Eye Appeal -vs- Technical Grade

[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.

[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

[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