How PSA Really Grades Cards - Let’s take a look under the loupe!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 окт 2024
- Ever wonder why your card comes back a PSA 9 when it looks perfect? I know I have so I bought a microscope to see what PSA sees. Wow.
Email: NicoSportscards@gmail.com
Instagram: Nico_Sportscards
Got this magnifying glass on Amazon:
200X Phone Mini Pocket Microscope
Stay tuned for many more NFL box breaks, product reviews, sports cards unboxing, and pack openings! I’ll have various football blaster/retail products, free giveaways, live group breaks, and random NFL trading card hobby pack openings. 2020 panini playoff football, 2020 panini contenders football, 2020 panini Donruss optic football, 2020 panini Prizm football FOTL, more 2019-20 panini D
onruss optic football (hobby), 2020-21 panini contenders draft picks FOOTBALL, 2020-21 panini prizm draft picks football, boombox football high end and boombox platinum, bothers in cards gold boxes, sick mail days, beginner tutorials, my thoughts on sports card investing, and much more. Thanks for all the support !
#football #nfl #nba #sportscards #panini #sportscards #irlpackopening
I've used a 20 power loop for 20 years , right now PSA is all over the map on grading , mostly undergrading
Good to know. I may downgrade to a 20 loop
As someone who thought he was about to send in his first bulk, this was SUPER helpful 😬
Best video on grading I have ever seen. People need to have a magnifier before they can complain about the grades they get back. Really great job !!! 🤙🏻🤙🏻
Thanks dude ! Comment made my day
Good video, but a great video would include a follow-up about what the cards actually graded rather than just a guess
That Ozzie rookie is still 🔥🔥🔥 nice hit! Thanks for the informational vid
Thanks for sharing. We need the grading to be equal and fair. That is the job of PSA!
I would like to see an update video of the card grades. I use a 30, 40 x magnifying glass. I never thought about buying a jewelry loupe.
Love the vid! Those damn fisheyes popping up are always fun!
Dang, I was really hoping you’d have the cards already graded at the end of the video. I’d guess an 8- maybe a 9 for the Kelly and Smith cards.
That’s a good call. Maybe I’ll do that for next time. Just film, submit, then do recap at end. Good idea.
@@NicoSportscards Yes. Really would seal the deal for entertainment and actual value for knowing it really well inside n out.
@@NicoSportscards It's a year later and I just browsed your video titles... I didn't see anything suggesting you've done this. Did I miss it?
Great video! I need a 200x loupe!
7:53 - the cause of most ultra modern PSa 9s
Very helpful video. Thanks for sharing this.
I use a scope. I posted on a forum some examples, and some people were poking fun about checking every atom - molecule of the card. I just giggled it off because their portfolios were loaded with PSA 5, 6, and 7s.
Same with me bud ! Let’s keep at it. Forget those fools
"portfolios"
tool
Would be great to see how they were actually graded
Love this kind of content.
Don’t knock the card stock! Graders should just look at the damn card like we all did back in the day. Under the mag, 10s would be almost nil if we all wanted to be honest.
By the way, thank you for showing this.
Thanks for sharing
I use a jeweler's loop (old school) , but same idea.
The "Fish eye" is actually called a "hickey" in printing, It's just a small piece of paper stuck on the printing plate, they need to be scrapped off while the press is running with a piece of mylar, just don't get your fingers caught :)
Awesome info thank you!
I could be wrong, but all the research and videos I've seen show that PSA only uses a jeweler's loupe. I used to use a microscope, but now i think its overkill.
I say this all the time. You can’t only look with the naked eye, you have to grab the illuminated loupe to see the true condition.
I thought PSA magnification standard is 10x magnification?... your lens said 200x... PSA used to remark about how grades took into account the printing limits of the production era but they are very clearly tightening up on vintage grading standards and things like fuzz/fibers and minor print defects(fisheyes, etc) are now, I believe, no longer discounted in the grading process... btw, one of your Ozzie corners looked like it had been in a screwdown holder(loss of gloss and uniform wear from crushing)... thanks for the vid!
I am a grader for SGC and I have graded over 18,000 cards so far. Cards as old as 1888 are the oldest so far
What type of magnifyer do you guys use???
Care to share more info?
