OJ collectors: should these be graded..

[ScottFandango]

...with different criteria?

Isn't the IMAGE in the OJ the most important aspect? I hate it when I can hardly see the image yet its graded 60...

...and then you see one graded 10 and it has a GREAT IMAGE!

the first thing I notice in an OJ is NOT it's corners, its the image...

Anyone hearing me on this?

[tiger8mush]

I'm hearing ya. However, I think grading should (attempt to) remain objective. Base the grade solely on the technical aspects of the card (corners, paper loss, creases, etc) and not the beauty of the card which is subjective. I'll guess that many OJ collectors don't give a hoot about the grade anyway. But certainly worthy of a discussion

[ScottFandango]

Originally Posted by tiger8mush

I'm hearing ya. However, I think grading should (attempt to) remain objective. Base the grade solely on the technical aspects of the card (corners, paper loss, creases, etc) and not the beauty of the card which is subjective. I'll guess that many OJ collectors don't give a hoot about the grade anyway. But certainly worthy of a discussion

Isn't EVERY aspect of grading subjective?

There is no mathematical reasoning when grading corners or paper wear...

I think Image Quality (registration) is just as measurable as corner wear...

[Matthew H]

If a T206 was faded I'm sure they would knock it down a few grades. Same should go for OJs.

[ScottFandango]

Originally Posted by Matthew H

If a T206 was faded I'm sure they would knock it down a few grades. Same should go for OJs.

Well faded is the word I would use to describe most OJs....I wouldn't say the about t206.....most t206 are very colorful still...tough comparisons due to black and white vs color...

Most t206s have great color and I find myself looking at centering and corner wear way more than registration in t206s....not so in OJs

[ScottFandango]

Since they are so old, and have no color, shouldn't IMAGE CLARITY trump all, more so than any other issue!