bought a loupe/ afraid to submit/scan added

bifff257

I have a pretty large pile of cards( late 70's ) I was going to submit to psa during the March special, until I bought a loupe last week and began to really "look" at the cards. Now I don't think any of them will get higher than a 7(UGH!!!!!!!!!)

Is there some "balance" that is needed when looking at cards with a Loupe? It is amazing to me all the "flaws" I see on a card that to the naked eye looks like an easy 9.

mikeschmidt

sometimes you won't know until you submit some cards and see how PSA grades them.

Every card has flaws. The larger you magnify, the more obvious they are. What mag. level are you looking at? 5x, 7x, 10x? At any rate -- you can post cards here and we can all give you our objective opinion, too.

What grades would you be happy with?

Even nearly all of my PSA 10s have flaws under certain magnification levels. I typically don't use a loupe for submission purposes -- I judge centering, print marks, and then closely examine each corner with my eye. And I do pretty well at getting only 8s and above, when that's what I'm looking for....

~ms

Brian48

None of my 10's are flawless. There's always an imperfection somewhere.

envoy98

I agree with MS. It does depend on what level of magnification you are using. I have a 5x / 10x loupe that I use. But to be honest, 99% of the cards I disqualify from my submissions are removed via the naked eye using a halogen lamp. It is important that it is halogen. I use a 50w desklamp I got at Target for $10. You will find surface wrinkles, dents, pits, potmarks, roller marks, odd surface coloring recoloring in some cases, and other general surface flaws.

I first do a quick once over separating solely on centering. Once I have that pile, I do a quick once over looking at the corners, removing any obviously poor ones. Once they've made it to round three, I run them under the halogen lamp where I am primarily looking for surface wrinkles and dents or roller marks/creases/bends etc. If they pass that round and go to round four, I pull out the loupe and give a quick once over with the "big eye" (5x) then move on to the "small eye" 10x. I usually allow for a small amount of visible chipping under the 10x but try to avoid cards with obvious corner wear and chipping visible under 5x. It seems that most things that are caught at the 5x but not to the naked eye, find their way into PSA 7 holders and usually look more like 8's to the naked eye.

Once that is done, I put them in card saver I's and wait a day or two. I then make another pass through them, comparing them to any peers. (duplicates or other cards from the same year & brand) and I usually end up pulling out a couple of others that don't look as good as I first thought. I tend to do quite well with my submissions, but there are still times I miss things but it's pretty rare.

I always pre-grade my cards too. I print off two copies of the submission form and I write the grade I think the card should get on my sheet. Once I get the grades, I compare. I am about 70%+ being dead on. The other 30% I am wrong on, I usually under-graded as opposed to over-graded. So if I could treat my grade as a "this or better", I'm closer to 90%. It's taken me a LOT of submissions to get to that point though.

Wow, that became a lot more writing than I intended.

Anyways, hope that helps.

-Josh

dpfitzell

I know you guys are talking about psa, but I sent in a 86 donruss rookie barry bonds with bgs got a bgs 7.5 I was shocked thought I would get at least 8.5.

bifff257

Thank you all for you feedback, the discussion has helped me alot to understand grading.




<< <i>The larger you magnify, the more obvious they are. What mag. level are you looking at? 5x, 7x, 10x? >>




It is a 10x



<< <i>I usually allow for a small amount of visible chipping under the 10x but try to avoid cards with obvious corner wear and chipping visible under 5x. >>




I think that is my problem, to the naked eye the cards look great, under 10x I see the chipping on the corners.






<< <i>What grades would you be happy with? >>




Well because they are all 1976- 1979 cards I think anything less than a Psa 9 for the commons is not worth submitting for resale.
Some of the star cards I could live with an 8

envoy98

Corners that look Mint-Gem Mint to the naked eye, usually look mint under 5x, or show very minor signs of wear. Under 10x, just about anything is possible. On white bordered cards, it's less of a distraction than on colored and especially dark bordered cards. Ie 86 Topps FB, 85 Topps FB, 95 SP Football, 71 Topps baseball, 62 Topps baseball etc...

If you see signs of wear under 10x but not under 5x or to the naked eye, an 8-9 is probably a very realistic grade. Assuming corners were the sole characteristic being judged. If you see little to no flaws under 10x, hope for the 10!!!

BugOnTheRug

good thing you didn't look at them under a 40X microscope

cravetopps

I bet you might find some flaws on Halle Berry under a loupe as well.

Boopotts

<< <i>Thank you all for you feedback, the discussion has helped me alot to understand grading.




<< <i>The larger you magnify, the more obvious they are. What mag. level are you looking at? 5x, 7x, 10x? >>




It is a 10x



<< <i>I usually allow for a small amount of visible chipping under the 10x but try to avoid cards with obvious corner wear and chipping visible under 5x. >>




I think that is my problem, to the naked eye the cards look great, under 10x I see the chipping on the corners.






<< <i>What grades would you be happy with? >>




Well because they are all 1976- 1979 cards I think anything less than a Psa 9 for the commons is not worth submitting for resale.
Some of the star cards I could live with an 8 >>



A good rule of thumb, I think, is if you have to agonize over a card it's not worth submitting for the purposes of resale.

bifff257

Here are a couple of scans as examples: See the chipping at the bottom:

bifff257

Wanted some opinions about these cards as examples?


thanks Guys

themetalsign

Based on the scan I would grade the Cobb 6 and the Grove 7.5









Dave D.

MikeyLikesIt

The Grove is a TOUGH card to find in that condition. It's historcally off center so at least you've got that taken care of. I would guess it's an 8 with a slim chance at a 9. I've certainly had cards come back with that kind of chipping as 9's.

The Cobb, not so much due to the tilt.

HoofHearted

<< <i>I bet you might find some flaws on Halle Berry under a loupe as well. >>



Blasphemous!

GDM67

The only thing wrong with Halle Berry is her current absence from my lap.

dpfitzell

The only thing wrong with Halle Berry is her current absence from my lap.

cardbender

Your Cobb looks like a 7 due to the l-r centering near the bottom.
Don't trust psa's published guidelines for centering. They're actually tighter than that. You need 35-65 or better to get an 8. If a card is 70-30 like your Cobb, it's almost certainly a 7. Trust me, I've spent hundreds of dollars in grading fee's finding this out.

It's the 'eye appeal' loophole in the grading guidelines which I feel is a way to get more submissions. PSA often doesn't adhere to their own published grading parameters with regard to centering ranges.

In sending cards into psa for grading, I would certainly be conservative in your centering measurements.

You're L. Grove card looks like a solid 8 with a shot at a 9 depending on the grader's opinion.