Q&A Comic Production Flaws
14 14

501 posts in this topic

3,321 posts
On 7/7/2017 at 10:52 AM, newshane said:

 

Thanks for the insight Kevin! I'm somewhat familiar with the web press they used while I was in the newspaper business. While I worked in the press room at one point, I never operated the press itself. Back in the late 90s, I used to perform CMYK color adjustments to images before they would enter the plate process. That's about the limit of my knowledge.

Perhaps my grammar was poor, but I didn't mean to say "production flaws become released." I was talking about production flaws on a book that was recently released. How does CGC learn about these issues and what part do they play in grading? Kind of like what happened with Wolverine 35. It seemed like CGC was willing to overlook a production flaw in handing out 9.8s...at least in a few instances, until more perfect books came to light.

If you wouldn't mind, take a look at the picture. You'll see the arrow pointing to the color loss. It's hard to capture in photos, but you might be able to see the "indentation" to which I'm referring...basically a straight and narrow "scratch" that made contact with the book in a few places. I've placed a square around the area where it shows up best.

I'm sorry that's the best I can do, but based on the photos...what do you think happened and how harshly would the CGC treat it? After personally viewing and handling several examples, a well-known expert told me he was more concerned with the color loss than the "indentation" left by whatever part of the machine did the damage.

Thoughts?

deferct.jpg

UPDATE: I submitted three of the best copies I could find. All of them had the same issue with the color rub...just like every other single copy that I found.

All three came back as a 9.6.

No love shown for this defect. I can tell you now, Spawn 275 is going to be almost impossible to find in 9.8.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
315 posts
On 8/23/2017 at 0:54 PM, BlowUpTheMoon said:

Here's a book missing the black ink from the cover.

599ddd5f08c0f_noblackink.jpg.b1fe3bdde2eb1308e83c3d75182a48d8.jpg

Since it's a green label I guess that means they gave the comic a grade without factoring in the manufacturing error? I wonder then if that blue label takes the flaw it into account when grading, or if I subbed my comic if I'd have the option of blue label or green label, like with a book that has writing on it or something where you can specify. Interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,127 posts
7 hours ago, sorb3t said:

Since it's a green label I guess that means they gave the comic a grade without factoring in the manufacturing error? I wonder then if that blue label takes the flaw it into account when grading, or if I subbed my comic if I'd have the option of blue label or green label, like with a book that has writing on it or something where you can specify. Interesting.

This book was graded in 2008, perhaps they have changed their stance and it would now get a Blue Label. They will not consult with you on whether you want a Blue or Green Label but I think you can ask in advance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,275 posts
On 8/22/2017 at 1:49 AM, adrainsmith said:

FANdemonium Network has a collection of comics books. View it online....

GTFO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,525 posts

I got the grade on my JSA Classified 1 It looked like a surefire 9.8 until I saw 2 small blisters on the back cover due to too much heat from the heatset oven when they printed the book, I was wondering if CGC  would downgrade the book over a production flaw. 

Came back 9.4  Grader Notes "Printer's bubble Back Cover"  

So now we know they do downgrade books for production flaws.  Book was flawless except that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
320 posts

Question: my copy of FOOM #2 doesn't have any staples nor holes to indicate they were removed. Is this a production flaw or were they all printed this way and if not, does this do anything to the value?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,525 posts
On 10/10/2017 at 5:45 PM, B2D327 said:

Question: my copy of FOOM #2 doesn't have any staples nor holes to indicate they were removed. Is this a production flaw or were they all printed this way and if not, does this do anything to the value?

The covers are printed separate from the insides, one book just happened to have not been stapled 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,127 posts
On 10/5/2017 at 5:27 PM, Kevin76 said:

I got the grade on my JSA Classified 1 It looked like a surefire 9.8 until I saw 2 small blisters on the back cover due to too much heat from the heatset oven when they printed the book, I was wondering if CGC  would downgrade the book over a production flaw. 

Came back 9.4  Grader Notes "Printer's bubble Back Cover"  

So now we know they do downgrade books for production flaws.  Book was flawless except that.  

