Eye Appeal -vs- Technical Grade

[ls7plus]

Purely as a philosophical matter, how much does eye appeal versus a card's technical grade factor into your decision to purchase the card? Obviously, for some ultra rarities, just the fact that you may finally have the opportunity to purchase an example of a card you have sought for years is enough to pull the trigger. But what about a card that is perhaps tough, but not impossible to obtain? From what I've seen on this board, eye appeal is a factor growing in influence.

Your comments are most appreciated.

Larry

[dstraate]

I don't really collect rarities (yet) but for me, eye appeal is everything. A clear image and nice centering will make me bid up to 30% over what I think fair value is. I've got a couple of PSA 2s that I wouldn't trade for half the 3s I see. Number grades are important from a business standpoint, but eye appeal is critical from a collecting standpoint.

[drc]

For a practical matter, eye appeal usually is reflected in resale value. Often, if you think it has eye appeal-- brighter colors, whatever--, others will agree.

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by dstraate

Number grades are important from a business standpoint, but eye appeal is critical from a collecting standpoint.

Well said.

[Leon]

I am not necessarily a high grade collector at all. I like eye appeal and will pay for it. When I find a card that is priced at the numeric grade, has awesome eye appeal for that grade, then I tend to buy it more often. I had been looking for a T205 Cobby forever. Even though you can literally find at least 10 every single day to buy (including ebay) you almost never see ones that don't have some sort of distraction to them. So far I have not seen any 6's that look better than this one I very recently acquired. Almost none of the 7's even look as good, except for the tiny bit of corner wear. The only thing about this one is that it had a speck of dirt on his cheek. As I told several friends that is all I could see.....not the beauty of the card. Two to three days ago I went ahead and cracked it from it's SGC 70 holder (*it's now raw) and the speck of dirt literally flew off of his cheek. I didn't even touch the card. Now I just need it back into a holder, for protection, and I am as good as gold (border)......So the short answer is eye appeal counts more than the number on the slab to me...or even it's technical grade regardless of it being slabbed or not. regards

[mintacular]

I'm glad this topic has been raised, recently a board member correctly reminded me that technical grades and eye appeal are two different factors i.e. technical grades do not quantify a cards' overall "eye appeal". Example: a perfect t card with a pinhole could and oftentimes get the same grade as a non-pinholed card but is an eye sore in every other respect.

Any further comments on this issue would be interesting for me to hear.

[famousgolfers]

It’s all about eye appeal for me. I have sold higher grade cards to buy or keep a lower grade card that has much better eye appeal to me. I often regularly pass on higher grade cards, where they just don’t present as well. I assume I am not in the minority, but I know a few people have to have those extra registry points! I do have some of my cards listed on the various registries, so I am not completely knocking those individuals.

[DeanH3]

Eye appeal is more important to me than technical grade. Like others, I prefer a lower grade with nicer eye appeal over a higher grade with less eye appeal.

[WhenItWasAHobby]

Definitely eye-appeal for me. When I was active on the PSA Registry, I'd sometime sacrifice a grade or two for a stunning, dead-centered, sharply focused, vibrant colored PSA 8 card instead of an PSA 9 or 10 that wasn't that aesthetically nice.

It's rather bizarre when one thinks about it. People pay sometimes tens of thousands of dollars more for a certain card compared to another because under 10X magnification they can't see traces of wear on the corners of one card but they can see microscopic wear on the corner of another card and that makes all the difference in value. The best example of late was the 1979 O-Pee-Chee Gretzky PSA 10 that went for $94,000+ while PSA 9 examples typically sell for $5,000 -$7,000. If you covered the flips on those 9's and 10, would you really see $85,000+ difference between the two?

[wonkaticket]

I deal with this all the time I’m really silly and picky. All the time I wrestle with the thought do I keep the higher grade & bump the overall grade points on the whole set avg. etc. Or do I do the collector in me and keep the more visually appealing example and down a grade.

In the end I think it’s what you are comfortable with. If you are all about the competition between other collectors with the Reg’s or you are really focused on resale, then you may want to keep the higher grades.

For me it’s always been about uniformity the cards have to have a look and feel and fit the following in this order. These are my rules and mine only you may have your own list that’s what makes the hobby great.

1. Color, Register, Depth
2. Corners
3. Overall Cleanliness
4. Centering
5. Matching or Uniformity (How does it fit with my other cards does it stick out or blend)

If the card meets these 5 above in spades then the grade in many ways become of no consequence to me.

I always look at it like this. I enjoy looking at the cards, I like these holder but you see one flip you’ve seen them all. I don’t spend hours poring over flips I do this over cards.

Some examples from my T206 set and the current which one do I keep game happening right now keep the 4’s or 5’s opinions welcome but not necessarily followed. LOL




Some of my keepers in my T206 set for sharing sake and uniformity examples…





That’s my take love to hear more about how people wrestle with this.

Cheers,

John

[wonkaticket]

BTW Leon you're scanner does not do that Cobb justice that is one of the best looking T205's of Cobb I have ever seen great pickup.

John

[Rickyy]

I'm also on the eye appeal as well... esp the clarity of the images ... I can live with the chewed up or rounded corners ... even off center... as long as its not diamond cut tilted too much.

