Is this acceptable...? Because it hurts my brain. 3 3

[Andrewandrewandrew]

On 1/17/2023 at 3:09 PM, Funnybooks said:

ASM 365 in it's current state is not a 9.6..damage during encapsulation or transport?

Lobo at 9.2 seems fair...there is noticeable stress on the wraps and especially along the spine that indicates this copy was handled/read at some point.

No the ASM was not damaged in encapsulation. I sent it off with a tear and uncleaned for a friend of mine that just wanted it graded. 

And maybe the grade is accurate on Lobo, however I just wanted a conversation about if waviness should hurt the grade more than a tear. Maybe the spine stress was the issue, however there was no graders notes on this Lobo. 

[Andrewandrewandrew]

On 1/17/2023 at 5:49 PM, PeterPark said:

I have also seen numerous examples of comics looking they were damaged during encapsulation.

Were you disappointed in the grade on the ASM 365? With that lower corner damage, I wouldn't expect a grade that high. That said, I'd also be careful to disclose it if you are looking to sell as the webbing can obscure damage in pictures that people would not be happy with in hand. I don't have a problem with the 9.2 on the Lobo book. It still came back high grade but waviness isn't a non-issue.  A press should've been able to fix that.

I'm not disappointed, just shocked. I sent this off for a friend with the corner tear and uncleaned. They just wanted it slabbed. 

[aardvark88]

On 1/18/2023 at 3:04 PM, Andrewandrewandrew said:

 I mostly wanted to have a discussion on if waviness should drop the grade more than a tear. 

To reduce waviness, change your pressing sheets more often so that there is less transfer of flaw(s) in sheets to cover, and buy a press with a larger platen.

[Off Panel]

On 1/17/2023 at 10:28 AM, Andrewandrewandrew said:

I know that waviness is an issue on my end with my pressing and am currently working that issue out now as I have just started doing my own books. However is this grading accurate and more importantly acceptable?

Waviness in and of itself shouldn't hit you too hard.

I've got a 9.8 Amazing Spider-man 137 and the only grader notes are:

Whole Book Lite Rippling/Warping

I think it's the extent of the waviness that is hurting your grade. I had a buddy who kept his books in a damp basement and they all looked like the top of that Lobo.

Despite the dire-sounding grader's note on my 137, the edges still look straight in the case.

 

 

 

In fact, I can't see any rippling or warping at all, but I'll take CGC's word for it that it was more apparent before being encapsulated.

 

[mephistopheles]

On 1/17/2023 at 7:04 PM, Dr. Balls said:

I've read that a book pulled out of the press too early will have waviness like that.

Was that Lobo pressed before subbing?

It can also be caused by too much humidity in the air.

 

[Tony S]

As to the question the OP has asked more than once - if waviness is a bigger defect than a tear - the answer is "we don't know".....

How big is the tear? Is it just a bindery tear at the bottom or top of the spine on a thick book inclined to bindery tears?  
How much waviness? A bit or a lot. Cover or the entire book? 
It's all a matter of degree. There is no answer to the question asked - except get the book graded and see. 

I would mention the Lobo has more than just waviness. The back cover lower spine looks to have bends that pressing didn't fix. 

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 1/22/2023 at 9:03 PM, Tony S said:

How big is the tear? Is it just a bindery tear at the bottom or top of the spine on a thick book inclined to bindery tears?  

[Tony S]

On 1/22/2023 at 8:58 PM, THE_BEYONDER said:

Thanks Beyonder
As others have noted this isn't a tear. Looks like a crease/impact crunch. So I was not sure what book the OP was discussing in reference to their specific question about waviness being worse than a tear. I probably wasn't reading everything close enough and appreciate you making it clear. 

As for is this book a 9.6?  I have come to dislike discussing such. Several years ago I would have said "maybe if the rest of the book is perfect". By the grading standards I've seen since CGC has hired a bunch of new graders and cranked up output (so the past 18 months)  I would have been guesstimated the grade lower than 9.6. 9.2/9.4 maybe. 

The reason I now dislike discussing "what should the grade be" is the issue of consistency. IMHO we are not seeing consistency.  And consistency is the MOST IMPORTANT thing to me as far as sending in books. I don't want to waste my time arguing with a grading company what a 9.6 should look like. But the hobby  NEEDS for the standard for 9.6 to be the same from year to year and decade to decade. Because without that consistency, the bedrock reason for third party grading and encapsulation - that "the grade is the grade" - gets undermined.

 

[Andrewandrewandrew]

On 1/23/2023 at 8:30 PM, Tony S said:

Thanks Beyonder
As others have noted this isn't a tear. Looks like a crease/impact crunch. So I was not sure what book the OP was discussing in reference to their specific question about waviness being worse than a tear. I probably wasn't reading everything close enough and appreciate you making it clear. 