Thanks for the FYI.  Interesting. I had a SA book that looked 9.4 to me but had a 'printer's bubble' on the FC. It graded 9.0 .  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,525 posts
12 hours ago, Bomber-Bob said:

Thanks for the FYI.  Interesting. I had a SA book that looked 9.4 to me but had a 'printer's bubble' on the FC. It graded 9.0 .  

Must have been a big bubble, this was pretty small and there were 2 of them. Coated paper is worse when it blisters.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,127 posts
4 hours ago, Kevin76 said:

Must have been a big bubble, this was pretty small and there were 2 of them. Coated paper is worse when it blisters.  

Actually, I still have the book. Here is a picture. It may be difficult to see but it is to the left of the A in Adventure of the title.

 

IMG_3186.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,525 posts

Yea I can't see it through a picture, I'd have to see it in person. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21,675 posts
On ‎11‎/‎18‎/‎2017 at 8:23 PM, Bomber-Bob said:

Thanks for the FYI.  Interesting. I had a SA book that looked 9.4 to me but had a 'printer's bubble' on the FC. It graded 9.0 .  

They used to be a lot easier on that flaw, maybe when Borock left they changed their stance on it. Had an Iron Man #1 that looked 8.0 at best (due to the bubbles) come back 9.2, but this was a long time ago.

Edited by joeypost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38,745 posts

WTF is a "printer's bubble"??? That's a new one to me. (Guess I haven't gone around the block enough times . . . ) :grin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,525 posts
Posted (edited)
On 1/18/2018 at 12:03 AM, divad said:

WTF is a "printer's bubble"??? That's a new one to me. (Guess I haven't gone around the block enough times . . . ) :grin:

After the ink is applied to the sheet of paper, it goes into a heatset oven to dry the ink, if the oven temp is too hot, the paper being run through (usually coated walking dead type of stock) will cause the paper to blister and create bubbles

Edited by Kevin76

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38,745 posts
1 hour ago, Kevin76 said:

After the ink is applied to the sheet of paper, it goes into a heatset oven to dry the ink, if the oven temp is too hot, the paper being run through (usually coated walking dead type of stock) will cause the paper to blister and create bubbles

Thanks Kevin! Out of my bailiwick. :preach:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 posts

Greetings all. I have been sending comics to CGC for just over two years now. Recently, I dipped into about 20 Venom LP #1's and the majority came back 9.8 with a few at 9.6. As I was recently going through about 25 others from what now seems to be a different "batch" if you will, most are 9.8/9.6 after careful scrutiny, other than just about every one having what appears to be the result of a dull-blade cut on only the bottom edge of the front cover. This is consistent with all of the issues. Your experienced thoughts on this is much appreciated as I'm thinking of only sending 1 or 2 in my next wave that are what I believe 9.8+ to see how this may/may not affect the grade.

Thank you for your time.

Aaron

Venom Bad Cut 1.jpg

Venom Bad Cut 2.jpg

Venom Bad Cut 3.jpg

Venom Bad Cut 3.jpg

Venom Bad Cut 4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,961 posts
28 minutes ago, Acegraphix said:

Greetings all. I have been sending comics to CGC for just over two years now. Recently, I dipped into about 20 Venom LP #1's and the majority came back 9.8 with a few at 9.6. As I was recently going through about 25 others from what now seems to be a different "batch" if you will, most are 9.8/9.6 after careful scrutiny, other than just about every one having what appears to be the result of a dull-blade cut on only the bottom edge of the front cover. This is consistent with all of the issues. Your experienced thoughts on this is much appreciated as I'm thinking of only sending 1 or 2 in my next wave that are what I believe 9.8+ to see how this may/may not affect the grade.

Thank you for your time.

