Do back cover defects affect grade as much as front cover?
0

25 posts in this topic

On 11/23/2021 at 9:25 PM, Qalyar said:

CGC awards technical grades, which by definition, are not intended as a measure of visual appeal. So, yes, front cover defects are (generally, anyway) weighted exactly the same as back cover defects. But of course, they have different impact in terms of visual appeal.

^^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/29/2021 at 10:15 AM, dikran1 said:

Love that cover so much! This is a great example of why there is such huge price variation between 0.5s. 

The difference in prices is just related to hype/trend, not really the cover. the one I bought for $500 looks better than the 2 that went for over $1000. If how the cover looked like really mattered, it would be more random than this downward trajectory.

image.thumb.png.3af36c35c0b8f488f524c39b3947424a.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/28/2021 at 2:47 PM, MAR1979 said:

It's tough call and while on the whole I'd probably choose a brand new crystal clear Mylar, there is something about a book and original 1st gen CGC slab I really like. Not sure what it is exactly but despite the lack of clarity they give me a good feeling when I see them.

On my "Oakland" Superman 234, which I purchased raw back in 1998,  I see the defect that prevents it from being a 9.8. I'm positive it will press out and receive a 9.8, however I like the original slab too much to do that.

Superman234.thumb.jpg.34235f6d134e7c41a29fae25f9615eaf.jpg
 

That's a beautiful book!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/23/2021 at 9:25 PM, Qalyar said:

CGC awards technical grades, which by definition, are not intended as a measure of visual appeal. So, yes, front cover defects are (generally, anyway) weighted exactly the same as back cover defects. But of course, they have different impact in terms of visual appeal.

I understand the visual aspect of it but to put it in pure technical terms, say if a tiny front cover spine tick is a 0.1 deduction, couldn’t 2 (or whatever) tiny back cover ticks be a 0.1 deduction for example? That's kinda what I was trying to get at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/2/2021 at 9:14 PM, dikran1 said:

I understand the visual aspect of it but to put it in pure technical terms, say if a tiny front cover spine tick is a 0.1 deduction, couldn’t 2 (or whatever) tiny back cover ticks be a 0.1 deduction for example? That's kinda what I was trying to get at.

They could be, but should not be, as visual appeal is far more subjective than technical grading. For visual appeal, buy the book, not the label on the slab :)

Edited by MAR1979
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
0