Evid of Coloration or Evid of Trim
bowlarama
Posts: 169 ✭✭
I have been submitting cards now for about 2 years. I am trying to learn the way to detect evidince of coloration on the "black beauties like 1971T BB, 1962T FB, 1985T FB. I have invested in a black light and a magnifying lamp. These tools have been valuable in detecting. ounterfeit cards. I have even caught a few cards where the sharpie marker recoloring was obvious, but I still seem to get a few rejected for recoloration from time to time. Frustrating is that it is usually a key rookie or star card that gets rejected. When I get them back I revisit the cards and find nothing. (Ironically, if I resub them they typically get graded)
Same thing with regard to Evidence of Trimming. I always measure the cards before sending them in. Anything that doesn't measure right (or look right) just doesn't get submitted. Yet, I always get a few rejects. Again I spend some time reviewing them to see what I missed. Then I resub and most get slabbed.
Any pointers or explanations from experienced submitters?
Of course, I have also experienced the same thing when I used to try "cracking and resubbing" cards that looked better than their slab grades.
I also wanted to mention that it seems to only affect the black beauty cards...
Same thing with regard to Evidence of Trimming. I always measure the cards before sending them in. Anything that doesn't measure right (or look right) just doesn't get submitted. Yet, I always get a few rejects. Again I spend some time reviewing them to see what I missed. Then I resub and most get slabbed.
Any pointers or explanations from experienced submitters?
Of course, I have also experienced the same thing when I used to try "cracking and resubbing" cards that looked better than their slab grades.
I also wanted to mention that it seems to only affect the black beauty cards...
0
Comments
almost all have since been resubbed and graded appropriately.
the few i chose not to send back, actually did have clearly detectable coloring on the tips, so at least they got it right those few times.
i feel they take an extra amount of caution with regards to this issue and automatically reject cards when they don't feel completely confident.
all part of the game. thank goodness all vintage Topps cards aren't color bordered.
Funny, like you I have sent them back in and every single one has gotten a grade with only one OC.
Recolored cards that are returned are usually recolored cards that I missed.
Joe
<< <i>several years ago, i subbed a large hoard of 71's and about 20% were returned ungradeable due to recoloration, trimming or Min. Size requirements.
almost all have since been resubbed and graded appropriately. >>
This is exactly what is wrong with PSA. I don't consider it to be "part of the game". Did those card magically become un-recolored or un-trimmed? Aren't these people grading experts?
<< <i>
<< <i>several years ago, i subbed a large hoard of 71's and about 20% were returned ungradeable due to recoloration, trimming or Min. Size requirements.
almost all have since been resubbed and graded appropriately. >>
This is exactly what is wrong with PSA. I don't consider it to be "part of the game". Did those card magically become un-recolored or un-trimmed? Aren't these people grading experts? >>
i appreciate your sentiments Daniel. i was rather shocked when i checked out my grades and received the ungraded cards back.
first of all, to clarify, the hoard of 71's was part of a substantial lot which i submitted, and it has always been my opinion that in the past, large orders were processed rather hastily, and perhaps somewhat recklessly, resulting in inconsistencies.
remember, that's my opinion.
the other side of the story, is that regardless of your opinion or mine, we pay THEM for an opinion, too. that's all it is. i understand that fact.
i simply contend that sometimes their opinion is wrong and react accordingly. it's my best bet to achieve satisfaction.
we can agree that they are not at all perfect. the "game" as i call it, is a label to the process.
win, lose or in reference to the 71's, draw.
<< <i>
<< <i>several years ago, i subbed a large hoard of 71's and about 20% were returned ungradeable due to recoloration, trimming or Min. Size requirements.
almost all have since been resubbed and graded appropriately. >>
This is exactly what is wrong with PSA. I don't consider it to be "part of the game". Did those card magically become un-recolored or un-trimmed? Aren't these people grading experts? >>
I'm with Dan on this one.
I understand that we pay for their opinion but there's just certain things that aren't a matter of "opinion". For instance, if someone deemed a card trimmed, one would assume the card didn't meet the l&w requirements. So, how does the card then get re-subbed and into a holder if not that the next person didn't do their job?
Same with re-coloring issues.
<< <i>It's in PSA's best interest to reject cards that they deem borderline. Better that than have trimmed or recoloured cards in holders. If they find a few recoloured cards in a submission, I'm sure they will be extra cautious when assessing the rest of the cards. >>
It's in PSA's best interest to get it right. Perhaps they need to slow down just a bit and not waste their customers time and money.
Just a thought.
Joe
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>several years ago, i subbed a large hoard of 71's and about 20% were returned ungradeable due to recoloration, trimming or Min. Size requirements.
almost all have since been resubbed and graded appropriately. >>
This is exactly what is wrong with PSA. I don't consider it to be "part of the game". Did those card magically become un-recolored or un-trimmed? Aren't these people grading experts? >>
I'm with Dan on this one.
I understand that we pay for their opinion but there's just certain things that aren't a matter of "opinion". For instance, if someone deemed a card trimmed, one would assume the card didn't meet the l&w requirements. So, how does the card then get re-subbed and into a holder if not that the next person didn't do their job?
Same with re-coloring issues. >>
PSA is being paid for their "expert" opinion about whether or not a card is in an unaltered state,
and if so what grade (from their scale) it qualifies for.
As they are human beings, they are not perfect. However, one would expect more issues around
the subjectiveness of assigning the grade than errors about evidence of trimming.
Many years back I submitted a Koufax RC that came back EOT. Same card sent to SGC came back
an 80. So who messed up? If there is EOT then that can't change. I can see the subjectivity of the
two graders resulting in a different grade, but physical alteration of a card should be apparent to BOTH
if they are truly "experts".
Who was right in this case? I have no way to know for sure. All I can say is that, based on the superior
prices received by most postwar PSA cards on the market compared to their SGC counterparts, market perception
seems to feel that PSA provides a better pedigree of authenticity (even with the mistakes they make).
I'm not perfect, so I guess I can live with the fact that PSA doesn't get it right 100% of the time (but they seem to
be getting it right a lot more than they do wrong, and certainly more so than any other TPG company if we are to respect
the performance of PSA cards in the market).
Dave