Beauty is in the eye of the beholder 2 2

[Flex Mentallo]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder

A mini debate in another thread sparked this thought, though I'm not sure whether or not it has been covered elsewhere. We all know that CGC tends to put the emphasis on technical grade over eye appeal, presumably because technical matters can be measured fairly consistently, while beauty is in the eye of the holder.

 

So here you can post examples from your collection of either books with great eye appeal regardless of the technical grade, and conversely, books with a high grade but relatively low eye appeal.

 

I think this one is possibly my most beautiful book, and it is fairly high grade as well.

 

 

[gino2paulus2]

I got a few that i believe present very nicely for the grade. None will be high grade as I swim on the other side of the pool but still a fun topic!! This tough Ace fits the bill

 

[gino2paulus2]

This one got hammered for the stain and  because it ROCKs!!

 

[gino2paulus2]

Sorry for iphone glare but this is proof that not all 1.5s are created equal at least visually speaking...

 

Edited April 7, 2017 by gino2paulus2

[comicjack]

This one drips colors for the grade

 

[comicjack]

This one is a looker with bright colors and amazing paper if it was an #8 it would be better 

 

[comicjack]

This one not so much for the grade but the colors are awesome along with the paper 

 

[comicjack]

1 hour ago, gino2paulus2 said:

This one got hammered for the stain and  because it ROCKs!!

 

Training them early !

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

Rather nice 

3 hours ago, gino2paulus2 said:

Sorry for iphone glare but this is proof that not all 1.5s are created equal at least visually speaking...

 

 

2 hours ago, comicjack said:

This one not so much for the grade but the colors are awesome along with the paper 

 

 

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

3 hours ago, gino2paulus2 said:

This one got hammered for the stain 

 

Are we talking about the baby or the book?

Edited April 7, 2017 by Grantley Goddard

[Flex Mentallo]

This one presents way better than the given grade.

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

5 minutes ago, Flex Mentallo said:

This one presents way better than the given grade.

There are so many things I like about this book.

1. It's a Planet

2. Sensational cover.

3. Sensational colours

4. Ingels art noted

5. Old old label

6. It belonged to Cage

7. The spine looks plump, prob not pressed

8. The wrap

Fantastic 

Edited April 7, 2017 by Grantley Goddard

[gino2paulus2]

42 minutes ago, Grantley Goddard said:

Are we talking about the baby or the book?

 ??. Both ROCK!! ??

Edited April 7, 2017 by gino2paulus2
typo

[Straw-Man]

love the look/colors of this 5.0.  looks 7.0 in the holder.

[ender]

4 hours ago, Flex Mentallo said:

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder

A mini debate in another thread sparked this thought, though I'm not sure whether or not it has been covered elsewhere. We all know that CGC tends to put the emphasis on technical grade over eye appeal, presumably because technical matters can be measured fairly consistently, while beauty is in the eye of the holder.

 

So here you can post examples from your collection of either books with great eye appeal regardless of the technical grade, and conversely, books with a high grade but relatively low eye appeal.

 

I think this one is possibly my most beautiful book, and it is fairly high grade as well.

 

 

Gotta say you have pretty high standards when a 9.2 on a book from 1944 is "fairly high grade"    totally agree about it being a really beautiful book!

[Straw-Man]

my interest in this title doesn't go this deeply into the run, but grabbed this'un solely cuz the colors popped so vividly.

[Sqeggs]

I'll go the other way, with a book that's probably overgraded.

I love this Baker cover, but the tanning along the spine and the damage at the bottom makes giving it a 6.0 a stretch for me. (Please forget I ever said this should I try to sell this copy to you, in which case it's a rare beauty, I tell you, an undergraded beauty!)

[Sqeggs]

At the other end, these two Baker 5.0s were hammered for creases (rightly, I think, in a technical sense), but the books both appeal to me beyond their grades.

[Sqeggs]

And while we're on Bakers (which I usually am!), here's a very appealing 4.5.

[Flex Mentallo]

49 minutes ago, ender said:

Gotta say you have pretty high standards when a 9.2 on a book from 1944 is "fairly high grade"    totally agree about it being a really beautiful book!

Point taken. 

Somewhere out there is the Church copy, which may or may not be the 9.6 that tops the census. I suppose it's also that this copy has eye appeal that - arguably - exceeds the given grade, because it looks so fresh... everything is relative...