Venom 1 August 2 different covers 0

[Sgtmjwilson]

On 11/2/2021 at 9:17 PM, Lazyboy said:

The question isn't whether there's more than one, but rather how just many there are.

Agree. Good question. Can peeps please tell us or show them? Apricate it. 

[Namtak]

On 11/2/2021 at 9:17 PM, Lazyboy said:

The question isn't whether there's more than one, but rather how just many there are.

To be classified as a variant there should be at least a few percentage distributed and accounted for if not  its a deffect/error...

[Sgtmjwilson]

On 11/2/2021 at 9:21 PM, Namtak said:

To be classified as a variant there should be at least a few percentage distributed and accounted for if not  its a deffect/error...

No idea how to find that. -o

[Sgtmjwilson]

On 11/2/2021 at 9:21 PM, Namtak said:

To be classified as a variant there should be at least a few percentage distributed and accounted for if not  its a deffect/error...

I am here to ask u all 

 

[Namtak]

You are on the right track and i am curious to find out if it is a variant not found publicly yet.if board members show you similar result it would be awesome!

[Lazyboy]

On 11/2/2021 at 8:21 PM, Namtak said:

To be classified as a variant there should be at least a few percentage distributed and accounted for if not  its a deffect/error...

 

No. Variants are intentional. Errors are just errors.

Outside of the UPC and price boxes, every copy of this issue is meant to look identical.

[Namtak]

On 11/2/2021 at 9:35 PM, Lazyboy said:

 

No. Variants are intentional. Errors are just errors.

Outside of the UPC and price boxes, every copy of this issue is meant to look identical.

I see your point but you are wrong on that one,if enough copy was produced intentional or not it is a variation.the spawn 1 is proof of that with interior cover with print defect and acknowledged by mcfarlane to have been produced almost half of production,not yet aproved by cgc but very known in collecting circles,and i have both.

[Lazyboy]

On 11/2/2021 at 8:42 PM, Namtak said:

I see your point but you are wrong on that one,if enough copy was produced intentional or not it is a variation.the spawn 1 is proof of that with interior cover with print defect and acknowledged by mcfarlane to have been produced almost half of production,not yet aproved by cgc but very known in collecting circles,and i have both.

That's not a variant, nor is acknowledged by anybody as such.

[ADAMANTIUM]

On 11/2/2021 at 8:57 PM, Lazyboy said:

That's not a variant, nor is acknowledged by anybody as such.

Correct. If cgc recognized it, they would say "error" on the label, as there is nothing intentional about said gold or even black error copies notated.

Still, I'm not sure of the criteria cgc needs to label as such, or feel that it shouldn't be qualified greener something

@Namtak we could speculate verbiage or even nomenclature, but got to find one 1st!

[Jesse-Lee]

I assume it's a manufacturing error. I often check this site if I run across errors in the wild:https://recalledcomics.com/index.php

They're not the final say by any means, but between them and MyComicShop, you can usually find some info. However, I was intrigued and decided to Google around a bit and didn't find anything on a gold edition. I did find mention of an error version with no "Holo-Grafx": https://www.keycollectorcomics.com/issue/venom-funeral-pyre-1-error,312923/

[Qalyar]

This type of reflective foil cover is really difficult to take reliable, comparable photos of. So, to start with, I wouldn't put much stock in sampling EBay photos.

With that all said, I'd chock this up to manufacturing variance. Despite being mass-produced, not all books are identical. Ink wells run low, foil application processes have ... weird stuff ... happen, holograms get mounted upside down. Those aren't variants, and by and large, they're often not even collectible errors, because they're one-offs. In philately, such things are called freaks. Some people collect them, but they aren't afforded any sort of standardized, catalogued recognition; they rarely demand a substantial premium.

Now, yes, sometimes there's a problem like that in comic book manufacturing such that it affects enough copies so as to be deemed an unintentionally created, but collectible, variety (or variant, if you will, although not in the "intentionally produced cover" sense of the term). Fantastic Four 110 Green Printing Error, Avengers 10 Yellow Printing Error*, Sandman v2 18 Blue Panels, Venom: Lethal Protector 1 Black. And so forth.

* technically, CGC doesn't recognize this one as a separate variety for census purposes and gives these books Qualified labels, but it's pretty widely considered "a thing"

I don't think that's what you have. I think you might have a one-off "freak", as it were. Although I'm not even sure exactly how distinctive the difference would be in hand, because photographing this type of cover side-by-side isn't going to give a true indication of the difference; if you want to sell the idea that you have something significant, start by taking images of the two books with identical lighting and positioning (yes, that means one at a time). But the idea that you have discovered some sort of Lethal Protector-esque rarity worthy of specific recognition? Well, I think you have an uphill battle there, especially in the absence of strong evidence that your unusual book (to the extent that one or both of these books even is unusual) is not merely a unique occurrence.