Solicited eBay Message 1 1

[Old_Man_Adam]

I got me of those “favorite “ add list emails as well, I also ran into him at a show in NJ a few weeks back when the whole Spiderman fiasco was going on ... surreal 

[telerites]

2 hours ago, RhialtoTheMarvellous said:

I'm thinking that I could createyool b grading software as a machine learning project. I will need a lot of front and back images of comics that have been CGC graded (need the actual grade number as well) to train the model though.

There was an online grading tool I think by something like E-Bigs but it no longer around.  This one still is,

https://www.comicbookgradingtool.com/

Not exactly what you're talking about but thought I would share.  I have used it nor know much more about it other than seeing it a thread some time ago. 

[justafan]

21 hours ago, blazingbob said:

First off Grading is what is in front of you now,  not what the book can become.  That is referred to as a proscreen by a person who does pressing.

I don't care what can come out,  that "What it can be" is only confirmed when it is done by the presser and in a holder or when the book is done and is regraded raw.  

Anybody who is selling books on a "Wanna/outta-be" grade needs to question their selling motive.  If you want to sell "Wanna/outta be" grades then spend the money and get it pressed.  

1. Undetectable pressable/cleanable vs non-pressable/non-cleanable defects.  one of the interesting things in the Overstreet grading guide is that there are multiple representations of defects that are pressable/cleanable but only allowed in lower grades but not upper grades. one example might be large or book length bends (not creases) that can be completely pressed out, multiple non-color break shallow bends and finger bends that don't break color all over the book but with sharp corners, perfect spine, and edges, or mild to moderate soiling all over the front or back covers that is dry cleanable.  Should those continue to be graded at the same level as they are now or considered for elevation in grade considering that FN/VF or VF book could soon be a VF/NM or NM+ with a good thorough clean and press?

Great point Bob.  These are the kinds of insight and discussions a "council" of experienced and seasoned graders/dealers should argue to come to a consensus that benefits the hobby but also allows for educated and well thought out agreement on where those defects should fall. 

In this example, one extreme opinion is considering that a pressable/cleanable defect be assigned a grade at it's post-manipulated perceived grade. I disagree and I feel most would as that is just not how grading should work and it would further complicate the grading process.  The defect is present regardless if the potential for removal exists.  the value may change for the potential upgradability over one that has non-pressable defects but that can be negotiated by the buyer and seller. 

On the other hand, the other extreme, but current, opinion is that pressable/cleanable defects should continue to be treated as they have always been even graded below other more permanent defects of equal size or of smaller size but greater accumulation.  Prior to the broad acceptance (undetectibility) of "expert" pressing and cleaning (despite the 2 having been used for decades) and the reinforced stigma of restoration color touch vs tear seals, all those defects had a level playing field.  However, with CGC purple vs blue labels and offering its own pressing service, the playing field has dramatically shifted.  There's even a different market and levels for restoration removal of color touch (A and B grades being potentially removable with C being the more permanent).  Why should it be any different for pressable/cleanable defects?  In the grading guide a full book length non-color breaking vertical bend is first observed in a FN- 5.5 example of a comic with a similar accumulation of defects allowed in higher grades despite book length bends not actually referenced in the grade description allowed defects reference page for FN-.  However, in the same guide you can have books with defects such as oxidation shadows along 2 full edges in FN 6.0 or animal chew on 2 corners affecting 1/4" of the cover and some interior pages in FN+ with a similar accumulation of defects as the comic with book length non-color break bend in the lower grade. Oxidation shadows and animal chews are permanent and removal/repair would be detectable as restoration and receive a purple label whereas a press of the book length bend would not.

I suspect the needle on where a book length non-color breaking bend may grade may fall might need to be moved to somewhere in between those 2 extremes.  But that is what I would expect the group of experts to debate and hash out.  For now, I have to keep grading it as the current opinion but perhaps making note of it's potential for upgrade but this is one area where I can see a change in consensus.

[blazingbob]

6 minutes ago, justafan said:

Great point Bob.  These are the kinds of insight and discussions a "council" of experienced and seasoned graders/dealers should argue to come to a consensus that benefits the hobby but also allows for educated and well thought out agreement on where those defects should fall. 

In this example, one extreme opinion is considering that a pressable/cleanable defect be assigned a grade at it's post-manipulated perceived grade. I disagree and I feel most would as that is just not how grading should work and it would further complicate the grading process.  The defect is present regardless if the potential for removal exists.  the value may change for the potential upgradability over one that has non-pressable defects but that can be negotiated by the buyer and seller. 

