[Archive]

Posted By: Corey R. Shanus

To the extent the grading service would distinguish between a first and second generation print, grading would have some usefulness -- a bit like the usefulness of saying whether a card has been altered or not. With that said, though, unless the grading service has in its employ some photographic superstar, I would be reluctant to give much weight to what the grading company says. More than any other factor, whether the photo is first or second generation will have the biggest bearing on its value. Answering that is not always so clear cut, and I for one would be more comfortable getting an opinion from an INDIVIDUAL recognized as an authority in that area, as opposed to from a grading COMPANY.

Other than opining whether the photo is first or second generation, anything else the grading company would say in my view is worthless. It is just too subjective an area to set grading standards. I for one put tremendous stock in photo contrast and resolution, and to that end am very tolerant of abuse to the mount. Others might prefer a better mount with a somewhat lighter photo. There is no right or wrong and it is nonsensical to assign a photo a numerical grade when there is such a broad range of opinion as to the condition criteria.