View Single Post
  #16  
Old 11-30-2020, 10:32 PM
steve B steve B is offline
Steve Birmingham
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: eastern Mass.
Posts: 8,098
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jchcollins View Post
All valid points. But when they spend less than 60 seconds on each card, that kind of scrutiny ain't happening. Right now the model we have, and all anyone cares about is the turn around time on grading. If I send in a minty Mickey Mantle card, my chief concern is going to be that I get it back in a week or so if I pay for that service, NOT that the grader spends extra TLC time in looking under loupes and evaluating edge precision, getting a second or maybe even a third opinion, etc. etc. But perhaps that the type of terms we need to start thinking in for super high-end or rare cards?

As others have pointed out though - for pure matters of dimension and size concern - I would think they could implement a way to measure cards digitally down to a hundreth of an inch or something. If you can do this and make that kind of measurement routine - then there wouldn't be a reason they couldn't quickly measure all cards that way. If it becomes commonplace, then whatever the current "Min Size" requirements are, you would think they could be drastically tightened up based on what the new micro-discrepancies turn out to be. I would be willing to bet that even the graders would be surprised with something like that - at exactly what was more or less normal for a card to be "off" by out of the pack.
With a 1200dpi scan it's possible to measure to just less that 1/1000th of an inch. Add a grid, and you can get even more info, like exactly how much tilt in a diamond cut. I'd have to have a few friends I know do the program, but they assure me it's very easy, if not already a feature on some photo software.
Reply With Quote