![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Mr. Met
This is now only my second post on this site. I wanted to sound off about the failure of most grading companies to account for poor register within the given grades they assign to cards. To me, I would rather have an SGC 60 (or a PSA 5) that has perfect register than an SGC 84 (or PSA 7) that is blurry. In my opinion, we are collecting cards mostly for the visual appeal thereof. Therefore, why would I want to own a blurry card????????? It drives me nuts when I see a high-grade card for sale with a blurry card. Why bother????? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: leon
Almost all collectors, except the "number on the plastic" folks agree, especially in 19th century sepia type cards (N172,n175 etc). The photo is always the most important thing and the grading companies won't take it into account. I have had PSA and SGC cards that were high grade and they looked like a shadow of a player....yet I have had cards graded a 1 with almost perfect photos, absolutely gorgeous, and some damage to the blank back.....I doubt it will ever be corrected to have the photo taken into account as it's too subjective....regards |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
I think it would be reasonable for grading services to subtract one grade for a blurry card or for a photographic card with a light photo, and to add one grade for a card with an absolutely pristine photo. And that's at the minimum. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Mr. Met
I agree about the Old Judge and vintage photo cards. I really notice the bad register issue on 1950-1952 Bowman baseball and football - beautiful cards, but when blurry, no reason to even own them. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: steve yawitz
I'm also fanatical about registration - to the point that I'd probably prefer a pinholed or tape-stained SGC 10 with near-perfect registration to an SGC 60 that might have one color just a skosh off. But it certainly seems like the grading companies pay it no mind. (Does PSA even still use the OF qualifier?) Nor do some collectors. I don't understand it, but to each his own, I guess. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: davidcycleback
If the graders don't include registration in the grade (and I don't know that that is true), I think it's a good thing. It forces collectors to realize that they have to rely on more than the number grade to evaluate a card, and that two cards of identical grade can sell for different prices. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Gilbert Maines
The appearance of a card is only evidence substantiating its grade. The slab is proof. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
IT'S THE SHARPNESS OF THE CORNERS....STUPID" ! ! ....... |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Joe D.
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: davidcycleback
Most Pre-War to Modern card collectors, SGC to PSA to Beckett collectors, agree that registration is important. So it's not just a vintage thing. 15 year olds don't want their Ichiro refractor out of focus either. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Steve f
I agree, registration is the paramount criteria... Did anyone else find the dolphin in that Coan? |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
BcB Auction only 7 Days Left to Register & Bid | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 0 | 04-16-2009 08:37 AM |
Poor Condition T206 cards wanted | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 6 | 02-17-2007 10:43 PM |
Scans are blurry (SGC)!!!!!!!!!! | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 28 | 11-21-2006 02:13 PM |
BUYING POOR T-206 cards | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 3 | 12-27-2005 08:10 AM |
poor condition cards | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 8 | 05-17-2005 05:24 PM |