Captain America #1 (CGC 9.4)
4 4

238 posts in this topic

2,410 posts
3 hours ago, Cat-Man_America said:

Both scans are arguably "off" color-wise.  I suspect the culprit is the CGC "billboard" label.  The color of the label pops at the expense of the book because it's so near the surface of the holder.  It probably forces whoever is in charge of imaging Heritage scans to figure out a way to make the comic book images as bold or bolder than CGC's advertising billboard, ...excuse me, label.

The way this appears to have been done ...and it's purely speculation on my part as I don't have access to Heritage's scanner to cross-reference the settings... is by boosting the color saturation, brightness and white level while tweaking the contrast enough to maintain satisfactory black levels.  Sharpness also seems bumped up (probably via clarity and shadow removal settings).  HA scans look like they've been imaged with lid closed using a solid white backing.  

The end result is an oversaturated color palette for the book with the CGC label's blue changing hue from dark blue to pale blue. Notice that the subtle lighter blue CGC trademark imprinted in the center of the label, seen clearly in the darker scan.  It almost disappears in the brighter image.

This is a rescan of a recent HA win from my HP scanner...

  Hide contents

edited-image_zpsyxcvvzr1.png

To get a fair representation of this book in hand it was necessary to adjust settings in the Photo-bucket Editor after scanning the book.  Notice how the label still overwhelms the book, but the colors appear uniform and accurate.  What I think Heritage has been attempting to do is make CGC graded books pop color-wise while walking back the hyper-emphasized, overpowering label.  While I'll give HA props for a noble effort, there's obviously a trade off that results in excessive color saturation.  If I can dig up the original Heritage scan of this book, I'll edit it into this post for comparison.

Back on point, the only way CGC could make these labels more unmissable would be to add Braille bumps.  

 

Here you go, thanks for sharing. I’ve often thought about comparing.  Their colors are certainly misleading.

 FE1F78C4-92C7-45EF-A7C1-73BAAF7099A7.thumb.jpeg.ac35bec0e4a3a2efc6f59f37b88902a2.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58,242 posts

I won an xmen 1 in a heritage auction. When I got it , I honestly thought they had sent the wrong book. The scan so misrepresented what the book actually looked like (intentional or not, it did)

rather than return book I quickly sold it for what I paid but I am Leary about scans representing what the book looks like in hand 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,574 posts
59 minutes ago, G.A.tor said:

I won an xmen 1 in a heritage auction. When I got it , I honestly thought they had sent the wrong book. The scan so misrepresented what the book actually looked like (intentional or not, it did)

rather than return book I quickly sold it for what I paid but I am Leary about scans representing what the book looks like in hand 

So their scans are on steroids hm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58,242 posts
15 minutes ago, batman_fan said:

So their scans are on steroids hm

The X-men 1 cover looked so white I was excited when I won. What I received was no where near white. Intentional or not, a serious misrepresentation 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,574 posts
3 minutes ago, G.A.tor said:

The X-men 1 cover looked so white I was excited when I won. What I received was no where near white. Intentional or not, a serious misrepresentation 

That has been my biggest fear with buying a copy of X-men 1 and a Daredevil 1, have a nice white cover only to get something off-white to cream.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,713 posts
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, G.A.tor said:
1 hour ago, batman_fan said:

So their scans are on steroids hm

The X-men 1 cover looked so white I was excited when I won. What I received was no where near white. Intentional or not, a serious misrepresentation 

I wondered if anybody has ever bothered to try to return a book to Heritage due to the inaccurate colors of their scans?  :p

I bet you if you throw around words such as misleading, misrepresentation, or potentially fraudulent, you would get your money back right away.  Of course, you most likely wouldn't ever be allowed to bid in any of their future auctions going forward.  hm  :censored:

Edited by lou_fine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58,242 posts
Posted (edited)
52 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

I wondered if anybody has ever bothered to try to return a book to Heritage due to the inaccurate colors of their scans?  :p

I bet you if you throw around words such as misleading, misrepresentation, or potentially fraudulent, you would get your money back right away.  Of course, you most likely wouldn't ever be allowed to bid in any of their future auctions going forward.  hm  :censored:

I suspect if I wanted to return that book

1) heritage would take it back

2) i’d be allowed to bid going forward. 

Edited by G.A.tor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,713 posts
2 hours ago, G.A.tor said:

The X-men 1 cover looked so white I was excited when I won. What I received was no where near white. Intentional or not, a serious misrepresentation 

 

51 minutes ago, G.A.tor said:

I suspect if I wanted to return that book

1) heritage would take it back

2) i’d be allowed to bid going forward. 

Since you ended up selling it for what you paid for it, did you ever considered simply sending it back to Heritage for a straight refund?

At least that way they would have gotten the message they had possibly done something wrong.  This way, they think everything's actually fine and hence, they continue to "misrepresent" their scans going forward, not thinking that anything was wrong at all.  hm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,187 posts
1 hour ago, G.A.tor said:

I suspect if I wanted to return that book

1) heritage would take it back

2) i’d be allowed to bid going forward. 

If that’s the case would they offer the book to the next highest bidder or inform  the seller it would slip to their next auction or ???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,690 posts
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, G.A.tor said:

I won an xmen 1 in a heritage auction. When I got it , I honestly thought they had sent the wrong book. The scan so misrepresented what the book actually looked like (intentional or not, it did)

:|

buying from Heritage a crapshoot then.

