unscrupulous methods he could sneak by CGC). A bit dangerous to consider 9.0 and better books to be safe from the pressing game...these are exactly the kind of books where the work would be worth it ($$$).

 

That's what I've been saying all along.