How was this not called out for trimming? 1 1

[DarthRawn]

Hey everyone! I have a question about something I am seeing quite frequently...

If you look along the right side there is a clear increasing angle of space on the descension, I wonder how something like this doesn't get a purple label? 

This just seems glaringly obvious that there has been a trimming attempt, along with the cut just searing Thing's elbow where untrimmed comics have a space between his elbow and the edge.

 

[crazyhips]

That could just be how it was cut. Comic production was not as exact back then as it is today and it could have been cut at an angle during production.  

[Point Five]

Welcome to the boards!

2 hours ago, DarthRawn said:

This just seems glaringly obvious that there has been a trimming attempt, along with the cut just searing Thing's elbow where untrimmed comics have a space between his elbow and the edge.

 

What crazyhips said. I'd trust CGC on this one. Older comics have all kinds of odd production miscuts and miswraps, even within a single issue. You can't look at the wrap on one random copy and extrapolate to all the other copies.
 

[joeypost]

Legit question, or pot stirrer? 

[aardvark88]

17 minutes ago, joeypost said:

Legit question, or pot stirrer? 

Pot-stirrer although I have seen similiar miscuts on Steranko Nick Fury's from 1968.

[Bomber-Bob]

3 hours ago, aardvark88 said:

Pot-stirrer although I have seen similiar miscuts on Steranko Nick Fury's from 1968.

Good example. The right edge of Daredevil #1 is usually angled, protruding out near the bottom.

[DarthRawn]

4 hours ago, Point Five said:

Welcome to the boards!

What crazyhips said. I'd trust CGC on this one. Older comics have all kinds of odd production miscuts and miswraps, even within a single issue. You can't look at the wrap on one random copy and extrapolate to all the other copies.
 

Thank you for your reply. I just have seen so many people on ebay trying to sell off restored copies of FF52. Some of them had specific markings or pen written on it that you can see was altered but still present in the exact same locations. I am in the market for another copy and trying to improve my grade on the one i purchase. It just made me worried that these altered copies could slip past inspection.

4 hours ago, joeypost said:

Legit question, or pot stirrer? 

Legit question.

3 hours ago, aardvark88 said:

Pot-stirrer although I have seen similiar miscuts on Steranko Nick Fury's from 1968.

Wrong. I didn't know miscuts were such a common phenomenon. 

[DarthRawn]

5 hours ago, crazyhips said:

That could just be how it was cut. Comic production was not as exact back then as it is today and it could have been cut at an angle during production.  

Thank you for your reply.

5 minutes ago, Bomber-Bob said:

Good example. The right edge of Daredevil #1 is usually angled, protruding out near the bottom.

I will look for this. Thank you for the info

[James J Johnson]

12 hours ago, DarthRawn said:

Thank you for your reply.

I will look for this. Thank you for the info

But oddly angled miscut or not, since they're all cut on the same machinery, by the same blades, and assembled likewise, they all typically have the same characteristic inside pages progressing out, beyond the covers to the centerfold and then reversing itself so the right edges of 1961 to 1967 Marvels typically look like this:  >  ,  rather than this:  ] .

Of course, there are exceptions to every rule, and this 52 looks like one of them except that since the interior pages cannot be seen at all, and since they don't peek out from under the covers on the long open edge, unusual on 52s, in this case a scan is useless to determine any evidence of what may be trim.

The fact that the bottom edge of this book, left to right, is just shy of 6 and 3/4" where the norm is usually 6 and 7/8's from the edge of the spine to the right edge of the centerfold, I'm sure that the CGC spent more time than usual examining those page edges for evidence of fresh cuts atypical from what the machinery produced. Of interest is that the top sizes full, left to right, about 6 and 7/8ths spine to right cover edge.

Further, size alone is never a good indicator in making the final assessment on trim! Size can serve as a red flag, drawing your attention to fine details and making you suspicious of trim, necessitating further examination. But that examination of page ends and the way they line up relevant to how they were initially produced should serve as the determining factor.

[DarthRawn]

15 hours ago, James J Johnson said:

But oddly angled miscut or not, since they're all cut on the same machinery, by the same blades, and assembled likewise, they all typically have the same characteristic inside pages progressing out, beyond the covers to the centerfold and then reversing itself so the right edges of 1961 to 1967 Marvels typically look like this:  >  ,  rather than this:  ] .

