CGC seems to be saying something like "We vill make up our own
definitions und you *vill* like it!"
Their use of the word "Vintage" as a definition is not in accordance
with that word's use in either the English language or in any
collecting, antique, hobby or related industry. The word "vintage" has
*always* been a vague synonym for "old". Nothing else. It is not -- and
cannot be -- used for any other purpose without creating a lot of
unnecessary confusion.
To try and make it mean anything else is the kind of stunt shady Ebay
sellers use, and ranks up there with the description of something being
in "excellent condition for its age"! CGC needs to stop using "vintage"
for any kind of grading/identification purpose, even if they already
have issued thousands of items using it.
CGC also wants to redefine a word that is time-honored in the
collecting/antique hobby/industries: Original.
"Original" has always meant just that. Everyone knows what original
means. Despite the mealy-mouthed attempts of some Ebay sellers to use
the word to mean whatever, real collectors have always known that
"original" means exactly what the dictionary says:
"preceding all other editions in time or being first made or performed"
...and there is absolutely no reason CGC should not have used the word
"Original" instead of trying to make "vintage" mean what we all consider
"original" to mean.
Instead they want to redefine "original" to describe a kind of
reproduction or re-issue -- like, a photo made 3 days ago from an
original 40-year old negative is still "an original"? Well, screw that.
If a photograph from an "original negative" was not made at or near the
time the film was released (or the time the original photograph was
taken), then it is *not* an "original" -- it is a later reproduction.
Yes, a repro, not a "later print" or "reissue". Heck, even the genuine
authentic original posters and photos are "prints" when you come right
down to it. What counts with collectors is *when* the item was printed
-- not if it came from an "original negative".
Besides, how does CGC *know* if a photo was made from an "original
negative"?
No, using "original" in this weird way is just plain wrong and adds
confusion to collecting. They need to stop using an accepted term in
this unacceptable fashion.
As for their "contemporary" grade, well, I have nothing but "contempt"
for it. It's a catchall. It could be a photo of a photo, or a digital
scan, or something retouched from the original using Photoshop or
whatever. The word "reproduction" is what the collecting hobby/industry
has always used for this sort of thing and since CGC knows that full
well, they should have continued to use that accepted word instead of
coming up with something that "sounds better" (i.e. something that is
worth more) than a "reproduction."
Final Nail in the CGC Confusion Coffin: I note that in defining their
definitions that CGC uses the word "original" to explain all *three*
definitions! Using original to describe what original means and that it
is not as good as "vintage"? Give me a flippin' break!
The short version: These CGC definitions are just plain useless to any
collector. Like Frankenstein's Monster, my opinion of CGC, already low,
has now dropped through the floor of the burning mill into the sub-basement.
-- JR
They list the definitions here on the net:
http://www.cgccomics.com/Vintage.asp
VINTAGE - A photograph printed from the original negative at or near the time
that the photograph was taken.
ORIGINAL - A photograph printed from the original negative.
CONTEMPORARY - A photograph derived by photographic processes from an original
image.
The problem now will be that they won't be able to change their
grading levels because they have already graded thousands of stills in
the current categories. If they changed the gradings now that would
upset many of the people who have purchased stills with the old gradings.
Looking at the definitions - "ORIGINAL - A photograph printed from the
original negative." I guess that means that the photograph could have
been printed yesterday whereas a Vintage photograph was printed from
the original negative at the time the photo was taken. They appear to
be saying that the top end of the scale is Vintage with Original as a
"second best".
let us not forget they only began slabbing stills when they were
requested to by Jay Perino
seeing as he was going to give them 1000s of pieces to grade, he
essentially helped them create the definitions
Jay is a well known coin dealer, but in comics & movie posters - he
knew next-to-nothing when he got involved in them and it has always
been my impression that CGC pretty much followed his instructions on
the definitions
that's why the rest of us do not agree with their terminology
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [email protected]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
