How Long Has PSA Been Slabbing Sketches With Grades?

[finfangfan]

Originally Posted by mjohnatgt

Zero chance unless it's already identified as the character by COMC in the submission form.

We shall see… CGC got “Ultron-12” (see pic in earlier post) not just the generic “Ultron” and I don’t think that was on the COMC description.

[mjohnatgt]

PSA is not CGC. And I think CGC should have slabbed it as card #006, since it is specific to the artist they sent the blanks to. I sent COMC some correction requests, but I'll email Rich and see if he can make it a policy there.

[finfangfan]

Originally Posted by mjohnatgt

PSA is not CGC. And I think CGC should have slabbed it as card #006, since it is specific to the artist they sent the blanks to. I sent COMC some correction requests, but I'll email Rich and see if he can make it a policy there.

Where on the label would you put “card #006”? I actually like the label “as is” so hopefully “Rich” (whoever that is) doesn’t botch things going forward. I really think CGC should have never gotten rid of the blue CGC label. I loved how that looked. I’ve been doing more through PSA ever since COMC added them as an option but if CGC would have kept the blue label I would have stuck with them (even though PSA has a premium in secondary).

EDIT: here is the card front again since it is now pushed back to last page…

[mjohnatgt]

They'd put the card number where the #50 is on this label.

Nice thing about the new artist-specific card numbers if that if COMC catalogs them properly, they'll have many fewer "UNKNOWN ARTIST" going forward. We'll know the artist assigned to each number for each set, and then also be able to tell if the artist they were given to sold them as blanks or someone bought their card, erased it, and had another artist do a card on top.

Rich was previously the lead of the COMC identifications team. He put together many of the rules they use to catalog cards on the site.

[finfangfan]

I don’t think “Card 006” would add anything tbh since they got the artist name right on the label. I don’t think “Card 006” would add anything to the value of the card if you were trying to sell. It would just confuse things imo and look cluttered on the label… they got character, set, and artist… perfect as is.

EDIT: and the difference between the two pictures above is the X-23 actually has a card number in that set whereas the Matt Stewart sketch is just his artist ID (that UD added to track artists that were selling blanks). Two different things imo.

[mjohnatgt]

Well, CGC could choose to exclude it; I was mainly talking about COMC using it as card number for cataloguing purposes.

[finfangfan]

How many of the throwbacks achievement sketches were there in total… like 50? I love the classic 89 silver stripe design and it’s insane how it only appears in a handful of achievement sketches and zero of the inserted cards (including base/parallels) which come in multiple colors but not the classic silver/gray.

[DynaEtch]

I like the gray striped sketch stock. Usually I’m not for overdesign or taking up real estate for sketches, but this one just has a plain neat factor- combining classic baseball designs from when I was a kid with sketches.

I’m not sure why there are 2 different fleer throwback sketch stocks? Because one is an achievement? Not often do I remember 2 different stocks for one set, but then again I don’t do much of the epack and achievement stuff.

As for identifying character, it’s possible CGC might go further than PSA because the company as a whole follows the comic side of things much more closely, compared to PSA being primarily sports based….but will have to see. I’m surprised any of these grading companies are even attempting to identify characters.

[finfangfan]

Originally Posted by DynaEtch

I like the gray striped sketch stock. Usually I’m not for overdesign or taking up real estate for sketches, but this one just has a plain neat factor- combining classic baseball designs from when I was a kid with sketches.

I’m not sure why there are 2 different fleer throwback sketch stocks? Because one is an achievement? Not often do I remember 2 different stocks for one set, but then again I don’t do much of the epack and achievement stuff.

Yeah, it was weird to just use the gray border sketch template for achievements as people love that template and not many floating around. Plus, some of the artists even drew over the gray with their sketch… example below:



The achievement was first 33 collectors to claim would each get TWO achievement sketches… so only about 66 of this template floating around out there. Quite rare.

[glorbgorb]

Originally Posted by DynaEtch

As for identifying character, it’s possible CGC might go further than PSA because the company as a whole follows the comic side of things much more closely, compared to PSA being primarily sports based….but will have to see. I’m surprised any of these grading companies are even attempting to identify characters.

It seems like any company would evolve enough to maybe, I dunno, have a submission form with the character name on it or something.

[DynaEtch]

Originally Posted by glorbgorb

It seems like any company would evolve enough to maybe, I dunno, have a submission form with the character name on it or something.

You’d think. Maybe it’s because they don’t want to just go by what the submitter him/herself is saying, in case it’s wrong. Then they have a slabbed label that is false advertising. Like the Fred.ian sketch I posted in the other thread, sort of looks like Iron Man and I could see someone just putting that, although it’s an obscure variant and not iron man.

At the end of the day though, we can just see the sketch itself right there, I don’t view it as a big deal either way in terms of what on it is being designated.

[finfangfan]

I got this one back from CGC today. Love that it graded 10 but would have been cool if they put “Maltese” in the label.

[finfangfan]

Going back to odds of whether or no Bonebreaker gets identified on the PSA slab… I think the fact both Fantomelle and Culpepper (both as obscure as Bonebreaker imho) bodes week for Bonebreaker’s name appearing on the slab when I get it back from PSA.

Originally Posted by finfangfan

In one of my more frivolous submissions… I’m sending this off to PSA to see how they handle obscure characters. Not too many Bonebreaker sketches around (or even regular cards of the character for that matter)…



And kudos to the artist (Tim Shinn) for honoring the spirit of the 1989 Throwbacks set… this character first appeared in 1988 and likely showed up in 1989 X-books as well. If not, close enough.





So we will see (in likely about 10-12 weeks) if PSA correctly identifies Bonebreaker on the slab label. For science!

[glorbgorb]

Originally Posted by finfangfan

Going back to odds of whether or no Bonebreaker gets identified on the PSA slab… I think the fact both Fantomelle and Culpepper (both as obscure as Bonebreaker imho) bodes week for Bonebreaker’s name appearing on the slab when I get it back from PSA.

Their names are written lightly at the bottom of the card, right? It certainly appears that way.

Not that I need a reason to keep hating on grading in general, or PSA specifically, but they really need to modernize their label. They need more text to better id things. Is "VR SK" supposed to be "vertical sketch"? What is "(MK)"?

[DynaEtch]

Originally Posted by glorbgorb

Their names are written lightly at the bottom of the card, right? It certainly appears that way.

Not that I need a reason to keep hating on grading in general, or PSA specifically, but they really need to modernize their label. They need more text to better id things. Is "VR SK" supposed to be "vertical sketch"? What is "(MK)"?

I was wondering about the MK as well. Doesn’t that mean mark, like a mark made on the card? Isn’t every sketch basically one big mark?

[DynaEtch]

What does the back look like on it, is there a noticeable color mark from the art media on it?

Because a mark designation on the front of a sketch doesn’t make sense. A pencil mark on a 1962 Topps Mantle can obviously get a mark designation. But even if there was a mark, even an out of place mark on the front of a sketch, how could the grading company know it’s not part of the art for certain? Or did they give it that designation because it’s slightly colored out of the lines at bottom (this cannot be the case lol).

Edit- actually its probably the names in light pencil at bottom....but I feel like that could still fall under the overall art of the sketch- put there by the artist, even if it's partially erased. Not unlike a written "Psylock" on a psylocke sketch I posted in another thread. Maybe it's because it's in the non-sketch area of the front. But cmon...mark designation for sketch...silly.

[finfangfan]

Originally Posted by DynaEtch

What does the back look like on it, is there a noticeable color mark from the art media on it?

Because a mark designation on the front of a sketch doesn’t make sense. A pencil mark on a 1962 Topps Mantle can obviously get a mark designation. But even if there was a mark, even an out of place mark on the front of a sketch, how could the grading company know it’s not part of the art for certain? Or did they give it that designation because it’s slightly colored out of the lines at bottom (this cannot be the case lol).

Edit- actually its probably the names in light pencil at bottom....but I feel like that could still fall under the overall art of the sketch- put there by the artist, even if it's partially erased. Not unlike a written "Psylock" on a psylocke sketch I posted in another thread. Maybe it's because it's in the non-sketch area of the front. But cmon...mark designation for sketch...silly.

Here is the back of the card. I honestly didn’t see the character names at bottom of card when I bought it on COMC. Initial scan was upside down. I think the MK “markings” designation IS due to character names appearing on bottom border.

[finfangfan]

And here is a fun one I just got back today. I was kind of hoping they’d name the character “E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial ” on the label but I guess this is still accurate.

[DynaEtch]

Originally Posted by finfangfan

Here is the back of the card. I honestly didn’t see the character names at bottom of card when I bought it on COMC. Initial scan was upside down. I think the MK “markings” designation IS due to character names appearing on bottom border.

