C.G. Poll: Comics, Age and Grading.

[The Charlton Guy]

I am under the firm belief that all comic books should be graded by the same strict grading criteria regardless of age.


I think it's the only way to create a fair and balanced playing field for the evaluation and grading of books that may have been printed decades apart.

I am also a firm believer in the 1-10 grading scale, with 0.5 intervals, believing that it gives a tight, but not too tight range of grades. I think the OSG 1-10 scale is a near-perfect means to determine a comic's grade, regardless of age.

Given the above, I also believe that it is pretty darn close to a miracle to find a 40+ year old comic in greater than VF condition. This is mainly due to the poor paper, poor ink, poor printing methods, haphazard distribution techniques, poor display methods, and the fact that the vast majority of buyers (up to the mid-60's anyway) were snotty nosed kids.

Anyway, I would love to hear your take on this, either by poll or post or both.

[slucas76]

I think that the same criteria should be applied to books from all times and ages.

Why change the rules simply because a book is older? However, I am also of the mindset that searching for that perfect book from years ago is a fruitless one and perhaps should not be undertaken.

Them's the rules, though, and as long as everyone knows and plays by them, there's not much you can do.

Also, even if the grades were all applied according to the same criteria, I don't think that much would change because the scale would simply slide so that VF becomes GM (NM, whatever) and the pricing would follow suit.

MHO, of course, and I don't know much about grading at all. :lol:

[The Charlton Guy]

MHO, of course, and I don't know much about grading at all. :lol:

Yeah...right...

But I agree completely. Once you stretch back to the early 60's (I like to use 1965, still a "pre-comic-collector's" era), it becomes nearly impossible to find more than a handful of copies that would match the 9.4 or higher grading criteria that is used so strictly on high-tech-produced modern books.

And I strongly agree with you that one should learn to live with this fact and understand that a VF from 1950-1965 or as low as a VG from 1939 to 1950 may be about the finest one could reasonably expect to find without extensive restoration. I also agree that the perceived value and/or the market value of the said 1939-50 VG or 1950-65 VF should jump accordingly. As for a true NM from this period? Throw away the guide (as many do nowadays).

I won't go into the role of "professional grading" in all of this, other than to say that I don't trust their grading criteria or restoration detection skills any more than I trust a car mechanic doing brain surgery.

Bottom line (and thanks for pointing it out so early)...collectors would be wise to learn that it is not a matter of "settling for second-best" when purchasing a less-than-NM GA or early SA book. I'll take a solid Very Good GA book or Very Fine SA book any day.

[marvelguy]

One question, today's new comics has this high quality super duper GLOSSY pages, does it give it a WHITE pages status automatically? Whereas, the older comics, "newsprint" quality paper or "rags" as some people online likes to call them, lots of off-white pages, white pages, cream, etc.... :roll:. I think there should be some leeway to different grading standards due to paper quality now and then.

[The Charlton Guy]

Absolutely.

I don't see how a comic produced in the last 10-15 years could have anything other than white pages, unless it was intentionally produced with simulated-old-style newsprint or colorized/dyed, as some DC TPB reprints are). Or unless it was left in really horrible storage conditions (heat/cold/sun).

I have noticed that the OWL charts simply do not match the whiteness of modern books. At the brightest, they simulate what I consider, and usually note, as off-white to white.

I gave up on my "TAUPE TO FUSCOUS" designation...

[rowand]

So you're the infamous Toupe Dancer that everyone was Fuchia about!

... and now CG wearing the regal robes of the Puce and Fuchia King bordered in E.B.White and framed by the powers-that-be.

[SatansProdigy]

You sure do talk purty CG!

Anyway, I agree wiith having one standard for grading.

[The Charlton Guy]

... and now CG wearing the regal robes of the Puce and Fuchia King bordered in E.B.White and framed by the powers-that-be.

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a240/the-charlton-guy/cg-heaven.jpg

[mordo]

CG, I agree with you 100%! There should be one universal grading standard for all comics regardless of age. I think people who fudge on grading an older book is doing so because somewhere in the back of their mind they want to make a little more money off of it. If it weren't about money there wouldn't be an issue in the first place.