Aaron

Venom Bad Cut 1.jpg

Venom Bad Cut 2.jpg

Venom Bad Cut 3.jpg

Venom Bad Cut 3.jpg

Venom Bad Cut 4.jpg

Those should come back 9.8, baring any other defects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
734 posts

(I posted this in the "Ask CGC" section, but it's pending approval, so I might as well ask here until I can get a proper CGC response)

I bought 3 copies of the Black Panther Cape and Cowl virgin variant and all 3 books have the same color breaking spine tick pictured below.  I asked the staff to check for other copies and they all appeared to have the same issue (staff must have looked at 10 books).  I also asked the owner who said that they reviewed a lot of the books for damages and that all books had the issue.  Now, I know if there's a known production defect, the defect will be ignored and will not count against the grade.  Most recently with Action Comics #1000 Jim Lee tour variant.  In most cases, I presume that CGC gets a lot of books and is able to verify for themselves "yes, a lot of the books all have the same damage so we won't dock them for it."  But in a case like the Cape and Cowl variant which is already limited to a production run of 3000 copies, AND catered to a local market (vs available to all markets or large public sales) which must reduce the number of collectors that would submit the book for grading, I'm guessing there won't be as many copies of the book coming to the Sarasota office for grading which thus limits them seeing firsthand for themselves that the damage is across most of the production run.  What evidence is enough for the grader to ignore it as a production defect?  I had hoped to submit a copy of both the trade dress and virgin variants for grading in the hopes of securing two 9.8s, but under normal circumstances, none of those books would seem to qualify (I'm guessing they'd get knocked down to 9.4s).  I would also hate to be one of the first to submit only for CGC to, at a later date, determine that the book had a production defect.

IMG_02051.thumb.jpg.a127a583f954a02dfd3c284036a64f98.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,127 posts
10 hours ago, ExNihilo said:

(I posted this in the "Ask CGC" section, but it's pending approval, so I might as well ask here until I can get a proper CGC response)

I bought 3 copies of the Black Panther Cape and Cowl virgin variant and all 3 books have the same color breaking spine tick pictured below.  I asked the staff to check for other copies and they all appeared to have the same issue (staff must have looked at 10 books).  I also asked the owner who said that they reviewed a lot of the books for damages and that all books had the issue.  Now, I know if there's a known production defect, the defect will be ignored and will not count against the grade.  Most recently with Action Comics #1000 Jim Lee tour variant.  In most cases, I presume that CGC gets a lot of books and is able to verify for themselves "yes, a lot of the books all have the same damage so we won't dock them for it."  But in a case like the Cape and Cowl variant which is already limited to a production run of 3000 copies, AND catered to a local market (vs available to all markets or large public sales) which must reduce the number of collectors that would submit the book for grading, I'm guessing there won't be as many copies of the book coming to the Sarasota office for grading which thus limits them seeing firsthand for themselves that the damage is across most of the production run.  What evidence is enough for the grader to ignore it as a production defect?  I had hoped to submit a copy of both the trade dress and virgin variants for grading in the hopes of securing two 9.8s, but under normal circumstances, none of those books would seem to qualify (I'm guessing they'd get knocked down to 9.4s).  I would also hate to be one of the first to submit only for CGC to, at a later date, determine that the book had a production defect.

IMG_02051.thumb.jpg.a127a583f954a02dfd3c284036a64f98.jpg

I don't think CGC will answer you here as they don't like to comment on grading without the book in hand. It's a legitimate question but definitely difficult to answer. I suspect you are correct that until they see a number of books, they can't make a bindery call. I'm not sure but I don't think a spine tick is usually considered bindery. It is usually caused by handling. Corner chips, staple issues and things of that nature may get a pass but not sure about a spine tick. The only suggestion I have is submit it in a larger pre-screen submission.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
734 posts
26 minutes ago, Bomber-Bob said:

I don't think CGC will answer you here as they don't like to comment on grading without the book in hand. It's a legitimate question but definitely difficult to answer. I suspect you are correct that until they see a number of books, they can't make a bindery call. I'm not sure but I don't think a spine tick is usually considered bindery. It is usually caused by handling. Corner chips, staple issues and things of that nature may get a pass but not sure about a spine tick. The only suggestion I have is submit it in a larger pre-screen submission.

That's a bummer.  I don't have enough copies for a pre-screen sub.  I had hoped that I might one day be able to track down the creators (Coates, Acuna, and Jamal Campbell) for sigs, but I would be a little disappointed to not be able to get a 9.8.  Maybe I'll have to go back to the store and see if 1 of the other 100 copies or so they had waiting to be picked up are any better.  :sorry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
14 14