CGC needs to modify its stance on Color Touch
7 7

350 posts in this topic

11,854 posts

Interesting post. CGC actually are grading the intent, not the physical event. By that I mean a comic with a pen written arrival date has pen on the cover. A comic with the owners name written on it has pen on the cover. A comic with a dot of colour touch has pen on the cover. And yet only the colour touch gets the PLOD. Seems unfair doesn't it. The PLOD is a label heralding the intent to enhance (or deceive). The comic with the owners name on it is often ugly and defaced, yet gets a blue.

There are many quirks like this. Micro trimmed cover? PLOD. Rip the cover off 'naturally'? It's a blue.

All good fun. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,863 posts
8 minutes ago, Get Marwood & I said:

Interesting post. CGC actually are grading the intent, not the physical event. By that I mean a comic with a pen written arrival date has pen on the cover. A comic with the owners name written on it has pen on the cover. A comic with a dot of colour touch has pen on the cover. And yet only the colour touch gets the PLOD. Seems unfair doesn't it. The PLOD is a label heralding the intent to enhance (or deceive). The comic with the owners name on it is often ugly and defaced, yet gets a blue.

There are many quirks like this. Micro trimmed cover? PLOD. Rip the cover off 'naturally'? It's a blue.

All good fun. 

I think the label was meant to discourage this kind of behavior from continuing. Purple label of mortification with color touch was to warn those who had done it in the past... maybe now it is well known idk. 

I think that some would argue that it's a slippery slope :foryou:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,703 posts
19 minutes ago, TwoPiece said:

Masking a spine tick with color touch intends on deceiving the owner/potential buyer into thinking there is no flaw, when in fact, there is a flaw...

I don't agree with color touch "not being restoration". Give it (PLO) death.

The PLOD punishes the (deceived) buyer, not the seller. Treat the color touch and the defect it's masking for what they are - flaws - and grade accordingly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,854 posts
Posted (edited)
48 minutes ago, ADAMANTIUM said:

I think the label was meant to discourage this kind of behavior from continuing

I can see that Mark, yes. But grading is a physical thing - the condition of the thing that is being graded is all that matters, not the intentions of a previous owner. The PLOD destroys the value of the book, often unfairly. One tiny dot renders an otherwise attractive copy as 'undesirable'.  Better to grade it as is, and note accordingly, i.e. a blue label with a note stating the extent of any colour touch. 

If the label is blue, but any colour touch is noted, the behaviour is still discouraged and the buyer can make their own mind up, free from the artificial destruction of value that the 'wrong' coloured label brings with it. 

Edited by Get Marwood & I
I spelt brings wrong. It was the auto word replacer thing. Honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,854 posts
7 minutes ago, faster friends said:

Blue labels for everyone!!!

Yes. Apart from for TwoPiece. His should be black, with red blood stains. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,854 posts
3 minutes ago, Black_Adam said:

Furthermore, purple labels have been encouraging more and more restoration removal - by CGC and others - which amounts to little more than intentional mutilation of a comic. I don't like seeing comics harmed in any way. And the current technique of removal is akin to going to the doctor because you have a limp and having him correct it by cutting your foot off. A correctly graded and denoted blue label would put a swift stop to this ill-advised practice.

Hence my "all good fun" comment. A book looks lovely. A grading company gives it a PLOD. Its value plummets.  That same grading company scrapes off a bit of colour touch, and makes it look horrible. It is now a blue. And is worth more.

hm

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,400 posts

Trimming is removal of a piece of the actual comic. Colour touch is not part of the comic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,854 posts
2 minutes ago, comicnoir said:

Trimming is removal of a piece of the actual comic. Colour touch is not part of the comic. 

But the suggestion is that you can only remove colour touch by also removing a part of the comic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15,564 posts

I don't think you should just change the definition of words because it's more convenient to the collector. The definition of restoration on paper collectibles was established long before CGC existed.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,703 posts
2 minutes ago, cd4ever said:

I don't think you should just change the definition of words because it's more convenient to the collector. The definition of restoration on paper collectibles was established long before CGC existed.  

Taping a tear on a paper collectible was considered restoration until CGC decided it wasn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,703 posts
18 minutes ago, comicnoir said:

Trimming is removal of a piece of the actual comic. Colour touch is not part of the comic. 

Restoration removal often involves cutting away the "restored" part of the comic, particularly with tear seals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,854 posts
2 minutes ago, Black_Adam said:

Restoration removal often involves cutting away the "restored" part of the comic, particularly with tear seals.

That was my point above.  Why is it that when I intentionally remove a piece of a comic, it's restoration and a 'negative' action, but when CGC does it that's a positive action that turns a PLOD to a Blue? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,854 posts
4 minutes ago, october said:

Most of the color touch removal I have seen (especially amateur color touch) involves scraping away the spots, including original paper. 

I've seen two GA key issue black covers where a decent bit of CT was removed, and the books look hideous. Just awful....but they are worth more. The comparison to taping covers back on in order to get a grade/price bump is a good analogy. Damaging the comics to exploit a market loophole. 

There's a whiff of hypocrisy here, isn't there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
7 7