Writing/creases 0

[GlennSimpson]

Just an odd thought, wanted to make sure my line of thinking is accurate.

If I had a book in, say, 9.4, and I wrote my name about an inch across in the upper right hand corner, my understanding is this would not drop the grade much, if at all.

On the other hand, if I put a piece of paper over the comic, and wrote my name the same size on the paper, leaving no pen on the book but leaving an indention of the name, it would be considered a big crease and would drop the grade more significantly.

[B2D327]

Sounds about write (see what I did there?) 

[GlennSimpson]

...Which seems really odd to me, especially since the latter is less disruptive than the former.

All I can think of is that it fits with what I have perceived to be the "stratification" of flaws:

1. Production errors: least harm to grade

2. Flaws developed in the process of owning and reading the comic (bends, wear, and apparently writing your name on it): medium harm to grade.

3. Mishaps that have no good reason for happening - stains, tears, creases, etc.: most hard on grade

[The Lions Den]

12 hours ago, GlennSimpson said:

...Which seems really odd to me, especially since the latter is less disruptive than the former.

All I can think of is that it fits with what I have perceived to be the "stratification" of flaws:

1. Production errors: least harm to grade

2. Flaws developed in the process of owning and reading the comic (bends, wear, and apparently writing your name on it): medium harm to grade.

3. Mishaps that have no good reason for happening - stains, tears, creases, etc.: most hard on grade

While I can certainly see your point here (and I agree with you) it's not as black and white as you may think. CGC graders have different thresholds for flaws. For instance, I recently saw a book that was a nice high grade copy, but it had a very noticeable flaw in the middle of the front cover. I would've never given it the grade that it received, but part of that is because I have a very low tolerance for flaws that affect the main image on the front cover. And because of that placement, it's not a book I would want in my personal collection, no matter what the numerical grade was. I also felt that the flaw would've hindered the appeal of the book had I ever wanted to resell it. So it's important to remember that the prominence and placement of the flaw should also be considered in the grading evaluation...

[Qalyar]

44 minutes ago, The Lions Den said:

While I can certainly see your point here (and I agree with you) it's not as black and white as you may think. CGC graders have different thresholds for flaws. For instance, I recently saw a book that was a nice high grade copy, but it had a very noticeable flaw in the middle of the front cover. I would've never given it the grade that it received, but part of that is because I have a very low tolerance for flaws that affect the main image on the front cover. And because of that placement, it's not a book I would want in my personal collection, no matter what the numerical grade was. I also felt that the flaw would've hindered the appeal of the book had I ever wanted to resell it. So it's important to remember that the prominence and placement of the flaw should also be considered in the grading evaluation...

That's why technical grades aren't supposed to be a measure of the visual appeal of books, and why for any given grade, there are "nice" books and "ugly" books. And honestly, there's no other way to do it. Faced with two identical flaws in different positions on a book's cover, I don't want my grading company to try to factor in which flaw location is prettier when determining the book's grade.

As for writing on cover versus impression of writing on cover... the idea here is that physical indentations compromise the structure of the paper, and so are a more serious technical defect than surface writing. Writing that also indents the paper would, of course, be the worst of both worlds. Now, obviously, many indentations (along with bends, curls, and a host of other issues) are more or less reversible, hence the press-happy nature of the hobby at current. But, again, grading has to be based on the book as it stands, not what could hypothetically happen post-press if nothing goes wrong.

[GlennSimpson]

33 minutes ago, Qalyar said:

That's why technical grades aren't supposed to be a measure of the visual appeal of books, and why for any given grade, there are "nice" books and "ugly" books. And honestly, there's no other way to do it. Faced with two identical flaws in different positions on a book's cover, I don't want my grading company to try to factor in which flaw location is prettier when determining the book's grade.

As for writing on cover versus impression of writing on cover... the idea here is that physical indentations compromise the structure of the paper, and so are a more serious technical defect than surface writing. Writing that also indents the paper would, of course, be the worst of both worlds. Now, obviously, many indentations (along with bends, curls, and a host of other issues) are more or less reversible, hence the press-happy nature of the hobby at current. But, again, grading has to be based on the book as it stands, not what could hypothetically happen post-press if nothing goes wrong.

I was making the assumption that the writing on cover would also create an impression.  In fact, theoretically it would be a deeper impression.

 

[Jeffro.]

On 1/7/2021 at 9:55 AM, The Lions Den said:

While I can certainly see your point here (and I agree with you) it's not as black and white as you may think. CGC graders have different thresholds for flaws. For instance, I recently saw a book that was a nice high grade copy, but it had a very noticeable flaw in the middle of the front cover. I would've never given it the grade that it received, but part of that is because I have a very low tolerance for flaws that affect the main image on the front cover.

Shouldn't such personal tolerances that could greatly affect the final grade be mitigated or outright disallowed? It's one thing for three different independent graders to assign a different grade to a comic based on their own individual opinions about the type of flaw(s). It's a whole other can of worms when a grading company, a supposed industry standard, allows such variation from grader to grader. Maybe I'm being naive but that shouldn't be allowed to take place.

Does CGC still do the three grader eval on all submissions? 

 

Edited January 8, 2021 by Jeffro.

[The Lions Den]

1 hour ago, Jeffro. said:

Shouldn't such personal tolerances that could greatly affect the final grade be mitigated or outright disallowed? It's one thing for three different independent graders to assign a different grade to a comic based on their own individual opinions about the type of flaw(s). It's a whole other can of worms when a grading company, a supposed industry standard, allows such variation from grader to grader. Maybe I'm being naive but that shouldn't be allowed to take place.

Does CGC still do the three grader eval on all submissions? 

 

All I'm saying is that since grading is subjective and each book is different, there will always be differences of opinion. And when we're talking about variation, it's usually only a slight variation, not a severe one. 

As far as the three grader evaluation, it says here on the website that "multiple" graders examine the books...  

[The Lions Den]

On 1/7/2021 at 11:21 AM, Qalyar said:

That's why technical grades aren't supposed to be a measure of the visual appeal of books, and why for any given grade, there are "nice" books and "ugly" books. And honestly, there's no other way to do it. Faced with two identical flaws in different positions on a book's cover, I don't want my grading company to try to factor in which flaw location is prettier when determining the book's grade.

I only wish you could see what it's like to sit in the CGC grading room for a week. I'm sure you'd find it an eye-opening experience...  

[Qalyar]

25 minutes ago, The Lions Den said:

I only wish you could see what it's like to sit in the CGC grading room for a week. I'm sure you'd find it an eye-opening experience...  

Well... yeah. I know that the concept and the reality aren't always in agreement.

[The Lions Den]

2 hours ago, Qalyar said:

Well... yeah. I know that the concept and the reality aren't always in agreement.

I think anyone that enjoys grading comics would benefit from the experience, which would ultimately result in a much better understanding of how comics are graded and why the books received their assigned grade. And while I can't speculate about any specific auditing system for the graders, the other graders in the room will often provide immediate and valuable feedback...