Of course, there are exceptions to every rule, and this 52 looks like one of them except that since the interior pages cannot be seen at all, and since they don't peek out from under the covers on the long open edge, unusual on 52s, in this case a scan is useless to determine any evidence of what may be trim.

The fact that the bottom edge of this book, left to right, is just shy of 6 and 3/4" where the norm is usually 6 and 7/8's from the edge of the spine to the right edge of the centerfold, I'm sure that the CGC spent more time than usual examining those page edges for evidence of fresh cuts atypical from what the machinery produced. Of interest is that the top sizes full, left to right, about 6 and 7/8ths spine to right cover edge.

Further, size alone is never a good indicator in making the final assessment on trim! Size can serve as a red flag, drawing your attention to fine details and making you suspicious of trim, necessitating further examination. But that examination of page ends and the way they line up relevant to how they were initially produced should serve as the determining factor.

That was very detailed, thank you for the lesson. So it seems as if there is no way to tell about trimmed comics on ebay then, minus finding the same comic with very specific marks show up 2 weeks later...

So graded comics are the safest approach to buying on ebay? 

[James J Johnson]

2 hours ago, DarthRawn said:

That was very detailed, thank you for the lesson. So it seems as if there is no way to tell about trimmed comics on ebay then, minus finding the same comic with very specific marks show up 2 weeks later...

So graded comics are the safest approach to buying on ebay? 

Graded comics are the safest approach to buying anywhere. Online and off. On ebay and elsewhere. That's not to say that a grading company can't make a mistake. It's a general rule. Trim is very hard to detect for most. Let's keep in mind that the comic being examined for trim has already been trimmed once, by the manufacturer. In many cases, the tell for a comic that's been re-trimmed (technically, the proper name for a trimmed comic, since every comic is already trimmed) is the way in which the edges are machined. To determine if the edge is synonymous with normal production at the time of manufacturing! Each comic that is cut on the same machinery, will maintain the characteristics of its original trim. For those that find it difficult to tell for sure, grading companies (2 out of 3 anyway, lol) are the safe haven as their detection people are in the upper 5% of those in the hobby that have that ability.

[rob_react]

On 2/11/2018 at 3:43 PM, Bomber-Bob said:

Good example. The right edge of Daredevil #1 is usually angled, protruding out near the bottom.

+1000

[rob_react]

I made an image a while ago, showing the differences in the size and shape of Daredevil #1s. They can vary wildly. 

[Dick Pontoon]

Miscuts on this book seem pretty common. I've seen others with the same angle, including my keeper.

[James J Johnson]

7 hours ago, rob_react said:

I made an image a while ago, showing the differences in the size and shape of Daredevil #1s. They can vary wildly. 

X-Men #40. That's the one with the widest discrepancy of manufacturing tolerances I've noted with respect to size and shape. I've measured one that was literally a giant. Slightly more than 7 and 3/8ths" across the top edge and less than 6 and 11/16ths" across the bottom edge, a trapezoid! I also noted other X 40s similarly small, serrated factory edge and all, like the DD 1s, shaped like a trapezoid.

[chrisco37]

SA Marvels, as others have said, can vary widely.  It's a blue label so, chances are, it's fine (not saying stuff doesn't get by CGC).  In any case, if it makes you nervous, pass on it.  The best thing about SA Marvels is that they are relatively common and another copy will come up.  

That said, not sure now is the time to be buying Black Panther books.  Wait a few months for the movie madness to calm down.  

[ThothAmon]

I’ve got this one at CGC now. Given what some have said here I now have hope for a blue label!

 

[James J Johnson]

40 minutes ago, ThothAmon said:

I’ve got this one at CGC now. Given what some have said here I now have hope for a blue label!

 

Can you post a back cover image of this 33?

[chrisco37]

1 hour ago, ThothAmon said:

I’ve got this one at CGC now. Given what some have said here I now have hope for a blue label!

 

I think you'll be fine on this.  

[James J Johnson]

Also, there appears to be a small, obelisk-shaped shard of paper in the bag, at the extreme bottom right. Curious as to what that is; if that is a piece of something and not just a figment of glare, the bag, and the wood background.