Edited by Gotham Kid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,259 posts

What a fascinating, but ultimately depressing read this thread is. Putting aside the clear benefits of third party grading, there is so much that is ethically questionable, so many conflicts of interest. I'd have loved to have contributed to the debates of the past but sadly find that any attempt to revive them on these boards is met with stony silence. What was wrong then is still wrong now and shouldn't be brushed aside just because the debate has been had. If a company can manipulate a grade upwards, with hundreds of thousands of dollars potentially at stake, how can that same company be trusted to deliver the subsequent grade in an impartial manner? Especially if they can be coerced by an unhappy owner as posts in this thread have suggested. And all to a set of grading criteria that they developed in house and do not publish. Why is it tolerated?

And as for the misrepresentation of books due to scanner settings, deliberate or otherwise, isn't it about time some of the big guns offered videos of the big books? These books are worth millions, and all you get is a front and back scan? Even ebay offers 12 free photos!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58,242 posts
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, lou_fine said:

 

Since you ended up selling it for what you paid for it, did you ever considered simply sending it back to Heritage for a straight refund?

At least that way they would have gotten the message they had possibly done something wrong.  This way, they think everything's actually fine and hence, they continue to "misrepresent" their scans going forward, not thinking that anything was wrong at all.  hm

I had emailed heritage about it, FYI 

I’m  sure they were/are aware 

Edited by G.A.tor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58,242 posts
3 hours ago, Get Marwood & I said:

What a fascinating, but ultimately depressing read this thread is. Putting aside the clear benefits of third party grading, there is so much that is ethically questionable, so many conflicts of interest. I'd have loved to have contributed to the debates of the past but sadly find that any attempt to revive them on these boards is met with stony silence. What was wrong then is still wrong now and shouldn't be brushed aside just because the debate has been had. If a company can manipulate a grade upwards, with hundreds of thousands of dollars potentially at stake, how can that same company be trusted to deliver the subsequent grade in an impartial manner? Especially if they can be coerced by an unhappy owner as posts in this thread have suggested. And all to a set of grading criteria that they developed in house and do not publish. Why is it tolerated?

And as for the misrepresentation of books due to scanner settings, deliberate or otherwise, isn't it about time some of the big guns offered videos of the big books? These books are worth millions, and all you get is a front and back scan? Even ebay offers 12 free photos!

I’ve had all 3 major auction houses email me multiple images of books upon request and I know I’ve seen videos too 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58,242 posts
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Gotham Kid said:

:|

buying from Heritage a crapshoot then.

To be fair, I’ve had books from all 3 that were “off” from the scans. Been that way since scan technology. But rare that a book is “way” off , though it clearly happens 

Edited by G.A.tor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,259 posts
28 minutes ago, G.A.tor said:

I’ve had all 3 major auction houses email me multiple images of books upon request and I know I’ve seen videos too 

Well that's good to hear at least, thanks. Maybe they should make more use of the available technology as standard though rather than on request. It could go some way to heading off debates like these, as everyone would be able to better see the 'true' appearance / colour strike of notable books. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18,774 posts

Many people also don’t realize that their monitors are showing them off color images too.  We trust what our screens show us unquestionably, even tho they drift from reliable and are adjustable, but rarely verify it to reality., because with monitor technology, there is no single reality!  We are each seeing a slightly different color, often radically different.

Having said that these recent Heritage scans are a bit hotter than usual. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,050 posts
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, G.A.tor said:

To be fair, I’ve had books from all 3 that were “off” from the scans. Been that way since scan technology. But rare that a book is “way” off , though it clearly happens 

Very smart move...But I would think if you were going to spend a Million dollars on a book you would actually go and look at it in person or have somebody who you trust personally inspect it at any of the Big houses also to verify.

Edited by Mmehdy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
932 posts
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, sartrexpress said:

The Denver Cap #1 originally was purchased at Greg Manning and was considered the second best Cap #1 at 9.0 .. years later other lesser copies were subsequently graded 9.2's.. I brought the Denver to a Chicago Con about 6 years ago where it was regraded by CGC twice from a 9.2 to a 9.4. I have never seen the SF Cap #1 but looking at the scans the corners look a little soft. I also own the Allentown Cap 3 which does have more brilliant gloss and color than the Denver Cap 1 so I would assume the Allentown Cap 1 beats the Denver in that respect. The Denver though has extremely sharp corners and a perfect spine. 

 

cap 1 9.4 v.jpg

Cap 3 9.6_editedv-2.jpg

Wow. 3rd post, and all you have is a pedigree Cap 3??!!

welcome, friend

Edited by GreatCaesarsGhost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58,242 posts
34 minutes ago, GreatCaesarsGhost said:

Wow. 3rd post, and all you have is a pedigree Cap 3??!!

welcome, friend

Steve has been a boardie for a long time. Not his 3rd post (but maybe since migration he started new boardname?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
932 posts
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, G.A.tor said:

Steve has been a boardie for a long time. Not his 3rd post (but maybe since migration he started new boardname?)

That makes more sense, but yes he shows a meager 3 posts to his name. I say that knowing full well my post count is meager too

Edited by GreatCaesarsGhost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
4 4