Are Newton Rings 'normal and acceptable'? 6 6

[Get Marwood & I]

A chance to voice your opinion and send a message to CGC

Edited July 21, 2018 by Get Marwood & I
Added a question

[Get Marwood & I]

 

And who could forget:

 

[punksdropdirtysrh]

I think they are “normal” because I understand how they would be created. However whether or not they are acceptable is sometimes a case by case basis. Pun intended. I think if it really distracts or makes the art look ugly, it is of course unacceptable. These cases were updated to a nice clear plastic to enhance the look of the book. Unfortunately that seems to have backfired. I don’t have any ideas on how to completely solve the problem, other than being more aware of it during quality control and having no hesitation to recase the book before returning it to the customer.

In my opinion it’s not just the Newton rings that are upsetting customers (and potential customers) it’s the cgc’s response to the issue. There’s no way they can see the horrible examples of this and just shrug it off. 

[Artboy99]

Just now, punksdropdirtysrh said:

I think they are “normal” because I understand how they would be created. However whether or not they are acceptable is sometimes a case by case basis. Pun intended. I think if it really distracts or makes the art look ugly, it is of course unacceptable. These cases were updated to a nice clear plastic to enhance the look of the book. Unfortunately that seems to have backfired. I don’t have any ideas on how to completely solve the problem, other than being more aware of it during quality control and having no hesitation to recase the book before returning it to the customer.

In my opinion it’s not just the Newton rings that are upsetting customers (and potential customers) it’s the cgc’s response to the issue. There’s no way they can see the horrible examples of this and just shrug it off. 

I have solutions but they all cost money and that is the likely issue.

1. increase the depth of the case design so that the case front doesn't touch the inner well anymore

2. Go back to the old cases ( costs money because I am sure they have either millions of the new cases in inventory or a contract with the manufacturer to order large quantity).

[Get Marwood & I]

13 minutes ago, punksdropdirtysrh said:

In my opinion it’s not just the Newton rings that are upsetting customers (and potential customers) it’s the cgc’s response to the issue. There’s no way they can see the horrible examples of this and just shrug it off. 

Added a question to cover this. 

[Larryw7]

11 hours ago, Artboy99 said:

I have solutions but they all cost money and that is the likely issue.

1. increase the depth of the case design so that the case front doesn't touch the inner well anymore

2. Go back to the old cases ( costs money because I am sure they have either millions of the new cases in inventory or a contract with the manufacturer to order large quantity).

I would love it if they went back to the old cases.

[comicdonna]

I like the clarity and style of the new cases.  CGC needs to take it one step further, and fix the newton ring problem.  I think the cost  of fixing it will out way the lost revenue that will occur if they don't.  

[Artboy99]

13 minutes ago, comicdonna said:

I like the clarity and style of the new cases.  CGC needs to take it one step further, and fix the newton ring problem.  I think the cost  of fixing it will out way the lost revenue that will occur if they don't.  

definitely agree! 

What an outstanding case it is when it doesn't have that ugly effect.

[DanCooper]

17 hours ago, Artboy99 said:

I have solutions but they all cost money and that is the likely issue.

1. increase the depth of the case design so that the case front doesn't touch the inner well anymore

2. Go back to the old cases ( costs money because I am sure they have either millions of the new cases in inventory or a contract with the manufacturer to order large quantity).

 

  Definitely think you are on the right track there with #1. The key correction seems to be a deeper (and perhaps thicker) case.

As far as #2, the main reason CGC went the route of a new case was because the main material in the old case (barex) was being discontinued by the manufacturer. Finding an alternative manufacturer for barex was probably explored, but deemed too costly.

 

Edited July 22, 2018 by DanCooper

[Get Marwood & I]

Great participation so far! Be great if we could get to a hundred plus votes. Maybe someone would then take note and make a statement...

[ExNihilo]

Well, I guess I'm the outlier here...  

1. Is it acceptable?  Yes, in a way.  My primary purpose for slabbing is two fold, authentication (of sigs) and preservation.  The slab serves its purpose in that regard (or at least I hope it will in 30 years time).  Appearance is secondary to preservation as far as I'm concerned.  Is it normal?  No.  You wouldn't buy a picture frame that distorts the image you're attempting to showcase, so we shouldn't have slabs that have Newton Rings either.  But if I have to put up with some Newton Rings to ensure the long term preservation of my book, then I can live with that.  My books spend 99% of the time tucked away in a box anyways so its not like it affects me that much.

