How do you feel about blue labels with "minor color touch" ??

[showcase4]

Ok...it's been a little while, and we were due for a robust resto debate! I am a huge fan of CGC, especially since I have been collecting since the "pre-CGC" days when no one really knew what they were getting, and buying had to be done in part based on "good faith" disclosures from a seller. Now with CGC, resto questions are backed by science....I trust science alot more!

 

However....... I am frustrated with the "gray area" created by blue labels with graders notes regarding " very minor glue" or "very minor color touch"...which is restoration....which should IMO trigger a purple label, etc etc

 

How do you guys feel about this "not really blue and not really purple" hybrid situation ? As far as I'm concerned, you can't be a little pregnant.

[Filter81]

I personally don't have a strong opinion either way. I guess with a gun to my head, my preference would be for all restored books to be placed in the same color labels. But CGC does list what was done to the book on the label, so regardless of what color the label is, people know exactly what it is they are buying. Everything is disclosed and thats good enough for me regardless of whether its disclosed on a blue or purple label.

[comicdonna]

As far as the glue:

If it is used for a tear seal, It's restoration. I used to have two books that had glue. One was Restored and one was Universal. The Universal had a small amount of glue, (I presumed spilled on the cover) The Restored had a small amount of glue on the spine of the cover.

 

As far as Color Touch: It's Restoration end of story.

[thedarkknight]

A restored book is a restored book. You can hide it as a note on a blue label or give it the purple label, but it is still a restored book.

 

That having been said I think CGC putting restoration notes on a Universal label is misleading. Glue on a book if not in a place to fix anything, but maybe a spill shouldn't be restored but that is another story.

 

On a personal note: I thought I was a little pregnant once, but my wife told me that men can't get pregnant so that was a relief.

 

Jeremy

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

As far as Color Touch: It's Restoration end of story.

 

This thread should end with those very words. There is nothing debatable here.

[Mad Dog]

I think it is fine... it is fully disclosed and those i have seen goes for between FMV of an unrestored and a Apparent SA.

 

As long as it is between disclosed, i am happy with it!

 

futhermore, one definition (which i am fond of) of resto goes along the line of any attempt to restore a piece of paper back to its original condition. I find it likely that the Blue labels with notes such as "very minor colour touch" or "minor glue" are indeed not examples of "intentions to restore a book to its original state" but instead just "accidents" from back in the day where the hobby was less anal ..

 

I would be happy to buy such a book if the price was right, has never seen any in person, but changes are you need a microscope to find it anyhow, and in my view, investment discussion aside (as i dont think it is a solid investment) you get good value for your money ..

 

.02 from me.. ... next!

[Straw-Man]

As far as the glue:

If it is used for a tear seal, It's restoration. I used to have two books that had glue. One was Restored and one was Universal. The Universal had a small amount of glue, (I presumed spilled on the cover) The Restored had a small amount of glue on the spine of the cover.

 

As far as Color Touch: It's Restoration end of story.

 

is a book with ink on the cover restored?

 

if a flair falls and leaves a mark on a book in a spot w/o color break, not restored, right, tho' it'll probably diminish the grade? if it lands on a crease with color break, it is restored, right? no intent in either case tho'.

 

i have no problem with blue label minor glue or pen. we take them with writing all over the, bonnettes or fawcett big old store stamps in ink all over them, but a drop of ink in the wrong place, "END OF STORY."

 

maybe cgc has created some gray areas because there have been gray areas all along, and why change now.

[Mad Dog]

maybe cgc has created some gray areas because there have been gray areas all along, and why change now.

 

spot-on and what i tried to say in my above post

[Silver Surfer]

If its looks like it can be professionally removed without adversely effecting the grade/value then I'm all for it especially if you can purchase it at discount.

[action1kid]

Whats the confusion? Unrestored is Untouched.

[action1kid]

Except for that little dot of color touch, its Unrestored.

[Mad Dog]

Whats the confusion? Unrestored is Untouched.

 

Says who (other than action1kid )

 

if it is minor, and there is a high likelihood of not being with the intention to revert the book back to any previous condition it had been in, i dont see why it should get a PLOD .

[Mr. Zipper]

If the "restoration" doesn't improve the apparent grade, it's not really restoration is it?

 

I have no problem with small touches of color or glue in a blue label if the "fixes" do not improve the apparent grade. If a 3.0 -- or 9.0 -- has a pinhead size dot of color touch that does nothing to improve the grade, who cares except the most anal OCD purist? It should be seen as just another flaw factored into the grade like a small stain or bit of foxing.

 

As far as an amateur glue tear seal... if you can still see the tear, but it just happenens to be glued so it doesn't flap around or tear further, is it really "restoration?" If the visible [but sealed] tear is factored into the grade accordingly, why hammer the book with a PLOD for a small smear of glue that has not improved the apparent grade?

 

IMO, it's time for logic to re-enter the resto discussion to replace the emotionally charged dance around the PLOD bonfire.

[Straw-Man]

If the "restoration" doesn't improve the apparent grade, it's not really restoration is it?

 

I have no problem with small touches of color or glue in a blue label if the "fixes" do not improve the apparent grade. If a 3.0 -- or 9.0 -- has a pinhead size dot of color touch that does nothing to improve the grade, who cares except the most anal OCD purist? It should be seen as just another flaw factored into the grade like a small stain or bit of foxing.

