Archived

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

FF 5

28 posts in this topic

I'm thinking about a VG+. Some wear on the spine and a crease on the bottom right. Top staple is under duress, but still attached. Back cover looks pretty darn nice. My guess on page color is Off White.

1187128-FF5A.jpg.b3aa5cd2d32da8ce800176328661e5b3.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on my CGC 4.0 JLA #2, not a 3.5. This looks better than that, but I guess it's in the eye of the beholder. The JLA 2 has a lot of creases, but the spine looks better. The FF 5 presents better, particularly if you factor in the back cover.

 

Anyway, I kindah think it's about like this one, perhaps better because the CGC copy has some water/coffee stains on the top:

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vie...bayphotohosting

 

The CGC'd copy has more prominent spine stresses and a slightly worse back cover, stains and maybe a few extra creases, but less actual wear on the spine.

 

The top is not trimmed, just the opposite, mis-cut because part of what would have been a separate cover is on this one. I just don't have the book in the scanner straight, it's a little crooked. If it had been trimmed one would think they'd have cleaned up this printing defect, not made it obvious.

 

Anyway, I've owned this for almost 15 years, which doesn't foreclose anything, but makes it less likely that work was done on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys are all way too high . . . may we see the BC please? And do you have the book? If so, please scan it out of plastic . . . it's not like you're going to hurt it or anything 27_laughing.gif

 

1187130-FF5B.jpg

 

Found it! grin.gif

 

3.5 max sumo.gif Perhaps lower in hand . . . 893scratchchin-thumb.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no, those are not interior pages. that black line you see is where the cover should have been cut, but was not. the grey is part of another FF cover. somewhere out there was another FF 5 with part of its bottom cover missing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no, those are not interior pages. that black line you see is where the cover should have been cut, but was not. the grey is part of another FF cover. somewhere out there was another FF 5 with part of its bottom cover missing.

 

Gotcha...it was just an elliptical collusion then, and not really a Ewert-wannabe-time job! 27_laughing.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what does the back cover show other than the book is mis-cut, which is readily apparent from the front? that's not a rip on the lower left, it's a printer's crease. the back cover looks better than that of a typical VG book.

 

sorry, it looks no worse than the slabbed 4.0 I put up, which has frigging water stains on the cover. and looks no worse than another slabbed SA 4.0 I own. I think I'll go with that. 4.0 seems to be the average consensus anyway, I'll avoid trouble by not going with VG+.

 

and yes, of course i have the book. i just didn't feel like cleaning the scanner before sticking my unprotected FF 5 in there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what does the back cover show other than the book is mis-cut, which is readily apparent from the front? that's not a rip on the lower left, it's a printer's crease. the back cover looks better than that of a typical VG book.

 

sorry, it looks no worse than the slabbed 4.0 I put up, which has frigging water stains on the cover. and looks no worse than another slabbed SA 4.0 I own. I think I'll go with that. 4.0 seems to be the average consensus anyway, I'll avoid trouble by not going with VG+.

 

and yes, of course i have the book. i just didn't feel like cleaning the scanner before sticking my unprotected FF 5 in there.

 

hey, don't get me wrong . . . it's your book. You have the advantage of having it in hand . . . grade it what you want sumo.gif If you think it's nicer than a 4.0, than by all means grade it 4.5 makepoint.gif

 

Be true to your own opinion angel.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites