How about someone want to grade THIS?? Another Iron Fist 14

[comicwiz]

Big-Butted Scan... I don't think so. As well, I think you should ask for a rear cover scan as well. This book is infamous for dust-shadowing. Based on the low-res scan (looks like a DPI of 150 max -- ask for something in the 300-600 range), I would say it grades like a VF/NM book. I don't think its got what it takes to grade higher than a 9.0; Ultra-conservatively, I'd grade it a VF+ 8.5. Be anal, because this book is fairly common in the 8.5-9.2 grade. It starts to get interesting in the NM 9.4 grades.

[doyle033]

for a TRULY big scan... try here. same page but i scanned it at 300 dpi (previously at 200) and left it kind of big. the white markings on the i in iron and the o in iron are not on the book, product of my fingerprints on the scanner (man i gotta clean that) truly a big scan... may take a second to load

the back cover is an attachment here or on the original post

take your pic. back i very clean. only problem is the bend towardst he top middle of back cover. not a crease just a slight bend.

i think its a nice copy... heck for the price i got it at its not bad. im anxious to have it slabbed to see who is right. my personal guess is 9.2

we shall see.

[joe_collector]

Just send 'er in and get yer CGC 9,2.

[comicwiz]

The creasing/bend at the top outer edge of the rear cover, in conjunction with what appears to be some slight crimping/impacting at both the top and bottom edges of the spine (can't tell if its an artifact of the scanner or not -- then again, the resolution of the rear cover scan is not entirely suitable for a realistic determination) are troubling enough to keep this book low on the VF/NM scale. These defects (or at least the top outer edge crease/bending) as well as the crimping to the top edge of front cover may well keep this out of the VF/NM range. I would likely go with the 8.5, but its still a nice book! Congrats, and let us know how it does should you decide to send it in for grading.

[joe_collector]

Do you really think so? I've seen CGC 8.5 copies that are no where near this nice, and (based on the scans) I'd be very suprised if it doesn't come back a 9.0 or higher.

 

If this turns out to be a CGC 8.5, I'll buy it for fair market value.

[comicwiz]

I've had two copies of this book graded already, and I have to concur with what murph0 said in another thread, for some reason, CGC is strict on this book. I wouldn't be surprised with a VF/NM 9.0, or 9.2, but based on my experience with grading this comic, and the defects I've been able to observe, I'd have to stick with my opinion that it comes back a VF+ 8.5.

 

Take a close look at the last (high-res) front cover scan --the defects keeping this book low on the VF/NM scale are: i) Top left corner of the spine of the front cover (I have a strong feeling that's serious enough to carry into the rear cover, even though I will dismiss that posibility because its hard to determine for certain with the low-res [rear cover] scan -- it may well be an artifact of the scanner); ii) (only noticed this after he produced the large scan) Two ticks just bearly breaking colour on the spine, one near IF's pinky finger, and the other in middle of the firey blaze produced by IF's back-hand attempt, and the bar code -- very difficult to see, but is noticeable if you look closely, and only because of the use of black ink in that area of the spine; iii) The bend/crimping on the top outer edge of the rear cover scan. All other noted defects in my previous reply would have to be inadmisable because of the possibility that the defects are artificats of the scanner. For all these reasons, I would have to stick with my opinion of a VF+ 8.5 rating.

[joe_collector]

I do agree that CGC grades this puppy tough, but only in the 9.4-9.8 range. I haven't noticed the same toughness on 8.0-9.2 though. Basically what I've seen first-hand is 9.4 and 9.6's (comparable to other same-era issues) get knocked down a level, but not any lower.

 

During the Modern label period, IF 14 was kin of a joke, because it was impossible to get a 9.6, though many Red Label 9.2 books were re-subbed and got 9.4-9.6 in return. 1977-79 was a bad era for the early CGC grades, that's for sure.

 

I will go on record (assuming no scanner funny business) as it being a 9.0 minimum and 9.2 probable.

