Attention to detail in the grading process today versus 24 years ago 1 1

[ONSLAUGHT77]

Is it true that CGC didn't pay as much attention to detail to the grading process as they do nowadays? And for that reason, if I were to send an old red-label slab to have it upgraded to the newest label I'm most likely get a lower grade?

Everyone's opinion is welcome, but if possible, I'd like to hear from CGC.

[revat]

On 7/2/2024 at 3:50 PM, ONSLAUGHT77 said:

Is it true that CGC didn't pay as much attention to detail to the grading process as they do nowadays? And for that reason, if I were to send an old red-label slab to have it upgraded to the newest label I'm most likely get a lower grade?

Everyone's opinion is welcome, but if possible, I'd like to hear from CGC.

I would be shocked if cgc would publicly comment on that

[thehumantorch]

I have no idea if they pay more or less attention now.  Not sure ow to even quantify how much attention is paid to a book when grading it.

I do think that books in older labels are more likely to grade higher now but that's mostly because pressing and cleaning were less common early on

[Lazyboy]

On 7/2/2024 at 9:41 PM, revat said:

I would be shocked if cgc would publicly comment on that

Yeah, even if the question weren't absurd and they did, for some reason, intentionally pay less attention to detail when grading back then, despite the fact that they used to guarantee that at least three graders looked at each book and now it's only two, they would never admit it.

With different people in charge over the years and also due to additional revenue streams (*cough* pressing), grading standards may have shifted slightly. But that's different than attention to detail.

[C. Spaulding]

Reholdering shouldn’t require the book to be regraded assuming you send it to CGC slabbed.

[joeypost]

On 7/3/2024 at 4:21 PM, C. Spaulding said:

Reholdering shouldn’t require the book to be regraded assuming you send it to CGC slabbed.

Unless they deem it received additional damage since its original encapsulation date. 

[MAR1979]

I've cracked and re-submitted 3 original (circa 2000/2001) CGC slab/label books over the years here were my results.

Original Grade | Resub Grade

9.6w | 9.6w
9.6ow/w | 9.8w
9.6ow/w | 9.6w

2 of the 3 received page quality bumps! 1 went up in numerical grade.  The only 1 of the 3 I had pressed retained it's original grade and page quality.

I'm not alone in receiving page quality increases, to the point I feel it's a joke that people pay extra for White compared to Off White-White on pre 1981 comics when appears all CGC does is flip a coin to decide. 

 

 

 

Edited Thursday at 11:43 PM by MAR1979

[The Lions Den]

On 7/2/2024 at 6:50 PM, ONSLAUGHT77 said:

Is it true that CGC didn't pay as much attention to detail to the grading process as they do nowadays? And for that reason, if I were to send an old red-label slab to have it upgraded to the newest label I'm most likely get a lower grade?

Everyone's opinion is welcome, but if possible, I'd like to hear from CGC.

I'm curious how notions like this even get started...   

To answer your question, from what I understand there was an initial period when the graders were defining and refining the grading scale. And like anything else, things have changed over time.

But attention to detail? That would be the responsibility of the individual grader. Judging by some of the books I've examined recently, I'm thinking the grading back then was actually tighter than it is now...

[newshane]

Way tighter in the old days. 

[MAR1979]

On 7/4/2024 at 9:51 PM, newshane said:

Way tighter in the old days. 

Must resist crude jokes....