AF15 Conundrum
2 2

108 posts in this topic

1,440 posts
2 hours ago, James J Johnson said:

This is a question that can only be definitively answered by CGC. Probably the same folks that do the color-touch removal. To remove amateur color-touch that has bled on through to the other side, and can't be treated any other way, excising the paper with the ink is the only recourse = artificial wear. What's left from the scraping and excision is damage, and probably more damage than the book previously had. So your question should be addressed to the ones that excise amateur color-touch in the correct manner to garner the previously restored label book a blue unrestored label once that procedure is concluded.

Logically, they should have a method for trim removal that will eliminate the trim. Ask them.

From my previous knowledge and digging through some old forums and debates from what I understood and read trimming can't be reversed but in this case its trying to hide the trimming with a damaged edge instead and with the grade being low I guess its more of just fooling CGC but also taking the extra hit on damage and dropping a grade. 

Also CCS says this kind of restoration can't be removed to get a book to a blue label

Capture.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,964 posts
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Krishosein said:

From my previous knowledge and digging through some old forums and debates from what I understood and read trimming can't be reversed but in this case its trying to hide the trimming with a damaged edge instead and with the grade being low I guess its more of just fooling CGC but also taking the extra hit on damage and dropping a grade. 

Also CCS says this kind of restoration can't be removed to get a book to a blue label

Capture.JPG

If all these things can be excised, the finished result of aggressive amateur color touch removal very obvious with scraping and holes on/in the cover that looks like the removal of color touch, and a tear can be unsealed, then logically, the same way unsealing a tear re-creates the tear, why can't a corner be torn off as well. I'm not advocating this theoretical prospect one way or the other. It just seems logical to me that if you can remove paper to remove color touch that bled, isn't that tantamount to removing a trimmed portion of the cover? How about if that trimmed portion had color touch and/or a tear seal that also had to be removed? Then what? What is the difference between tearing off a corner purposefully vs. tearing it off in anger? Or it dog eared and fell off at some point over the last 50 years? If the trimmed area is gone because the paper, the trim's surrounding area is gone, does why and how it's gone mean the difference between purple and blue labels?

Edited by James J Johnson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,440 posts
On 7/5/2019 at 4:44 PM, James J Johnson said:

If all these things can be excised, the finished result of aggressive amateur color touch removal very obvious with scraping and holes on/in the cover that looks like the removal of color touch, and a tear can be unsealed, then logically, the same way unsealing a tear re-creates the tear, why can't a corner be torn off as well. I'm not advocating this theoretical prospect one way or the other. It just seems logical to me that if you can remove paper to remove color touch that bled, isn't that tantamount to removing a trimmed portion of the cover? How about if that trimmed portion had color touch and/or a tear seal that also had to be removed? Then what? What is the difference between tearing off a corner purposefully vs. tearing it off in anger? Or it dog eared and fell off at some point over the last 50 years? If the trimmed area is gone because the paper, the trim's surrounding area is gone, does why and how it's gone mean the difference between purple and blue labels?

oh I understand what your saying as I mentioned in my post that its just trying to fool CGC and taking the grade hit as well as considering it a tear across a section of the edge instead of a trimming but I also said that would a tear cover up this trimming as I am wondering if there are other ways to detect if a trimmed has been ripped would CGC still consider this trimmed as the comic wouldn't be to size. I am no way a pro just asking about processes that CGC has for the restoration detection. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,763 posts
1 hour ago, Krishosein said:

oh I understand what your saying as I mentioned in my post that its just trying to fool CGC and taking the grade hit as well as considering it a tear across a section of the edge instead of a trimming but I also said that would a tear cover up this trimming as I am wondering if there are other ways to detect if a trimmed has been ripped would CGC still consider this trimmed as the comic wouldn't be to size. I am no way a pro just asking about processes that CGC has for the restoration detection. 

In my mind, those trimming guidelines would be for books where one edge (or more) of a book has been trimmed, which is what's commonly seen with most trimmed books. If only one small area of the cover has been trimmed (such as on a corner) it would theoretically be possible to tear off the trimmed portion and thus eliminate the trimming, as long as that was the only part of the book that'd been trimmed.

