• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

FF 126 AND FF 128

Started by doc_sampson-migration,

44 posts in this topic

mcd-migration

mcd-migration

Posted
Posted

Any interpretations as to how Overstreet's guidelines would downgrade for this? The miswrap on that FF 128 is exactly 1/8". The description in the new grading guide says "slight" bindery defects allowed at 9.6,

 

Not sure, but the Overstreet Comic Grading Guide shows a 9.9 with a notation of a slight miswrap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
blowout

blowout

Posted
Posted

Nah I could care less if you want to buy good lookin books or not. I'd rather have less competition on the non-miswrapped/miscut books as I truly believe that eventually CGC's going to HAVE to stop grading these in the NM's categories.

 

Werner, like he said. tongue.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fantastic_four

fantastic_four

Posted
Posted
You guys see an ugly book.

 

I see a beautiful undamaged book from 1972.

 

Oh well. tongue.gif

 

I think it's rather pretty as well, but still, I'd rather have one with perfect centering. The type of collector who cares about centering also tends to be the type of collector who buys 9.4 or better comics, so it makes sense to me that 9.6 and up shouldn't have significant offset. And cover offset rarely gets much worse than 1/8" like that FF 128 has, although there I may have seen an example or two of 3/16" or even 1/4".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
THE_BEYONDER

THE_BEYONDER

Posted
Posted

I thought "CONDITION" was supposed to have a DIRECT CORRELATION with the amount of "WEAR". Why should CGC give a "miswrapped" book a lesser grade? I think their grades should be a reflection of the amount of "care" used to preserve the book. Isn't a Grade supposed to reflect the difference between "BRAND NEW" and "USED"? Next your going to ask CGC to downgrade because the cover art is awful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mushroom

Mushroom

Posted
Posted

I agree with beyonder. A lot of you guys get all hot and sweaty over a double cover yet it is an error of the printing process just as much as a miswrap yet there is no cgc downgrading for that. I think the grade should apply to the condition of the book. If somebody doesn't like the miswrap then they won't bid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fantastic_four

fantastic_four

Posted
Posted
I thought "CONDITION" was supposed to have a DIRECT CORRELATION with the amount of "WEAR". Why should CGC give a "miswrapped" book a lesser grade? I think their grades should be a reflection of the amount of "care" used to preserve the book. Isn't a Grade supposed to reflect the difference between "BRAND NEW" and "USED"? Next your going to ask CGC to downgrade because the cover art is awful.

 

Well...if that's your opinion...perhaps you'd like to attend the yearly Overstreet meetings and take it up with the group. Because I didn't create his grading standards, I just happen to agree with them.

 

If one of the guys running the printing press takes a dump on one out of every ten books that come off the press, does that mean those one out every 10 start out as a 10.0 with the stains since they came off the press that way? Wear isn't the only thing which reduces from grade; going by Overstreet's latest grading criteria, there are 22 defect categories which affect grade, which are as follows (listed in the order they appear in the new grading guide): bindery/printing, cover inks/gloss, cover wear, cover creases, soiling, staining, dates/stamps, spine roll, spine split, staples, staple tears, rust migration, stress lines, corners, centerfold, interior tears, paper quality/color, acid odor, missing pieces, amateur repairs, coupon cut, readibility.

 

So it's a LITTLE more than wear. Grade reflects the aesthetic appeal of a comic, and cover miswrap detracts from that. Overstreet specifically defines bindery miswraps as a defect, and he even has categorical grades to assign to the severity and angle of the miswrap that he first released in the 1992 grading guide. The FF 128 in question has the most common type of miswrap, a type "1A" going by his taxonomy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PovertyRow

PovertyRow

Posted
Posted
[

It does, but "wear" is not the only factor to consider in a grade.

 

What "factor" is there aside from "wear"?

 

Writing and ink stamps, registration, misplaced staples, bindery creasing and tears and miscutting to name a few.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mushroom

Mushroom

Posted
Posted
A variant is something deliberate such as testmarketing a new price. A double cover is not deliberate and therefore is an error.

 

So it's "double-cover ERROR", not "double-cover VARIANT"?

 

Every other collecting field uses the term "error" i.e. meaning a mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
THE_BEYONDER

THE_BEYONDER

Posted
Posted
[

It does, but "wear" is not the only factor to consider in a grade.

 

What "factor" is there aside from "wear"?

 

Writing and ink stamps, registration, misplaced staples, bindery creasing and tears and miscutting to name a few.

 

Even if a book has misplaced staples, you could still have a "PERFECT" example of a book with misplaced staples....I always thought CONDITION should have more to do with "handling". I understand how a miswrap "detracts" from the appearance of any particular book, but why can't there be a MINT condition miswrap?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
COI

COI

Posted
Posted

Even if a book has misplaced staples, you could still have a "PERFECT" example of a book with misplaced staples....I always thought CONDITION should have more to do with "handling". I understand how a miswrap "detracts" from the appearance of any particular book, but why can't there be a MINT condition miswrap?

 

Ok, it's all about eye appeal. In the case of JR's FF #128, the miswrap dosen't look bad because the white spine that is showing is even/straight. Here's an example of a horrible miswrap:

 

silversurfer14cgc96.jpg

 

Are you telling me this is deserving of a 9.6, just because the rest of the book is perfect?

 

This is also a perfect example of why Scans are absolutely necessary when deciding on a graded book.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PovertyRow

PovertyRow

Posted
Posted

Even if a book has misplaced staples, you could still have a "PERFECT" example of a book with misplaced staples....I always thought CONDITION should have more to do with "handling". I understand how a miswrap "detracts" from the appearance of any particular book, but why can't there be a MINT condition miswrap?

 

Hey Beyonder!

 

I actually understand what you are saying and I actually agree with it. I really like the idea of the grade of a book reflecting only the physical damage the book has: tears, fading, creases, stains, yellowing, etc etc etc. Then the collector can decide if a miscut, a bad wrap, out of register etc. is something they can deal with and at what price (or discount).

 

Unfortunately, that isn't how things are graded.Hey! I want to see a single CGC label color and just let the label text describe restoration, qualification etc. But I don't think either one of us will see our ideal happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
THE_BEYONDER

THE_BEYONDER

Posted
Posted

"Unfortunately, that isn't how things are graded.Hey! I want to see a single CGC label color and just let the label text describe restoration, qualification etc. But I don't think either one of us will see our ideal happen. "

 

I'd like to see a single CGC label color as well...... smirk.gif

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing