Buy the card and not the grade movement

[towerymt]

Originally Posted by raddoc25

The downside with eye appeal becoming more important is the trickery some engage in. Scans can hide pinholes and wrinkles. Those PSA 2's that look like PSA 7s? They almost always have a faint or not-so-faint wrinkle. I've been sticking to higher grades that shouldn't have any wrinkles, hidden or not. A lot of pictures of off centered cards are taken at an angle to hide the centering. It's amazing how everyone's centered cards are shot straight on but the off centered ones are shot at an obnoxious angle.

In the end, the responsibility lies with you, as the buyer, to ask the questions before you purchase. "Can I see a picture of the card straight on?" "Does this card have any wrinkles or surface defects?" "Can I see more pictures of the card?"

+1

PSA-6 -- should be pretty much what you see is what you get. Maybe a scuff or stain.

PSA-5 -- I've had one that looked like an 8, but had a ~1" light wrinkle on the back. Usually clean of those things you can't really see in 2-D images, but no guarantee.

PSA-4.5 and below....if it looks too good, it's probably hiding something on the surface that you won't necessarily see in 2-D images.


Here's one of my examples with a few images to illustrate the bolded comment above.

Photo -- once you know where the problem lies, you can see it in this photo. But you can't tell how bad it is from this photo and that's the important part.



Scan -- now you see it?


The seller of this card when I bought it actually went above and beyond, showing this photo that highlighted the crease.

[Jibbers23]

Anybody have an opinion to offer on this 52 bowman Mantle. I only have the money for something like this every blue moon and I am very much in the camp of buying for eye appeal, however that is tricky online.

This almost seems too good for a 4 except I can’t tell what is going on with that little black spot at the top left of the border. Any help would be much appreciated. Hopefully I can post the pics correctly. On a side note. Mantle has always been king of post 50 vintage but I feel him pulling away from people like Mays (who i’m a even bigger fan of) lately. I don’t know if it’s the newer people getting into cards who see Jordan tearing up basketball and think that you have to go after one person only in all genres. Can’t figure it out.

How do I make pictures from my photo library way bigger so people can actually see them?

[Jibbers23]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/20516114024...mis&media=COPY

Hopefully that works. The colors almost seen AI enhanced or something. Maybe not.

[towerymt]

It looks like it could be black plastic debris from the internal border piece? I can't tell for sure...ask the seller. It looks like the ebay images match the SGC scans, and I didn't come up with a prior sale so I didn't find any other images of the card.



Images from SGC (click for full size)

[vintg]

ok, here goes my educated "guesses" WITHOUT a loupe/magnification

1) sgc downgrades due to poor centering, t/b is not good, l/r is not great

2) very light "scuff" on left cheek and neck

3) mark on top left of border

---------

4) it is my belief that tpg's are OVERLY tough on major stars. i.e. if this
was a "common" , may get a 5

it IS a really good looking card, all things considered

[Jibbers23]

Thanks for the input

[Jibbers23]

Thanks for noticing the scuff. Didn’t see that.

[Mahomie]

Picked up a Charlie Chaplin card at a show this weekend:



It's from a 1920 set out of Spain that featured famous film stars from that era.

To me, the card's condition actually contributes to the overall aesthetic.

[inaka]

That Chaplin card is a beauty!

Like you said, the "patina" adds to the charm and eye appeal. Nice pickup!

[corndog]

Originally Posted by Mahomie

Picked up a Charlie Chaplin card at a show this weekend:



It's from a 1920 set out of Spain that featured famous film stars from that era.

To me, the card's condition actually contributes to the overall aesthetic.

That is such a nice 100+ year old beauty!

[Mahomie]

Originally Posted by inaka

That Chaplin card is a beauty!

Like you said, the "patina" adds to the charm and eye appeal. Nice pickup!

Originally Posted by corndog

That is such a nice 100+ year old beauty!

Thanks, y'all!

It's interesting to see how certain elements of trading cards have stayed constant over the years.

[raddoc25]

Was watching a couple of Willie Mays on REA tonight. Massive sales again for centered vintage. The premium being paid for centering/eye appeal keeps going up up up.

A centered 1958 PSA 7 sold for $3700 which is pretty much double the usual comps of $1600-1800 for this card. The 1958 Topps is a tough set with low pop counts at high grades so I figured this card would be at $2000-2200. Not even close.

A beautiful 1953 Topps PSA 5.5 sold for $9000. Another PSA 5.5 that's not as well centered literally sold for $5250 yesterday. In fact, last 3 PSA 5.5 sales were all under $6k. A PSA 6 sold for $6900 on REA tonight.

[discodanman45]

Originally Posted by raddoc25

Was watching a couple of Willie Mays on REA tonight. Massive sales again for centered vintage. The premium being paid for centering/eye appeal keeps going up up up.

A centered 1958 PSA 7 sold for $3700 which is pretty much double the usual comps of $1600-1800 for this card. The 1958 Topps is a tough set with low pop counts at high grades so I figured this card would be at $2000-2200. Not even close.

A beautiful 1953 Topps PSA 5.5 sold for $9000. Another PSA 5.5 that's not as well centered literally sold for $5250 yesterday. In fact, last 3 PSA 5.5 sales were all under $6k. A PSA 6 sold for $6900 on REA tonight.

People are trusting a two dimensional scans way too much and bidding wars are insane. I stick to COMC and eBay for the most part, have my eye on a few cards on Fanatics Collect, but the cards will likely go over typical eBay prices with an additional 20% buyers premium thrown on top.

I won't mind paying up for a 2/3 on a big card IF I can hold it in my hand under good lighting. I am not going to pay 4 prices for a 2 with a scan. Sellers can hide card issues and make colors pop with subtle changes in software like Photoshop. The amount of money being thrown around in vintage now is insanity. That 1.5 Cracker Joe Jackson was truly crazy unless the buyer saw the card in person before purchasing.

[lklopfenstein]

So happy to get this gray back and great centering

[BuffJake]

Just snagged a '54 Bowman of the great Larry Doby that looks tremendous! Honestly far better than many of the higher grades I've seen. Centering, clarity and colors are all sharp! The back is super clean and bright too!

[discodanman45]

Originally Posted by BuffJake

Just snagged a '54 Bowman of the great Larry Doby that looks tremendous! Honestly far better than many of the higher grades I've seen. Centering, clarity and colors are all sharp! The back is super clean and bright too!

Beauty! Underrated player, underrated set, and registration is perfect. I have cards like this and there is a surface wrinkle somewhere, but unless you look at an angle, there is no way to see it. Especially with my deteriorating vision, I sometimes can't see the wrinkles at all.

For vintage my two top factors are registration and then centering. This card has both.

[VanLingoMungo46]

Indeed '54 Bowman has a few unique qualities. I have a Junior Gilliam that is quite nice looking but does have those same spider wrinkles discodanman spoketh of above. You really have to squint to see them in the right light. I was in a grading mood at the time because I think this issue looks great in a tuxedo, and felt the 5 they gave it was quite generous, although it does have nice eye appeal. Here is that one and a couple of other Dodgers in my PC:

[discodanman45]

Originally Posted by VanLingoMungo46

Indeed '54 Bowman has a few unique qualities. I have a Junior Gilliam that is quite nice looking but does have those same spider wrinkles discodanman spoketh of above. You really have to squint to see them in the right light. I was in a grading mood at the time because I think this issue looks great in a tuxedo, and felt the 5 they gave it was quite generous, although it does have nice eye appeal. Here is that one and a couple of other Dodgers in my PC:

We are talking about cardboard that is 70 plus years old. Surface wrinkles happen.

With card cleaning and techniques used by people like Kurt, I think we will start to see issues pop up in holders. Maybe these card "cleaning" techniques can temporarily hide wrinkles and stains, but they might come back inside the holders. Only time will tell. There are a lot of people "restoring" cards right now unfortunately. A card that receives a 5/6/7 may have more serious issues as times pass by inside the holder.

[Mahomie]

^nice color and registration on those 54 Bowmans

[Gary]

Originally Posted by VanLingoMungo46

The eye appeal on these 2 are beautiful with the centering and color .......nice cards.

[Tea10]

Originally Posted by discodanman45

There is a big movement among vintage collectors right now to ignore the grade on the label and buy the card inside the slab. I think it is generally a positive thing, but people need to be careful of this. As someone who grades vintage cards, the cards inside the holder don't look the same as the card when it is raw. Slabs can sometimes mask very serious issues like bends and if you buy cards online, creases can be very difficult to see and the color can be less vibrant.

I think this is a very good strategy for truly scarce or expensive cards. If I am looking for a 1933 Goudey Ruth, eye-appeal is everything. If you are buying a common card like a 1971 Topps Hank Aaron, I would suggest going for a better condition cards instead of overpaying for a beautiful looking PSA/SGC 2 to 3. I would personal just be patient for a really nice 5/6 for that card.

Right now it is seeming that a lot of people are just looking at the 2 to 4 grades to try to find a high eye-appeal card for cheap. The problem is that a lot of other people are doing the same and driving the prices of these cards 2/3 times over comps. I am personally just collecting oddball stuff right now like 50's and older Wheaties and just buying up raw cards. My graded collection will be a lot smaller in 2025. Trying to move into much rarer cards for graded and more player runs in top-loaders for the 50's to 80's.

I totally agree. First off - grading is at marketing on some level.

There is no consistency within one company, let alone the 4-5+ that are slabbing these cards. And secondly - sometimes a 1-3 looks way better than a massively off-center or blurry face printed 4-6.

I like collecting the card itself, the player, the rarity. I will say, I do like graded just for that extra step to ensure the card is real and not a fake. But totally agreed.

[towerymt]

[nevermore]

Picked this for my Yankees run. I haven't been as picky with the commons, but wanted a decent copy of this particular card. Seems I overpaid about half-grade to full grade above comps. Perhaps too much of a premium for eye appeal?Curious to hear thoughts of more experienced vintage collectors here.

https://goldin.co/item/1953-topps-82...-sgc-pr-1ul3p5

[Sluggerrr]

Great card. Paper loss, or white out, on the perfect spot on the back. The best kind of a 1 grade card.

[raddoc25]

Great looking centered SGC 1. Looks better than a SGC 2 of this card I sold a year ago. Yes, it's a big premium but there was at least one other person willing to pay nearly that much (the underbidder). And that's the point of the thread. Eye appeal and centering will often trump grades, particularly at lower grades where the spectrum of eye appeal is so high and where the price difference between grades is relatively lower.