 

As far as an amateur glue tear seal... if you can still see the tear, but it just happenens to be glued so it doesn't flap around or tear further, is it really "restoration?" If the visible [but sealed] tear is factored into the grade accordingly, why hammer the book with a PLOD for a small smear of glue that has not improved the apparent grade?

 

IMO, it's time for logic to re-enter the resto discussion to replace the emotionally charged dance around the PLOD bonfire.

 

this guy makes WAY too much sense for these boards. where is my "censor" button? you mean i can edit mine, but i have to leave posts this intelligent alone?? even tho' it make me look bad in comparison? the horror, the horror.

[Sid]

What's an accidental color touch? Accidents would be spills, droplets but if someone attempted to try to color touch, which is obviously the case given the description then it SHOULD be under the restored label. Restoration in my definition doesn't always have to improve the book, but the attempt to improve it. You screw with the book to try to make it not original ( wether it did the book good or bad ), it should be disclosed with a bright purple label.

[Straw-Man]

What's an accidental color touch? Accidents would be spills, droplets but if someone attempted to try to color touch, which is obviously the case given the description then it SHOULD be under the restored label. Restoration in my definition doesn't always have to improve the book, but the attempt to improve it. You screw with the book to try to make it not original ( wether it did the book good or bad ), it should be disclosed with a bright purple label.

 

if a wrinkled book just happened to randomly land at the bottom of one of edgar's stacks and over time flattened out, not pressed. if he had a wrinkled one and put it at the bottom on purpose and it flattened out, pressed. intent! and we'll know that happened how? oh, yeah, NOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[comicdonna]

As far as the glue:

If it is used for a tear seal, It's restoration. I used to have two books that had glue. One was Restored and one was Universal. The Universal had a small amount of glue, (I presumed spilled on the cover) The Restored had a small amount of glue on the spine of the cover.

 

As far as Color Touch: It's Restoration end of story.

 

is a book with ink on the cover restored?

 

if a flair falls and leaves a mark on a book in a spot w/o color break, not restored, right, tho' it'll probably diminish the grade? if it lands on a crease with color break, it is restored, right? no intent in either case tho'.

 

i have no problem with blue label minor glue or pen. we take them with writing all over the, bonnettes or fawcett big old store stamps in ink all over them, but a drop of ink in the wrong place, "END OF STORY."

 

maybe cgc has created some gray areas because there have been gray areas all along, and why change now.

Show me examples. I'm talking about examples where the drop of ink is the same color as the comic, and landed in ONLY the spot where the Color touch was needed.

[Mr. Zipper]

Restoration in my definition doesn't always have to improve the book, but the attempt to improve it. You screw with the book to try to make it not original ( wether it did the book good or bad ), it should be disclosed with a bright purple label.

 

This is the type of emotional response to which I referred.

 

You are treating a PLOD as a punitive device, when in fact it should be an emotionally neutral tool used to identify books that have been enhanced. If the book is the same technical grade with or without the drop of glue or pinhead sized color touch, why issue it a PLOD "apparent grade?" To lash out at the practice and "teach someone a lesson?"

 

Bear in mind, I'm not suggesting ignoring the technique... as I stated, it should be factored in as a flaw accordingly.

 

[Sid]

What's an accidental color touch? Accidents would be spills, droplets but if someone attempted to try to color touch, which is obviously the case given the description then it SHOULD be under the restored label. Restoration in my definition doesn't always have to improve the book, but the attempt to improve it. You screw with the book to try to make it not original ( wether it did the book good or bad ), it should be disclosed with a bright purple label.

 

if a wrinkled book just happened to randomly land at the bottom of one of edgar's stacks and over time flattened out, not pressed. if he had a wrinkled one and put it at the bottom on purpose and it flattened out, pressed. intent! and we'll know that happened how? oh, yeah, NOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

I do support the network though, I think it's a step in the right direction

[Sid]

Restoration in my definition doesn't always have to improve the book, but the attempt to improve it. You screw with the book to try to make it not original ( wether it did the book good or bad ), it should be disclosed with a bright purple label.

 

This is the type of emotional response to which I referred.

 

You are treating a PLOD as a punitive device, when in fact it should be an emotionally neutral tool used to identify books that have been enhanced. If the book is the same technical grade with or without the drop of glue or pinhead sized color touch, why issue it a PLOD "apparent grade?" To lash out at the practice and "teach someone a lesson?"

 

Bear in mind, I'm not suggesting ignoring the technique... as I stated, it should be factored in as a flaw accordingly.

 

 

If the book has been messed with even a tiny bit I'd like to know about it. My only concern is when I look at a cgc'ed book if it's in a universal label, I just look at the grade + PQ and not notes. PLOD, I look closely to see what's up. I can certainly see where you are coming from but I just believe any bit of 'screwing' done with the book should be upfront and center, IF it was intentional.

 

If there is a blotch of red droplet on the green car on the cover of Action #1, I would expect that in a Universal Label counted as a defect, since that is obviously not intentional. But if there is even a chance of enhancement to be intentional, such as slightly different shades of green on the car where color lifts had happened, it should get a PLOD. It hurt the grade, sure, was it intentional attempt at a horrible restore job, Yep.