Iron Man #36

[divad]

 

 

[Neurosis138]

9.6

[Sir Ped of Ro]

wow, great comic, a safe 9.4 with a chance to a 9.6

the colours seem to be a little bit washed off, losing their glossy...is it from the scan?!

 

regards

[Pirate]

9.2 due to color fading

[-cryptkeeper-]

light rubbing on ULFC 9.2 and is there something on black near I.M right foot ?

[the blob]

some people seem to think the lack of gloss and the lack of bright white back makes a big difference, but it doesn't seem like CGC cares that much. OGG has been somewhat confusing in that regard. I'd go 9.2 for the aforementioned reasons and it looks like there's a small stress near bottom staple, something going on near the 15 cents, some slight rubbing on the green near the little iron man and the aforementioned question about what that is on iron man's foot on the right side, some slight dirtiness on the back, which would be ok in 9.2 for the most part, but maybe not in 9.4/9.6, especially with the lack of glossiness.

 

it's a nice book.

[divad]

Interesting that the comments are uniform, as there's actually no lack of glossiness whatsoever. Look at the reds and yellows on Iron Man; check out other copies of this issue (especially in hand, and not some amped-up eBay photo); the colorist chose a a very bland pallette for the backgorund colors. This copy exhibits no fading whatsoever, just an off-whiteness, particulary noticeable on the BC.

 

[october]

Interesting that the comments are uniform, as there's actually no lack of glossiness whatsoever. Look at the reds and yellows on Iron Man; check out other copies of this issue (especially in hand, and not some amped-up eBay photo); the colorist chose a a very bland pallette for the backgorund colors. This copy exhibits no fading whatsoever, just an off-whiteness, particulary noticeable on the BC.

 

 

How can a person detemine glossiness from a scan anyway? You need raking light to truly appreciate a nice gloss.

 

As for the colors, they look great to me. 9.4/9.6. Great copy there.

[Darrell F]

9.4 Great book

[marvelcollector]

9.2..slight discoloration on spine..

[inconceivable]

NM 9.4 Just a bit of edge wear top front cover.

 

Dan

[the blob]

Whatever the gloss, I don't think it really makes a difference grade-wise unless maybe we're talking about a 9.8, it's just other tiny things that would have me leaning toward a 9.2 vs. 9.4. Gloss is mainly a nice little bonus. And yes, you often can't tell from a scan because scanners often dull things down.

[uclapeterg]

Is there a crease on Iron Man's back foot? color loss? rubbing?

[12c_Comic]

I would go as low as a 9.4 and high of a 9.6

[KingOfRulers]

Interesting that the comments are uniform, as there's actually no lack of glossiness whatsoever. Look at the reds and yellows on Iron Man; check out other copies of this issue (especially in hand, and not some amped-up eBay photo); the colorist chose a a very bland pallette for the backgorund colors. This copy exhibits no fading whatsoever, just an off-whiteness, particulary noticeable on the BC.

 

 

But you know what? "I see a slightly abraided corner. And a slightly abraided corner is a slightly abraided corner." 8.0.

 

[divad]

Interesting that the comments are uniform, as there's actually no lack of glossiness whatsoever. Look at the reds and yellows on Iron Man; check out other copies of this issue (especially in hand, and not some amped-up eBay photo); the colorist chose a a very bland pallette for the backgorund colors. This copy exhibits no fading whatsoever, just an off-whiteness, particulary noticeable on the BC.

 

 

But you know what? "I see a slightly abraided corner. And a slightly abraided corner is a slightly abraided corner." 8.0.

 

 

[Pirate]

Interesting that the comments are uniform, as there's actually no lack of glossiness whatsoever. Look at the reds and yellows on Iron Man; check out other copies of this issue (especially in hand, and not some amped-up eBay photo); the colorist chose a a very bland pallette for the backgorund colors. This copy exhibits no fading whatsoever, just an off-whiteness, particulary noticeable on the BC.

 

 

How can a person detemine glossiness from a scan anyway? You need raking light to truly appreciate a nice gloss.

 

As for the colors, they look great to me. 9.4/9.6. Great copy there.

 

i said fading colors, nothing about gloss

[divad]

No one was addressing your comment . . .

[october]

Interesting that the comments are uniform, as there's actually no lack of glossiness whatsoever. Look at the reds and yellows on Iron Man; check out other copies of this issue (especially in hand, and not some amped-up eBay photo); the colorist chose a a very bland pallette for the backgorund colors. This copy exhibits no fading whatsoever, just an off-whiteness, particulary noticeable on the BC.

 

 

How can a person detemine glossiness from a scan anyway? You need raking light to truly appreciate a nice gloss.

 

As for the colors, they look great to me. 9.4/9.6. Great copy there.

 

i said fading colors, nothing about gloss

 

I was talking to Dave.

[uclapeterg]

Is there a crease on Iron Man's back foot? color loss? rubbing?

 

Can someone (this means YOU, David) please answer my question?