Trimmed edge or a slice? 1 1

[joeypost]

On 5/2/2024 at 8:59 AM, Artboy99 said:

just FYI: Trimming does not need to be the entire side.

To the original poster: You used a cutting instrument and cut off a portion of the cover. How is it not trimmed? 

I think the situation would need to be taken into consideration. This was not an attempt to remove 1-2 inches of damage, it was 1-2 inches of additional damage added trying to remove the book from the inner well. Then again, CGC has made decisions that seem to defy any type of speculation we may throw around here on the forums. 

[MatterEaterLad]

On 5/2/2024 at 9:20 AM, joeypost said:

Then again, CGC has made decisions that seem to defy any type of speculation we may throw around here on the forums. 

This. 

I have a book with a similar problem. I have no idea who, how, or why this small section was trimmed (if it actually is trimmed). But it definitely got hit with a Purple label. People have argued that this shouldn't be considered trimming since it doesn't appear to have been done to enhance the appearance of the book, it's just...weird. I dunno.

 

[comicginger1789]

On 5/2/2024 at 12:55 PM, MatterEaterLad said:

This. 

I have a book with a similar problem. I have no idea who, how, or why this small section was trimmed (if it actually is trimmed). But it definitely got hit with a Purple label. People have argued that this shouldn't be considered trimming since it doesn't appear to have been done to enhance the appearance of the book, it's just...weird. I dunno.

 

I think we assume all trimming was done to improve the book for other collectors...what if this was just some kid who didnt like the edge wrinkling or wear or whatever so they took an exacto-knife and removed the edge? Definitely was cut by someone at some point so the book has been altered. Maybe to us it doesn't enhance the look but to the kid at the time it does.

When I was a kid I uses to cut the corners off my hockey cards because the edges were always getting dinged and bent so I rounded them off (I was a dumbo kid like the above kid was and before you get concerned that I ruined good cards, 99% were the 90's pro set stuff so no worries).

[Point Five]

Try to make it look like a horrible accident and they'll go easy on you. Maybe dab some blood on the edge.

 

[MatterEaterLad]

On 5/2/2024 at 11:48 AM, comicginger1789 said:

When I was a kid I uses to cut the corners off my hockey cards because the edges were always getting dinged and bent so I rounded them off (I was a dumbo kid like the above kid was and before you get concerned that I ruined good cards, 99% were the 90's pro set stuff so no worries).

I was talking to a someone who's father left her a massive comic collection. Lots of GA and SA books.

Apparently when her father was a kid, he trimmed the ad pages out of his comics so he could fit 2-3 in a comic bag 

[Neo "The One"]

On 5/1/2024 at 2:44 PM, Paul Kosnik said:

This isn't trimmed.  It meets neither the letter nor the spirit of the definition of trimmed.  Firstly, trimmed is entire side (or substantially so, perhaps in the case of a misscut comic).  And trimmed, by definition, improves the appearance and is intended to deceive.  This cut does not improve the appearance, cannot deceive, and is for one small section of the edge.  This is just a defect, and will be graded as such if they do their jobs correctly.  Here is CGC's definition of trimmed:

• TRIMMING – A technique that involves cutting off the edges of a comic book’s cover or pages to remove defects and sharpen edges. Unlike the other restoration techniques, trimming results in an improved appearance through destruction (loss of paper).

Just like pressing does not improve a grade... Oh, who said that?!  I agree it is not a trimmed edge, but just a missing piece. I mean, CGC removing restoration (color touch) by cutting it out is more the definition of  trimming IMO!

[Neo "The One"]

On 5/2/2024 at 4:02 PM, Neo "The One" said:

Just like pressing does not improve a grade... Oh, who said that?!  I agree it is not a trimmed edge, but just a missing piece. I mean, CGC removing restoration (color touch) by cutting it out is more the definition of  trimming IMO!

Ok - so I just had a mental 'smoke' and am replying and quoting my own post.  Hypothetically if there was color touch on the edge of a comic and CGC cut it out - would that qualify as trimming!?  Now I really need to smoke.

 

[Paul Kosnik]

On 5/2/2024 at 7:59 AM, Artboy99 said:

just FYI: Trimming does not need to be the entire side.

To the original poster: You used a cutting instrument and cut off a portion of the cover. How is it not trimmed? 

From the full definition in The Official CGC Guide to Grading Comics, it is pretty clear:  "It (trimming) is accomplished by cutting off one, two, or all three edges of a comic to remove wear leaving sharp edges".  It doesn't state "part of the edge", but rather the edge, which by any plain reading of English with respect to a book means the entire edge.  Further, from the guide again:  "It (trimming) is classified as restoration because it can enhance the appearance and grade of a comic".  The slice (the official jargon CGC uses for such a defect) in question does not enhance the appearance, but rather detracts from it.  

From the definition of Slice, again from the guide:  "A slice involves a cut into the paper with a sharp object".  Further, "A slice is usually accidental, most often occurring while cutting open a shipping container..."

Seems to fit the exact definition of what the OP did and the resultant defect to the book.

Edited May 2 by Paul Kosnik
I hadn't read the rest of the posts and they made some of my comments redundant or nonsensical.

[Koopakidd11]

Got this back today and it certainly looks like Paul was correct....not considered trimmed/restored.  Whew.  Thank you all for the input!  Oh, and the grade remained the same.

Edited June 14 by Koopakidd11

[jimbo_7071]

On 5/1/2024 at 5:02 PM, Koopakidd11 said:

This one's in the mid-grade range (4.5 to 5.5).  I will submit it either way and post what I get back from CGC.  Thanks for the repsonse!

I will be shocked if that book comes back 4.5 with that additional damage. 3.5 is probably the best you can hope for.

[Koopakidd11]

Hi jimbo.  Please see above photo.  It suprisingly came back at a 4.5. 

[Kirby_Fan]

Doesn't intention play a large role in determining the dividing lines between what and what isn't restoration? Whether an alteration is deliberate or accidental? 

I look at the Surfer #1 and can rationalize the trim two ways. Either:

1) someone accidentally cut too deeply into the well to liberate the book and took part of the right edge off, or:

2) someone attempted to trim the right edge and didn't count on the tears causing the ends of the cover to shear off unexpectedly, and then stopped before destroying the whole right edge and the total value of the book even as a low-grade copy. 

Now although we know what occurred and this was accidental and not a restoration attempt to improve the look of the book (as though trimming accomplishes that end), simply letting that right edge speak for itself, I would tend to think it was a botched deliberate trim. I know the story behind the right edge now, but if I didn't have access to that info, and it came across my grading desk, I'd be thinking trimmed. Ineffective, of course, but trimmed just the same. 

Be interesting to see how CGC interprets that edge. My guess is purple to be consistent with many trimmed books in purple labels with botched trims that caused asymmetrical edges that sort of look like this. 

[Paul Kosnik]

On 7/7/2024 at 4:59 AM, Kirby_Fan said:

My guess is purple to be consistent with many trimmed books in purple labels with botched trims that caused asymmetrical edges that sort of look like this. 

You don't have to guess...the OP showed the result on 5 June: 4.5 Universal. Does not meet CGC's definition of trimmed.

[Kirby_Fan]

On 7/22/2024 at 11:36 AM, Paul Kosnik said:

You don't have to guess...the OP showed the result on 5 June: 4.5 Universal. Does not meet CGC's definition of trimmed.

I never saw the 2nd page prior to making my comment. Either it didn't load or the number 2, indicating the second page of the thread, couldn't be seen or was cut off at the bottom of the page on my device.