Yea back looks clean and I agree it’s the light names causing it (which Im assuming was made by the artist and shouldn’t be called a MK imo, no more than an artist signing their work on front should be called a MK).

Anyway, I like the sketch a lot- great artwork on that one. The lesser trodden characters always make for interesting sketches.

[finfangfan]

Ruh Roh… I haven’t gotten an email yet (or refund that I can see). But just got this PSA sketch submission through COMC back into my COMC account with new scan but no slab. Looks like PSA doesn’t grade the Star Wars die cut sketch cards? I submitted about 2 dozen or so the last few months so I guess I’m going to be getting a ton of refunds in next couple weeks/months. I was looking forward to seeing these in PSA slabs. CGC slabs them at least (as shown in post above). Still kind of cringy to submit so many that will needlessly pass through other sets of hands before coming back to me.

[finfangfan]

Originally Posted by finfangfan

Ruh Roh… I haven’t gotten an email yet (or refund that I can see). But just got this PSA sketch submission through COMC back into my COMC account with new scan but no slab. Looks like PSA doesn’t grade the Star Wars die cut sketch cards? I submitted about 2 dozen or so the last few months so I guess I’m going to be getting a ton of refunds in next couple weeks/months. I was looking forward to seeing these in PSA slabs. CGC slabs them at least (as shown in post above). Still kind of cringy to submit so many that will needlessly pass through other sets of hands before coming back to me.

Hold the phone… looks like this other Star Wars die cut sketch card DID get slabbed by PSA… so not sure what is up until COMC emails me.

[finfangfan]

I got a few more Star Wars diecut sketch cards from 2009 and 2010 back and it looks like maybe it’s just the Vader helmet shape that PSA doesn’t grade for some reason.

Here are the ones I got back today from PSA:

[finfangfan]

I think the market for slabbed sketches is slowly building. In modern products sketches tend to be rarer hits than the old days which also probably helps with secondary prices of all sketches, not just slabbed. This isn’t a PSA slab but I was happy with the strong sales price on this one…

[blackandgold]

Originally Posted by finfangfan

I think the market for slabbed sketches is slowly building. In modern products sketches tend to be rarer hits than the old days which also probably helps with secondary prices of all sketches, not just slabbed. This isn’t a PSA slab but I was happy with the strong sales price on this one…

Tryed sending you a dm but your messages are full

[DynaEtch]

Originally Posted by finfangfan

I think the market for slabbed sketches is slowly building. In modern products sketches tend to be rarer hits than the old days which also probably helps with secondary prices of all sketches, not just slabbed.

You may be right- if so, it’s a market trend I’m personally at odds with…but the market is the market. I’m old school I suppose and it’s the art/artist which gives a sketch its value and not the rarity in the product (or grade). UD is making sketches rarer now. But you could have a sketch be 1 in 50 cases and if basic looking art, wouldn’t move the needle for me. A detailed sketch or bigger artist from an older set which were 1 per box I would rank higher.

If anything avg sketch quality has been quite down over the last couple years in UD marvel products. But unless someone is a pretty involved sketch collector, they might not even know the difference, and just think since it’s a rare hit in a high priced product then it has to be $$$. Not really how it works in sketches…and there is a steep learning curve with sketches, especially with valuing them. I have been seeing posts from newer collectors elsewhere hitting sketches showing this. Thinking a $50-100ish sketch is big time money just because it’s Spider-Man in a newer product (doesn’t work that way…gotta see the sketch first!). Or to take an extreme example, just because a sketch is a 1/1 it should be way better than /10 parallels out there like PMGs. Lots of misunderstanding with sketches out there. Is my view the “correct” view (that it should be dominated by art and artist alone?)…not necessarily, but I do think a lot of people being around sketches for enough time have a similar view.

Grading in my view is about the $, I always argue that is the main reason people grade cards in general, to boost the value. A lot of people coming in from sports etc are hitting a sketch in a pack, see it as a hit, and immediately sending it in for grading like they do other hits, perhaps barely aware of the quality of art. It’s very possible in this new market, if most buyers have a similar mindset that graded automatically = higher value, then they will go for more. In that case props to sellers taking advantage of that and wisely getting more for their sketches by grading them. I of course am not the market but I do not see any added value to a sketch being graded, but I know spoken enough on that. I’ll step down from the soapbox now.