Home PSA Set Registry Forum

Computer Grading?

Been a while since I’ve been on here!
years ago they tried Computer grading coins.

To say it did not work out, nor was it popular would be an extreme understatement
Only lasted a few months as I recall somewhere around 1986.

Is it possible things could of changed since then? Yes and NO.

As with the coins - Computers can’t pickup subtleties of the cardboard as well as
Humans can (in my humble opinion!) just like with the metal on a coin.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Tony
KalineFan RIP my hero

Comments

  • JoeBanzaiJoeBanzai Posts: 8,638 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Welcome back!

    Why does one have to replace the other?

    I think a combination of the two would improve the process. A machine can measure the card and check for centering much faster and more accurately that the human eye.

    The human eye is also a great way to "pickup subtleties of the cardboard" that a machine might miss.

    At $300.00 a card the machine should be affordable?

    2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
  • UrbanDecay04UrbanDecay04 Posts: 816 ✭✭✭✭

    Seems like a similar concept to coin grading... A computer (if they were to try) wouldn't be able to pick up the scratch marks that the human eye can... that said a combination of the two may be able to give a much stronger output and grade, than if just one or the other could.

    YN collector: Been doing it for 3 years and would never consider myself an expert! :)
    BST: MorganMan94

  • ArmourPhilArmourPhil Posts: 91 ✭✭

    I couldn't disagree more strongly. For anyone watching a baseball game on TV this is like do you trust the umpire or the "box" that sees the ball as it crosses a certain x,y,z coordinate ?

    I work in electronics and the optical inspection equipment available today is so much better than the human eye that this is not worth discussing. They are capable of looking at things that are sub micron. ALSO they can be tuned to grade within a certain window (i.e accept flaws that are no bigger than X ) . I don't know what they were trying to use on coins in 1986, but todays electronic equipment (after being set for the parameters your looking for) can replace every one of PSAs graders and from the quality of some of the work I have seen I say "don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out"

    I especially love their PSA excuse catch phrase "eye appeal" which means "I don't care what you think we are not changing the grade"

    These kind of inspection robotics also dont get tired. Do the math on how many cards they are grading and how many seconds they have to come to a grade for each card. Do a few hundred in a row and tell me that doesn't affect your judgement ...robots don't get tired.

    Anyway if we all want the most consistent grading possible and really want to be sure that no one is getting favored treatment turn it over to the robots. Thats my vote !

  • JoeBanzaiJoeBanzai Posts: 8,638 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ArmourPhil said:
    I couldn't disagree more strongly. For anyone watching a baseball game on TV this is like do you trust the umpire or the "box" that sees the ball as it crosses a certain x,y,z coordinate ?

    I work in electronics and the optical inspection equipment available today is so much better than the human eye that this is not worth discussing. They are capable of looking at things that are sub micron. ALSO they can be tuned to grade within a certain window (i.e accept flaws that are no bigger than X ) . I don't know what they were trying to use on coins in 1986, but todays electronic equipment (after being set for the parameters your looking for) can replace every one of PSAs graders and from the quality of some of the work I have seen I say "don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out"

    I especially love their PSA excuse catch phrase "eye appeal" which means "I don't care what you think we are not changing the grade"

    These kind of inspection robotics also dont get tired. Do the math on how many cards they are grading and how many seconds they have to come to a grade for each card. Do a few hundred in a row and tell me that doesn't affect your judgement ...robots don't get tired.

    Anyway if we all want the most consistent grading possible and really want to be sure that no one is getting favored treatment turn it over to the robots. Thats my vote !

    It's nice to see someone who has an understanding of optical inspection equipment.

    I have been pondering this for quite some time. I have been out of the business for 20+ years, but I am curious how the machine would detect print dots.

    I am assuming every single card would have to be individually programmed for the machine to catch every flaw. Then just what do you do with an "obvious" print blob right on the players face as opposed to a "minor" one in the background?

    Are the machines advanced enough to "figure out" flaws now?

    I like the idea of humans having part of the inspection process, but not nearly as much as now.

    2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
Sign In or Register to comment.