[Delray Vintage]

I find grading a neccesary evil because of all the fakes and alterations out there. That being said I have always found it absurd that cards with blank backs with a missing milimeter get graded automatically to a 1 or 2. Twenty years ago that card would be a Nm. While I value eye appeal I also recognize how people price cards and the resale value is important. It is clear that eye appeal within the same grade makes a huge difference in price.

[shaunsteig]

I'm gonna partially agree with what's been posted. Eye appeal is certainly my starting point -- I have to enjoy viewing the card after purchasing, rather than simply enjoying its position on some spreadsheet or registry. I've had occasions where I got a "bargain" for the given technical grade but ultimately due to eye appeal didn't end up enjoying the card. In situations of the reverse (ie low grade but strong eye appeal), I've never been disappointed.

Where I might deviate from the other posts is that I won't overpay for the eye appeal alone. Meaning the technical grade will determine the price that I'm willing to pay, but I won't go outside of it. I don't collect to resell, but I do feel that I need to protect myself in case that I do end up selling things (ie, times change, or I end up with a duplicate after a lot purchase, or I end up upgrading the card). So for that reason I avoid paying beyond the usual price for a given grade.

Good question, thanks for starting the discussion.
--S

[ls7plus]

Well illustrated, Wonka, and worthy of a textbook regarding this point. Thanks for taking the time to dig the cards out and scan.

Best regards,

Larry

[Steve D]

For me, eye appeal is the deciding factor in whether to purchase a specific card or not.

I have a specific grade I'm looking for with a card. So, the grade puts a specific card on my radar. If the card has the eye appeal I'm looking for, I go it. If the card doesn't have the eye appeal, I pass on it.

Steve

[mintacular]

Wonkaticket, could you define "depth"? That is a condition characteristic I've never considered and would like to learn more. Seriously.

[cfc1909]

GriffithA.jpg

GriffithAb.jpg

Dahlan.jpg

Dahlanb.jpg

[3-2-count]

I think John said it best when he stated, "I enjoy looking at the cards. I like the holders but when you've see one flip you’ve seen them all. I don’t spend hours pouring over flips, I do this over the cards". I'd like to add and this is only my opinion, but I think many of us have fallen into a funk anymore of placing a value on a card based solely on what number these darn third party graders have assigned to the flip. Sad!! Very sad indeed!! I'd prefer to be the judge of that thank you. Eye appeal trumps all. Fantastic cards everyone..........

[3-2-count]

[wonkaticket]

Originally Posted by mintacular

Wonkaticket, could you define "depth"? That is a condition characteristic I've never considered and would like to learn more. Seriously.

Jim & Tony, amazing cards as always!

Pat, depth is when the image has more color and a more 3D look and feel to it. You will notice with many of these cards sometimes they can be in focus but the colors are more mute or not as vivid.

When the colors are layed more boldly as Tony's cards show the central image seems to pop more from the background giving more depth. This also can result in faces having more detail and shading almost making many images of players faces look not like the other. You can see this in the Mitchell card above see not only does it have more deatil in the face but the body of the player seems to not blend with the background as much. I Have a few other examples I will show.

Hope this helps.

Tony could not have said it better myslef we are in a plastic funk and need to break out a bit and get back to the cards the holders can be a nice addition to the cards but shouldn't be the central attention grabber that should be left up to the cards.

Cheers,

John

[ls7plus]

Many thanks to all for taking the time not only to post, but to dig out superb cards demonstrating tremendous eye appeal far exceeding their technical grade!

Sincerely,

Larry

PS: Some beautiful looking cards, Tony A.!

[Big Six]

I originally thought I would be doing my Diamond Stars set in nothing less than PSA 6...until I realized that there seemed to be far more PSA 5s that were nicely centered and had a better eye appeal than the PSA 6s I was limiting myself to...now that I'm open to 5s, I have more selection, can be more picky and have a few extra bucks to throw at the project...just my $.02...

[Jcfowler6]

In my opinion the number assigned by PSA or any other grading service is just an opinion. Usually formed after only a very brief time with it. It's nice to have them in a case protected. Other than that ignore the number and pic up a pretty card when it crosses your path.

[Bicem]

I like high grade ugly cards.

[Mikehealer]

I am all about the grade.

[scooter729]

I certainly am about the eye appeal of it, when cards like this can get the same technical grade as the Marquard right above (no offense to you, Mikehealer!)....

[39special]

Eye appeal. If a card catches my eye,thats what is about to me.

[rdixon1208]

[GrayGhost]

Eye appeal as well. I have a Boston Store card and a Cracker Jack that are both SGC "A" and IMO, despite a little trimming, look MUCH nicer than a Poor or w/e. That is my general rule, w some exceptions.

[ls7plus]

That Walter Johnson reminds me of my '56 Kahns' Frank Robinson, Scott--Ex+ front, slight back damage, apparently from being glued into a scrapbook and improperly removed. It received a grade of "fair" from SGC, but I'd been looking for one that looked even halfway decent for many years, and was [and am] absolutely delighted with it!

Thanks for all the responses, guys. I really wanted to know what the hardcore guys thought.

Larry