Please bear in mind that I don't support or condone this type of thing---I believe in keeping books in their original, untampered condition. And two wrongs don't make a right...or do they?   hm 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,922 posts

Obviously it would help to see pics, although it's a catch 22 for the OP.... if he posts a photo then the comic will be recognized by all of us once it makes it into a slab.

However.... I agree with the OP, if the only resto is a 1/2" x 1/8" corner trim then I would probably do the micro tear and get the blue label.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,014 posts
3 hours ago, gadzukes said:

Obviously it would help to see pics, although it's a catch 22 for the OP.... if he posts a photo then the comic will be recognized by all of us once it makes it into a slab.

However.... I agree with the OP, if the only resto is a 1/2" x 1/8" corner trim then I would probably do the micro tear and get the blue label.

What about CGC recognizing it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
711 posts
Posted (edited)
On 6/26/2019 at 6:10 PM, Bomber-Bob said:

I'm still baffled why we are discussing trying to hide a trim with a tear. This is okay for everyone ? 

If I am understanding this correctly, I wouldn't say this is hiding the trim but a drastic method of "removing" the restoration. A tear by accident VS a tear on purpose still equals the same result, a tear.... That being said, "micro-tearing" sounds duplicitous to me.

Edited by Xenosmilus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,964 posts
12 hours ago, The Lions Den said:

And two wrongs don't make a right...or do they?   hm 

Dollars and cents. The two wrongs make dollars and cents that would have been left on the table, apparently.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,966 posts

I'm kinda starting to lean to a side where I think "trimming" that is not done to make the comic look like an original cut along the edges, IMO, should not be considered "restoration". Like cutting a triangle out of an edge to remove a tear or something. Obviously it wasn't originally distributed that way. I think that it should still be noted so that the consumer always knows it was 'modified', but IMO should get a blue label.

Does that make sense..?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,763 posts
1 hour ago, TwoPiece said:

I'm kinda starting to lean to a side where I think "trimming" that is not done to make the comic look like an original cut along the edges, IMO, should not be considered "restoration". Like cutting a triangle out of an edge to remove a tear or something. Obviously it wasn't originally distributed that way. I think that it should still be noted so that the consumer always knows it was 'modified', but IMO should get a blue label.

Does that make sense..?

Does anything make sense in this world..?  (shrug)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,964 posts
On ‎7‎/‎8‎/‎2019 at 12:48 PM, gadzukes said:

Obviously it would help to see pics, although it's a catch 22 for the OP.... if he posts a photo then the comic will be recognized by all of us once it makes it into a slab.

However.... I agree with the OP, if the only resto is a 1/2" x 1/8" corner trim then I would probably do the micro tear and get the blue label.

Pics would let the cat out of the bag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,964 posts
14 hours ago, TwoPiece said:

I'm kinda starting to lean to a side where I think "trimming" that is not done to make the comic look like an original cut along the edges, IMO, should not be considered "restoration". Like cutting a triangle out of an edge to remove a tear or something. Obviously it wasn't originally distributed that way. I think that it should still be noted so that the consumer always knows it was 'modified', but IMO should get a blue label.

Does that make sense..?

Yes. A corner crease gets to a point where if it's been folded enough times, or the paper is very dry, maybe toned, it may fall off altogether by itself. I doubt that a grader would rule that missing piece "restoration" or "trimmed" if there's no way to differentiate whether it is missing by chance or on purpose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,763 posts
46 minutes ago, James J Johnson said:

Yes. A corner crease gets to a point where if it's been folded enough times, or the paper is very dry, maybe toned, it may fall off altogether by itself. I doubt that a grader would rule that missing piece "restoration" or "trimmed" if there's no way to differentiate whether it is missing by chance or on purpose.

