Page Quality and OWL

[PovertyRow]

Has anyone been able to actually use the OWL guide that was packaged with the first Overstreet grading guide? At least on the card I had, as soon as you get one level below white the thing is unnaturally brown and dark.

 

I can understand why they used 4-color process - it is cheaper. They should have gone to inks pre-mixed to the right shades. Maybe in the next grading guide?

[murph0]

I thought OWL 7-10 were pretty close...you could at least tell what they were getting at..

 

Brian

[read_em-migration]

A quote from Arnold Blumberg off of Ebay's Threaded Board: "This new Grading Guide will be in full color. How's that? But, I'm sorry to say, there will NOT be a new OWL card. Just the book. But hey - full color. Doesn't that make up for the lack of a little laminated card? I hope so."

[drbanner]

As the scan shows, this card is just about useless to use to determine page quality, I mean that "off-white" is ugly! They need a new card, and they need to use multiple genres of books in their examples. 1970's books and newer often have a grayish-newspaper type stock that degrades differently than silver and gold, so the progression from "new" (white/gray) to "beat" (tan/cream/yellow) is different for different types of books.

[aardvark88]

Per usual, Banner is correct. Also silver DC is different fr silver Marvel paperstock .

[fantastic_four]

That's a great idea--can you tell that to Blumberg directly? If you don't want to, let me know, because I will. It may inspire him to include OWL cards for different ages in his book. I wish he wouldn't rush that book to publication so quick...I'm afraid we're all going to be disappointed by the new edition, unless he and Overstreet have been working furiously on it lately.

[PovertyRow]

They need a new card, and they need to use multiple genres of books in their examples. 1970's books and newer often have a grayish-newspaper type stock that degrades differently than silver and gold

 

That makes good sense.

[drbanner]

That's a great idea--can you tell that to Blumberg directly? If you don't want to, let me know, because I will.

 

Please do!!

[Mister_Comics]

My pet peeve #6

 

Comparing that slick shiney paper to the regular type paper.

 

Why is it that no matter what age, the books pages have to look like that slick shiney white paper to get a "white pages". Thats like comparing apples to oranges. There should be a different comparsion scale for different type paper. Not all paper ages the same. I'll bet twenty years from now you still won't see tan or off-white slick shiney paper. It will still look close to new. Thats because the paper they use now is of better quality. I can remember some comics I bought as a kid brand new, looked like they were slightly tan in color to begin with. If that was the best the paper was when new, how can anyone say that the paper should be white?

 

Yes there should be a new color scale for the different type paper stock. Golden age paper was different then silver age paper. DC paper is different then Marvel paper. Modern age paper is of better quality. The shiney slick paper is probably the best paper. So were do you begin with a new scale? It would have to be a lot bigger and cover a wider range of papers.

 

And ya can throw that OWL scale in the garbage. Never could see it being of any help. Unless you were blind in one eye and couldn't see out of the other.

[comicinvestor-migration]

Paper quality is a freaky topic, as even within the same production run, there were differences. I can remember picking up 2 copies of X-Men 96 and one was the standard rough-grade stuff that was slightly grey to begin with, but the other was thin, almost like onion paper and really light-weight.

 

Now, that standard issue is beginning to show some paper aging, but onion-boy still looks bone white. They are definitely totally different paper types, and apparently they age differently as well.

[comicinvestor-migration]

As the scan shows, this card is just about useless to use to determine page quality, I mean that "off-white" is ugly!

 

No joke, and what they state as Off-White, I've always thought of as Tan. There needs to be a revision to that puppy to make it more in line with the times. It looks some something used to measure page quality on BlazingBob's "Off-White to Cream" Pedigree Gems.

[read_em-migration]

Ebay post by Arnold Blumberg:

"No OWL card (in the new OGG), but we still sell them and your best bet is to contact Gemstone through the usual channels to order one if you like.This book does not delve into the OWL system and references it only in passing. There will be number notations on the examples and descriptions of paper quality in all the grade sections, but no chart per se. It would have been waaaay too difficult to guarantee that the printer could maintain a consistent hue to make such a chart worthwhile. Besides which, as we point out in a section just before the grading sections that I'm quite proud of, there is no such thing as "white" in all cases. Different companies, different eras, all result in a wide variety of paper stocks that have different levels of "whiteness," so it's all relative. We try to explain that in the book."

There ya go guys!

[ArnoldTBlumberg]

"I wish he wouldn't rush that book to publication so quick"

 

I'm afraid to say that choice isn't mine to make. I only work here , but I appreciate the sentiment.

 

Arnold

[fantastic_four]

Even though it sounds like the writing of this book has only been happening during 2002, I'm sure you guys haven't been in a mental vacuum about grading since the 1990 edition. But still, getting down on paper the following necessary grading topics that pro graders try to keep in their heads sounds like it would take more than a year:

• A detailed taxonomy of common paper defects
• metrics to assign varying severities to each defect category and sub-category (simple example--color-breaking creases could be described as "hairline," "very light," "light," "heavy," and "torn")
• procedures for assigning a numerical grade to all defects and severities noted during a visual inspection
• a standard, comprehensive checklist to use as both a reminder of what to look for during grading as well as a record of what was found during grading. This would likely only be used on more expensive comics, but could be used by a diligent seller on any copy. A tiny number of sellers have developed their own checklist and use them, but it would help ALL collectors and dealers if there was a standard one.
• a detailed guide to restoration detection

The last one of those I believe to be the most important...CGC has cut out a lot of the slight-restorers out there, but there are still a few real snakes that have built their entire comic selling model around the fact that 99% of collectors are unable to detect slight professional color touch and trimming on their own. The primary tool against these selfish is to educate collectors who wish to be educated and let that knowledge filter down slowly to the collecting community as a whole. Right now, Gemstone and Overstreet are in the best position to get this information out...good luck in your efforts!

 

I can sure say that I respect and appreciate your work, even if the 2002 edition of your Grading Guide doesn't end up becoming the definitive one.