On the other hand, the other extreme, but current, opinion is that pressable/cleanable defects should continue to be treated as they have always been even graded below other more permanent defects of equal size or of smaller size but greater accumulation.  Prior to the broad acceptance (undetectibility) of "expert" pressing and cleaning (despite the 2 having been used for decades) and the reinforced stigma of restoration color touch vs tear seals, all those defects had a level playing field.  However, with CGC purple vs blue labels and offering its own pressing service, the playing field has dramatically shifted.  There's even a different market and levels for restoration removal of color touch (A and B grades being potentially removable with C being the more permanent).  Why should it be any different for pressable/cleanable defects?  In the grading guide a full book length non-color breaking vertical bend is first observed in a FN- 5.5 example of a comic with a similar accumulation of defects allowed in higher grades despite book length bends not actually referenced in the grade description allowed defects reference page for FN-.  However, in the same guide you can have books with defects such as oxidation shadows along 2 full edges in FN 6.0 or animal chew on 2 corners affecting 1/4" of the cover and some interior pages in FN+ with a similar accumulation of defects as the comic with book length non-color break bend in the lower grade. Oxidation shadows and animal chews are permanent and removal/repair would be detectable as restoration and receive a purple label whereas a press of the book length bend would not.

I suspect the needle on where a book length non-color breaking bend may grade may fall might need to be moved to somewhere in between those 2 extremes.  But that is what I would expect the group of experts to debate and hash out.  For now, I have to keep grading it as the current opinion but perhaps making note of it's potential for upgrade but this is one area where I can see a change in consensus.

This is all well and good but I am a Grader,  I am not the Presser.  People value my grading on my ability to grade what the book is now.  They are not paying me for what it could become.  Just because I give an opinion on what "might" come out doesn't make it true.

In addition are all "pressers" the same?

Does the "What it might become grade" come with a disclosure statement?  What If I state that a book is upgradeable,  the person trusts my judgment and the presser pops the staple or damages the book?      

[bc]

14 minutes ago, blazingbob said:

This is all well and good but I am a Grader,  I am not the Presser.  People value my grading on my ability to grade what the book is now.  They are not paying me for what it could become.  Just because I give an opinion on what "might" come out doesn't make it true.

In addition are all "pressers" the same?

Does the "What it might become grade" come with a disclosure statement?  What If I state that a book is upgradeable,  the person trusts my judgment and the presser pops the staple or damages the book?      

+1

[RhialtoTheMarvellous]

4 hours ago, bc said:

While that sounds great - how about the interior defects (like pages & stamps missing, centerfold & wraps detached, tears, etc.)?

-bc

For my purposes experimenting with this sort of thing those won’t be accounted for, but you could take imagery of the interior of the book and model on that in addition to exterior imagery as long as the inputs are fairly consistent. The machine is just modeling off of what you give it. My initial stab at training the model will probably just be front and back cover images pasted together into one image with a grade attached. This is a fairly well explored category of machine learning starting way back when with facial recognition and the tooling is such that I can pick up a few libraries and get something going quick once I have a decent sized dataset composed.

All that said though it’s interesting to think of what you could do with high res images of books. If you’ve ever zoomed in on a 600dpi or 1200dpi scan of a cover you can see microscratches that are generally invisible to the human eye without a magnifying glass or microscope. These are the sorts of things that a computer will “see” quite easily. These are also the sort of things that can’t be corrected by pressing or other non-restoration techniques. This is where you could really go down a rabbit hole on grading. 9.991 for microscratch on cover. Lol

[Poka]

On 9/27/2020 at 9:28 PM, JollyComics said:

I am aware of that you are not a fan of Dylan's Auctions and am not a follower of him.

Not long ago after I sold Hulk copy,  I got the email from Dylanauctions this morning and I scoffed.  Of course, I will not reply to his egomaniac thing.  Wondered if you got this message too.

Here is his message:

He sends me the same message every few months or so even though I have never bought from him - so........

[badback83]

Just yesterday I received the eBay message from him about following him.  I don’t recall buying anything from him so I have no idea how he got my user ID.

[Hollywood1892]

On 9/27/2020 at 9:28 AM, JollyComics said:

I am aware of that you are not a fan of Dylan's Auctions and am not a follower of him.

Not long ago after I sold Hulk copy,  I got the email from Dylanauctions this morning and I scoffed.  Of course, I will not reply to his egomaniac thing.  Wondered if you got this message too.

Here is his message:

Message sounds sad tbh

[JollyComics]

1 hour ago, Hollywood1892 said:

Message sounds sad tbh

What an annoyance!