[malaprop]

Having come in last in the most recent round of Grading, I don't feel my reputation is in any danger of slipping. That said, I wil give a limited agreement with the one set of rules opinion, with one small exception. That is on the weighting that should be given color brightness and page color on 40 year + books. The laws of nature being what they are, an otherwise perfect old book that shows slight discoloration from age should not be compared with the brightness of last month's issue of Infinite Screwups #783. It should be compared with other 40year + books. Not that I'd ever give it a 10.0, but the weighting of the color factor should be minimalized on the old books.

[malaprop]

I meant minimized. I hate it when I mess up words.

[oxbladder]

I am under the firm belief that all comic books should be graded by the same strict grading criteria regardless of age.

I learned from a young age that age plays no role. CGC and the big boys changed this and I do not like it one bit. There are books out there that do fit the criteria of better than VF for sure but they are not as common as CGC and others have lead us to believe. Indeed this soft age criteria has led to an enormous amount of book manipulation and a redefinition of restoration to the detriment of all collectors.

There exists a huge double standard now too because of it. Many people who accept this soft on age criteria by CGC still have the old "standard" in their heads so that whenever any raw seller on ebay or otherwise tries to sell under the same rules they get lambasted on forums everywhere. As far as I am concerned many honest sellers have been losing out or not even bothering with the market because of this which hurts us.

CGC's sliding grade scale and Overstreet's cozying up to such standards has created a market where there are less people learning and confident with grading skills which opens the door for those who are in the know of the sliding rules to profit. Again to the disadvantage of your average joe collector.

I have stated many times on a number of boards that I do believe in third party grading but the current structure is fraught with problems and corruption. I will not support any grading company nor do I trust the grading from them. Until they standardize their processes it is a massively costly game to play. I will stick with mostly grabbing raw and local and only venturing on to the online market when needed and with a huge amount of caution.

Raw or graded it a crap shoot.

[aarondawe]

I feel older books should be graded the same as new as well. The only exceptions being that the printing quality of books from older years be taken into account. I don't know if a glossy cover from the '80's looks the same as a glossy cover from the '50's would have had when intially published -- I doubt that they would. But these are small differences in overall grade. Cover gloss and page whiteness don't have a huge impact on overall grade anyway (from what I've seen).

Now, structural damage to a book should be treated the same whether a book was published yesterday or 60 years ago. And rarity should not allow for a sliding scale. That's just stupid.

Aaron

[SILLYSHIP--pirate eye--]

"2I think people who fudge on grading an older book is doing so because somewhere in the back of their mind they want to make a little more money off of it. If it weren't about money there wouldn't be an issue in the first place."

Everyday I see this on eBay. If it weren't for money????



malaprop said
"That said, I wil give a limited agreement with the one set of rules opinion, with one small exception. That is on the weighting that should be given color brightness and page color on 40 year + books. The laws of nature being what they are, an otherwise perfect old book that shows slight discoloration from age should not be compared with the brightness of last month's issue of Infinite Screwups #783. It should be compared with other 40year + books. Not that I'd ever give it a 10.0, but the weighting of the color factor should be minimalized on the old books."

NO NO NO, all books should be graded as if they could have been a 10 when they were brand new. I recently bought a GA All American #32 and when looking at it with a friend who was buying them when they came out he pointed out the differences in priting methods. Yes, the older books look different, but should be graded as if they were new.

"As far as I am concerned many honest sellers have been losing out or not even bothering with the market because of this which hurts us."

Doesn't hurt us if they are selling them cheap.

"I will stick with mostly grabbing raw and local and only venturing on to the online market when needed and with a huge amount of caution."

Exactly

"I don't know if a glossy cover from the '80's looks the same as a glossy cover from the '50's would have had when intially published -- I doubt that they would."

No, they don't look the same, the paper is different, the inks are different and the printing is different and so they should be graded according to how a 10.0 book printed in that time period, brand new and in 10.0 condition would have looked like.

"Now, structural damage to a book should be treated the same whether a book was published yesterday or 60 years ago. And rarity should not allow for a sliding scale. That's just stupid."

Quoting Frank Abagnale Jr. , I concur.

"I'll take a solid Very Good GA book or Very Fine SA book any day."

I totally agree. After all what is the most expensive high grade book of all time? And what condition is it in?

So when do we see the CGC standards of GA books chage to represent 8.2 and 8.7 books?