Specific Grade Reference Threads

[Rob]

We discuss and read about grades all day long, but what does a "light crease" look like? Or "moderate wear"? Many people, myself included, learn by visual aid. I think my grading skills would be improved simply by viewing many examples of each grade. I don't know how feasible this is, as there are many grades and therefore many threads. But I would love to see a thread where people posted large scans of examples of each grade. Maybe we could have threads that included ranges of grades, maybe 9.0-10.0, or even wider, 6.0-8.0. But if I could see scans of 8.5's many times, I think I would get a better idea of what would fall in that grade. The Overstreet Grading Guide helps somewhat, but the scans are small, and there's only a handful of examples for each grade.

[Davenport]

Ths site has photo references for various defects: E-Bigs

 

And there's the Heritage archives for viewing mega-scans of the different grade levels.

[divad]

Ok, I'll start it right here. Let's start at the lowest collectible grade and work on up.

 

Grade 1.8

 

Here's my copy of Amazing Fantasy #15 - collectively graded on the Boards from a 1.5 to a 2.0, and aptly graded by CGC at 1.8: severe spine wear; tape pull to CCA stamp; pieces missing at URFC and LLFC; substantial Marvel chipping to full length of REFC; moderate loss of cover gloss; otherwise complete; cover and CF attached; off-white pages.

 

[Comicdey]

This Hulk #1 that I once owned and sold was later CGC'd and came back with a 1.5 with tape down the spine...(I sold it as a Fair)

[SurfingAlien]

We discuss and read about grades all day long, but what does a "light crease" look like? Or "moderate wear"? Many people, myself included, learn by visual aid. I think my grading skills would be improved simply by viewing many examples of each grade. I don't know how feasible this is, as there are many grades and therefore many threads. But I would love to see a thread where people posted large scans of examples of each grade. Maybe we could have threads that included ranges of grades, maybe 9.0-10.0, or even wider, 6.0-8.0. But if I could see scans of 8.5's many times, I think I would get a better idea of what would fall in that grade. The Overstreet Grading Guide helps somewhat, but the scans are small, and there's only a handful of examples for each grade.

 

I think thats a great idea. Even though one could look up grades on Heritage, that would require the effort of going through their archives and bringing up each individual issue. If we started separate threads here on different grade points - by collective effort we could have a nice large-scan visual gallery of allowable defects for given CGC grades. Might be more useful than the Overstreet grading guide as far as figuring out CGC grades. I don't have any 1.8's but will pitch in for 5.0 and up

[Rob]

So should we start grade threads? Should we do ranges? I don't think we'd want a separate thread for 10.0, 9.8, 9.6, 9.4, etc.

[SurfingAlien]

So should we start grade threads? Should we do ranges? I don't think we'd want a separate thread for 10.0, 9.8, 9.6, 9.4, etc.

 

maybe break it down into the overstreet ranges ? A thread for 2.0-3.5, one for 4.0-5.5, 6.0-7.5, Then maybe a little closer for the upper grades? 8.0-9.0 9.2-9.4, 9.6 up? Would that make sense?

[Rob]

I like it. Other opinions? Everyone else support it?

[Mac Man]

I would REALLY love to see a thread with examples of comics from 9.0-10.0 focusing mostly on the grades in between. I'm pretty comfortable with low and mid grade comics; and while I'm getting better with the higher grade stuff, I'm still not 100% satisfied with my HG grading (I low-ball stuff more often than I ought to).

 

DEFINITELY in support of it!

[Comicdey]

I think having examples in order of CGC graded 0.5 through 10.0 in one thread and then locking it would be very nice for an example to new board members...maybe unslabbed and slabbed of three or four different issues for each grade with fronts and backs....

[Davenport]

Another educational visual reference is STL/ Iron Maniac's Grading Contest Archives. Gigantic front and back cover scans *with grader's notes* begin each round, then the grade guessing, and finally the label reveal. The archive goes back several years, so there's plenty to look at and learn from.

[Rob]

I think having examples in order of CGC graded 0.5 through 10.0 in one thread and then locking it would be very nice for an example to new board members...maybe unslabbed and slabbed of three or four different issues for each grade with fronts and backs....

 

Well, we've all seen 3 or 4 examples of each grade. I think your idea would definitely be a benefit for collectors new to CGC grading standards. However, as a "seasoned veteran" (but by no means an expert), I would like to see dozens of examples of grades. Sometimes a book gets a certain grade due to one larger flaw, sometimes it's an accumulation of tiny flaws. I say, the more we can see, the better.

[Rob]

OK, I started the threads. Can't wait to see comics of a particular grade range grouped together. I think this can be very educational!

[Rob]

Sorry, I should have been more specific. These posts were supposed to be a gallery of CGC-graded books, so we can develop our grading skills. I don't mean to knock anyone's personal grading skills, but it's better to learn by reviewing actual CGC grades, rather than someone's opinion of a raw comic. I appreciate the effort, but they should be scans of actual grades that CGC has given out.

[rodan57]

I think having examples in order of CGC graded 0.5 through 10.0 in one thread and then locking it would be very nice for an example to new board members...maybe unslabbed and slabbed of three or four different issues for each grade with fronts and backs....

 

Well, we've all seen 3 or 4 examples of each grade. I think your idea would definitely be a benefit for collectors new to CGC grading standards. However, as a "seasoned veteran" (but by no means an expert), I would like to see dozens of examples of grades. Sometimes a book gets a certain grade due to one larger flaw, sometimes it's an accumulation of tiny flaws. I say, the more we can see, the better.

 

I think this is an excellent idea. I would love to see dozens of examples of each CGC grade at one go. If, for example, over and over and over again you saw a certain type of book as being a 4.0, I think you could learn to eyeball an "initial" grade and then refine your judgment from that point.

 

This is certainly the sort of practice I could use in grading mid-range books.

 

Dennis

[Ze-man]

Sorry, I should have been more specific. These posts were supposed to be a gallery of CGC-graded books, so we can develop our grading skills.

 

 

I think it would also be beneficial if everyone included the grading notes along with their posted book.

 

Many times flaws are not visible from a scan.

 

Ze-

[Dick Pontoon]

Sorry, I should have been more specific. These posts were supposed to be a gallery of CGC-graded books, so we can develop our grading skills.

 

 

I think it would also be beneficial if everyone included the grading notes along with their posted book.

 

Many times flaws are not visible from a scan.

 

Ze-

 

Great idea for a thread! And that they be graded - the initial spate of raw books threw me, I assumed you meant graded. And more thumbnails, folks! These posts will be a pain to navigate if lots of books are added

 

And besides grading notes, I'd prefer to see scans prior to slabbing if people have them. Flaws will be much more visible.

[Rob]

I think this is an excellent idea. I would love to see dozens of examples of each CGC grade at one go. If, for example, over and over and over again you saw a certain type of book as being a 4.0, I think you could learn to eyeball an "initial" grade and then refine your judgment from that point.

 

That's what I was thinking when I had the idea!

 

I too was going to suggest calling out the flaws. Some of the CGC scans, I couldn't tell why it got the grade it did.

[Dick Pontoon]

Each grade specific thread might need a brief explanation of the purpose of the thread at the top, otherwise we'll have posts that won't be useful as a reference.

[divad]

I think these threads are stoopid.