[DavidTheDavid]

I want preservation, ease of handling, and very importantly, presentation. I have no plans to submit anything, to CGC at least, in part because of this issue.

[Gaard]

I have never owned a company so this is an honest question...

Is it normal for a company to tell it's customers what is an acceptable amount of defects?

[I like pie]

1 hour ago, Gaard said:

I have never owned a company so this is an honest question...

Is it normal for a company to tell it's customers what is an acceptable amount of defects?

"It's not a defect."

[Artboy99]

8 hours ago, ExNihilo said:

Well, I guess I'm the outlier here...  

1. Is it acceptable?  Yes, in a way.  My primary purpose for slabbing is two fold, authentication (of sigs) and preservation.  The slab serves its purpose in that regard (or at least I hope it will in 30 years time).  Appearance is secondary to preservation as far as I'm concerned.  Is it normal?  No.  You wouldn't buy a picture frame that distorts the image you're attempting to showcase, so we shouldn't have slabs that have Newton Rings either.  But if I have to put up with some Newton Rings to ensure the long term preservation of my book, then I can live with that.  My books spend 99% of the time tucked away in a box anyways so its not like it affects me that much.

why bother submitting? Books in a mylar would serve the same purpose for you.

We submit our books to get a 3rd party to grade that is accepted by both sides in a transaction. To have the end product look fantastic is required in this instance as comic collecting is inherently visual. 

[steveinthecity]

48 minutes ago, Artboy99 said:

why bother submitting? Books in a mylar would serve the same purpose for you.

We submit our books to get a 3rd party to grade that is accepted by both sides in a transaction. To have the end product look fantastic is required in this instance as comic collecting is inherently visual. 

There's still the Sig verification and restoration check to consider here.

[Artboy99]

39 minutes ago, steveinthecity said:

There's still the Sig verification and restoration check to consider here.

Absolutely, but I see no reason why the final presentation needs to suffer for those.

[Get Marwood & I]

1 hour ago, Bumble Kitty said:

I brought this up to Matt at CGC.  I showed him a book I recently received and he told me they (meaning CGC) are aware of the problem.  The problem is happening at Quality Control.  Apparently, they have many different size holders and the operator is not choosing the correct size.  He said the outer holder needs a little space to prevent the Newton "effect" from showing up.  I told him the one book with the thickest holder does not have the Newton ring problem, which kind of confirms what he was telling me. 

He could not confirm that a change in personnel led to this problem, but he thought it could be the reason. Steps are being implemented to prevent this from happening with future books.  He told me to submit my book (or books) for reholdering.  I told him I plan to wait until Wondercon, as I did not have all of my "problem" books with me.  Matt said CGC would honor the reholdering at that time.

So it appears the Newton ring problem was possibly caused by someone who may not have been as experienced in choosing the correct outer holder size.  If nothing else, nobody was charged extra for the "pretty" oily rings. 

 

[Gaard]

39 minutes ago, Get Marwood & I said:

 

I'm not sure I understand. How can it be a QC problem, but at the same time, is caused by a the operator choosing the wrong size slab. Aren't those 2 different steps (people) in the process?

[Get Marwood & I]

2 hours ago, Gaard said:

I'm not sure I understand. How can it be a QC problem, but at the same time, is caused by a the operator choosing the wrong size slab. Aren't those 2 different steps (people) in the process?

I'm not sure either Gaard

@Bumble Kitty - hope you don't mind my reposting your post here. Can you elaborate?

 

Bumble Kitty said:

I brought this up to Matt at CGC.  I showed him a book I recently received and he told me they (meaning CGC) are aware of the problem.  The problem is happening at Quality Control.  Apparently, they have many different size holders and the operator is not choosing the correct size.  He said the outer holder needs a little space to prevent the Newton "effect" from showing up.  I told him the one book with the thickest holder does not have the Newton ring problem, which kind of confirms what he was telling me. 

He could not confirm that a change in personnel led to this problem, but he thought it could be the reason. Steps are being implemented to prevent this from happening with future books.  He told me to submit my book (or books) for reholdering.  I told him I plan to wait until Wondercon, as I did not have all of my "problem" books with me.  Matt said CGC would honor the reholdering at that time.

So it appears the Newton ring problem was possibly caused by someone who may not have been as experienced in choosing the correct outer holder size.  If nothing else, nobody was charged extra for the "pretty" oily rings.