You are correct, JJJ...  (thumbsu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,964 posts
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, The Lions Den said:

You are correct, JJJ...  (thumbsu

I am still of the opinion, as are you, that leaving it alone is the right play. GP gives us a history of internet CGC sales prices but there are aberrations. There are so many instances of a 6.0 selling for more than a 7.0 in the same month, and other books in all grade ranges. That 6.0 could have sold for the price of the average 7.5 for a few reasons, one being that maybe it looked more like the average 7.5 than the average 6.0 or 7.0! Another reason could be that two bidders squared off over it and did battle on the 6.0, driving up each other's bids, or it could have been heavily shilled, in that case only one stubborn bidder fighting against the owner.

My belief is that an attractive purple label 1.5 can sell for just as much, if not more, than an ugly blue labeled 1.0, and nothing would make a purple label 1.5 into an ugly blue label 1.0 faster than pulling off a piece.

My belief is that those aberrations we sometimes see, when a 2.5 sells for more than a 3.5 did the same month have more to do with eye appeal than anything else. It's great to have CGCs opinion, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and many still bid on the book inside the holder.

Also, another thing for consideration. We all have certain defects that we can't abide by. Some hate dates or markings on a cover. For some, distributor ink is a deal killer. Or chips. Or tape, or missing pieces. etc., etc. Tearing off a piece of a cover, even on a low grade book, may be the deal killer for someone who would have loved to have a purple label 1.5 with no missing pieces.

Edited by James J Johnson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,922 posts

I just thought I'd add a "visual aid" to help with the conversation.

I took one of my worthless comics and trimmed the corner as per the OPs description 1/2" long by 1/8" deep.

On the second photo I just scraped up the edge a little to make it look like a tear or a bug chew.

Photo 1 represents the OPs 1.5 restored AF15.  GPA shows values around $5000

Photo 2 would most likely get the same grade (1.5) in a Blue label.  GPA shows value around $11,000.

Discuss

a1.jpg

a2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,966 posts
2 minutes ago, gadzukes said:

I just thought I'd add a "visual aid" to help with the conversation.

I took one of my worthless comics and trimmed the corner as per the OPs description 1/2" long by 1/8" deep.

On the second photo I just scraped up the edge a little to make it look like a tear or a bug chew.

Photo 1 represents the OPs 1.5 restored AF15.  GPA shows values around $5000

Photo 2 would most likely get the same grade (1.5) in a Blue label.  GPA shows value around $11,000.

Discuss

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
836 posts

I thought trimming was along the entire edge, be it top, bottom or reading edge of a comic to make it seem properly cut and to potentially remove any edge imperfections???

Cutting a whole corner off with scissors cleanly is considered restoration also? Versus ripping it off which is not? This seems silly

To me, both should grade the same. Missing a corner. And both should not be considered restoration. Nothing was "restored". 

When you trim an entire edge, you remove possible imperfections and try to make the book appear better, "restoring" it visually, so I understand why that is considered restoration. This corner clipping I do not understand why CGC considers it such. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,922 posts
4 minutes ago, TwoPiece said:

giphy.gif

haha.... I'm not condoning..... I just wanted to add a visual to the thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,922 posts
3 minutes ago, comicginger1789 said:

I thought trimming was along the entire edge, be it top, bottom or reading edge of a comic to make it seem properly cut and to potentially remove any edge imperfections???

Cutting a whole corner off with scissors cleanly is considered restoration also? Versus ripping it off which is not? This seems silly

To me, both should grade the same. Missing a corner. And both should not be considered restoration. Nothing was "restored". 

When you trim an entire edge, you remove possible imperfections and try to make the book appear better, "restoring" it visually, so I understand why that is considered restoration. This corner clipping I do not understand why CGC considers it such. 

I agree.  Unfortunately..... if CGC detects ANY trim.... it gets a PLOD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
836 posts

To me, if someone cut nice square corners off of a book for some reason versus a rat chewing each corner, I would rather the former. So perhaps that is why they deem it restoration.

However, if someone tore it off or cut it off, that seems the same to me as the purpose was likely to make the book seem better. I have a Batman #251 that had its top right corner (about this same size) folded back and forth so many times that by the time I owned the book, the corner just fell off, leaving a nice clean line. I guess technically you could determine a clean cut edge from a natural separation but that has me worried that if I ever were to grade my copy, they would give it a restored grade.

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
2 2