As for is this book a 9.6?  I have come to dislike discussing such. Several years ago I would have said "maybe if the rest of the book is perfect". By the grading standards I've seen since CGC has hired a bunch of new graders and cranked up output (so the past 18 months)  I would have been guesstimated the grade lower than 9.6. 9.2/9.4 maybe. 

The reason I now dislike discussing "what should the grade be" is the issue of consistency. IMHO we are not seeing consistency.  And consistency is the MOST IMPORTANT thing to me as far as sending in books. I don't want to waste my time arguing with a grading company what a 9.6 should look like. But the hobby  NEEDS for the standard for 9.6 to be the same from year to year and decade to decade. Because without that consistency, the bedrock reason for third party grading and encapsulation - that "the grade is the grade" - gets undermined.

 

I really like the way you think about this issue. I diffidently agree about the consistency of grading and from the sounds of it I think the best course is just to not send stuff off to get graded. Especially if we get these inconsistency. 

[joeypost]

On 1/23/2023 at 8:30 PM, Tony S said:

Thanks Beyonder
As others have noted this isn't a tear. Looks like a crease/impact crunch. So I was not sure what book the OP was discussing in reference to their specific question about waviness being worse than a tear. I probably wasn't reading everything close enough and appreciate you making it clear. 

As for is this book a 9.6?  I have come to dislike discussing such. Several years ago I would have said "maybe if the rest of the book is perfect". By the grading standards I've seen since CGC has hired a bunch of new graders and cranked up output (so the past 18 months)  I would have been guesstimated the grade lower than 9.6. 9.2/9.4 maybe. 

The reason I now dislike discussing "what should the grade be" is the issue of consistency. IMHO we are not seeing consistency.  And consistency is the MOST IMPORTANT thing to me as far as sending in books. I don't want to waste my time arguing with a grading company what a 9.6 should look like. But the hobby  NEEDS for the standard for 9.6 to be the same from year to year and decade to decade. Because without that consistency, the bedrock reason for third party grading and encapsulation - that "the grade is the grade" - gets undermined.

 

Personally, I think it a combination of a bad bindery tear that may have been handled by an inexperienced presser or was bent over and folded back at some point in the books history. May have caught the bag and dog eared a little.

While not discounting an impact dent, I have worked on too many copies of this book, and realize how bad the corners can be coming from the bindery to discount it as the correct answer. 

[Tony S]

On 1/24/2023 at 4:02 PM, joeypost said:

Personally, I think it a combination of a bad bindery tear that may have been handled by an inexperienced presser or was bent over and folded back at some point in the books history. May have caught the bag and dog eared a little.

While not discounting an impact dent, I have worked on too many copies of this book, and realize how bad the corners can be coming from the bindery to discount it as the correct answer. 

Yes, it could indeed be as you say. 

If it is a bindery tear then that would also explain the 9.6.  Over the years I've seen lots of 9.6's with bindery tears and this book is particularly prone to them. It is challenging to find copies without any bindery tears. So historically books with bindery tears can get 9.6 and historically if a defect is very common on a particular book CGC grades that defect more leniently. 

Edited January 25, 2023 by Tony S

[comicginger1789]

On 1/17/2023 at 2:45 PM, LowGradeBronze said:

I understand your disappointment but to call 9.2 and 9.4 grades dismal is a little strong. Anything 9.0 and above is near mint. That's not a dismal grade. Near Mint. Say it a few times: Near Mint, and see if you're still disappointed to have near mint comics. I wouldn't be! 

I think it is a disappointment because some (not all) people are paying $20-30 for a book they think is 9.8, grading said book for another $40-50 and then only finding they can sell their 9.0-9.4 copy for the same amount or less than what they put in it.

 

[LowGradeBronze]

On 2/9/2023 at 5:47 PM, comicginger1789 said:

I think it is a disappointment because some (not all) people are paying $20-30 for a book they think is 9.8, grading said book for another $40-50 and then only finding they can sell their 9.0-9.4 copy for the same amount or less than what they put in it.

 

It's called speculation. Some folks are good at it and others, not so much. 

[Mr. Zipper]

That waviness is quite bad and frankly means that you have a long way to go before you should be pressing books of value and submitting them. That is pressing 101 not to have the waves. 

[joeypost]

On 2/15/2023 at 2:25 PM, Mr. Zipper said:

That waviness is quite bad and frankly means that you have a long way to go before you should be pressing books of value and submitting them. That is pressing 101 not to have the waves. 

Didn’t you know that everyone becomes a pressing “master” the second they set up their press.