[doyle033]

i) Top left corner of the spine of the front cover (I have a strong feeling that's serious enough to carry into the rear cover, even though I will dismiss that posibility because its hard to determine for certain with the low-res [rear cover] scan -- it may well be an artifact of the scanner); ii) (only noticed this after he produced the large scan) Two ticks just bearly breaking colour on the spine, one near IF's pinky finger, and the other in middle of the firey blaze produced by IF's back-hand attempt, and the bar code -- very difficult to see, but is noticeable if you look closely, and only because of the use of black ink in that area of the spine; iii) The bend/crimping on the top outer edge of the rear cover scan

let me elaborate on these flaws, maybe it will help

1)the top left spine is a ding. if it does carry over to the rear it only does so slightly at most, not noticeable to the naked eye, perhaps with magnification though. the bottom of spine(corner) is fine, any flaws there must be scanner related

2)the tick is singular. the one by IF's pinkey is there, the other is a printing defect (not enough ink makes line look seperated, kind of an ink tick, not a stress or crack)

3)of all these the bend on top of rear is most frightening to me.

BUT

as you can see in a subsequent post, I attached a copy of my 9.4 IF scan. IMHO they are very very close. I called it a 9.2 as well. there is a distinct spine stress (to me anyhow) about half way between the words snow and white. it does break color slightly. the lower front cover had a kind of roll to the bottom about 1 and 1/2 inch long leading to the LRC. kind of like the edge of a quarter, or scalloped if you will. not too pronounce but it was there. also the miscut on the cover and the cover was a tiny bit translucent if you ask me (in the bold logo print) and the colors were not as "punched up" as this. my scan may not do it justice but the colors on this are one step off of those ultra colorful marvel masterpiece versions.

again i am hoping for a 9.2 but with the back I am a bit worried.

on a side note, I have seen two others one a 9.4 which i thought was ok and one a 9.6 which i thought was tremendously over graded. it was a 9.2 on any other book. actually i had thought they had been nice on the other two i saw. the 9.4 was close as is mine but that 9.6 was a joke (had a big color flake out of the orange background behind IF in logo. about 1/8 to 1/4 inch splotch.)

thanks again tho

[PovertyRow]

If you get this book CGCd send a scan again. It will be interesting to see this before pic and then see if the cover has that same transparency after the paper is inserted!

[doyle033]

do you think the paper adds to the transparency or takes away from it. I was wondering this a while ago. some of my issues with big white logos, (other IF 14, my hulk 181, some x men i have) seem to be a bit more transparent in the logo after slabbing. does anyone think this is the microchamber paper, or the sealing up in the well, or a combination of the two that causes this. or am I simply getting older and imagining things like my granny did about the lizards with orange road crew vests who were dating clowns and they ate sorbet together at the stop light in the car next to us? any thoughts?>

[PovertyRow]

do you think the paper adds to the transparency or takes away from

 

From what we have seen so far it seems to really add to the transparency.

[greggy]

Don't you mean that it adds to the appearance of the transparency?

[PovertyRow]

Don't you mean that it adds to the appearance of the transparency

 

Greggy, you are 100% correct. It is simple appearnce of transparency, as you say. The true transparancy or opaqueness will not be affected. Good call, Greggy!

[doyle033]

but is it the paper or the sealing method used in the "well" design that adds to the appearance of the transparency?

[greggy]

Good call, Greggy!

 

Aren't they all?

[greggy]

It's the paper. Although the scans are gone.....look at this old thread --> Link

[PovertyRow]

Aren't they all?

 

Some are. Some aren't. Same as the rest of us. I am rteally too pissed off to get involved in this.

[greggy]

I am rteally too pissed off to get involved in this.

 

What's wrong POV? Did your meal come out wrong?

[PovertyRow]

What's wrong POV? Did your meal come out wrong?

 

no

[greggy]