@@GemRippers I have a magnifier that I designed and developed. I can tell 25 kinds of printers 🖨 I can tell live to autopen signatures. I can even tell if there's something under oil paintings. Usually museums have to get x-rays. I can tell what kind of inks that was used during signatures
Everybody talks about PSA using 10x magnification. I think you commented using 20x. But your loupe say 200x. What am I missing?
I have been fooled so many times with the naked eye. Depressing when I use the loupe before sending in for grading and see the damage. Amazing how many bad corners and edges look good to the naked eye.
So true
That is about the nicest centering on a raw Ozzie RC I've ever seen. A 200x loupe is generally overkill though; you are overpowering the field. Old PSA under Joe O. said they generally use 7-10x loupes. I don't know if that's still the case today or not.
Good to know. Hoping for an 8. I’ll report back
Any grades on these yet? I would say that Ozzie could pull an 8 for sure. Back centering is the only major issue I see. Worst case scenario scenario is a 7…. 🤞🏽
Whatever happens, it takes FOREVER! I’m on day 52 of 60 with Beckett. They better not be six months late like 2020. I sent my cards in just before the craze, before they had a disclosure for delays, and they wouldn’t honor my dispute
I would say the Jim Kelly and Ozzie Smith cards would come back either 7 or 8. Ozzie has a better chance at the 8.
Great video. Are you grading? Curious what they would get. My expectation of PSA would be 6/7. Anything over would be a win for me. Regardless, they have 9/10 eye appeal!
Yes gonna send them in. I’ll do a recap vid when back
@@NicoSportscards Did this ever happen?
I am sure someone pointed this out. It looks like there is a lot of paint loss on the back of that Ozzie card. Unless I am mistaken. But check that out before you send it in. Definite surface issue.
Good call, I’ll have a look. I see the paint loss on front. But I’ll double check back
@@NicoSportscards I could be mistaken. It could have been a trick of the light. When you get a chance try to look at the video as well if you don’t see anything on the card. The vintage stuff are such hard grades!! Good luck my man! Hope to see a follow up.
How much do you think that ozzie Smith rookie is worth? I actually have one and was wondering if it was worth the trouble and money to get it graded. And what would be a trustworthy place to send it? Nice video by the way 👍
Depends on the grade but I’d say $100-200 if a decent grade
Send to PSA for sure: no other company is worth it
Love ur video!! very informative. What zoom are u using with microscope?
Jim Kelly 5-6. If that comes back a 9 i will pay your grading fee. The black flecks of missing ink will get dinged, the corners are dinged. You are correct naked eye they look good but no way that Kelly is an 9.
Good luck & let me know where to send the grading fee
I’ll report back. Let’s meet in the middle at an 8? Haha
@@NicoSportscards did you ever send this card in to PSA? Either way would like to see the result
@@NicoSportscardsso what did it get?
I’m not sure I’d send anything to PSA, to me they have way to many graders and their numbers are all over the place. Great idea in the magnifier…I never send until I put them under the scope, but older cards are almost always going to have flaws
Exactly what kind of loupe are you using? Do you have a link?
Just subbed. Great video. Do you also inspect the rest of the surface - or do you feel that’s more naked eye?
Surface is harder for me to check. I can do an eye scan by moving the light around it but I haven’t figured out a way to really check surface on older cards yet
I wonder how much they down grade for those fish eyes? I got some 1963 topps football graded and they were pretty harsh. They were mostly 6’s.
I think they used to be more lenient - I know the early basketball stuff they would just let it pass. Not sure on how they would grade them today
@@NicoSportscards Yeah it's difficult to predict how PSA will react. I sent them some vintage and so far they have beat me up pretty well on the grades. Some make sense and I expected some 6's but there were not nearly as many 7's or 8's as I would have expected, especially since they are 60 years old. Ahhh well. Thanks for your video. I think I am going to hit amazon and get the microscope you used in the video.
@@NicoSportscards Did you get your microscope with or without CPL? Thanks.
Does that magnifying attachment work with an iPhone with multiple camera lenses?
Yeah. It just uses the iPhone camera. Not sure on multiple lenses. Should work on any phone
Ozzie & Kelly are both PSA 6s, my guess
My question
Can you use any microscope?
I’m sure you can. The one I used is in the description. Got it from amazon
Can PSA catch trimming? How does that look under microscope? Can you magnify through the psa case?
PSA “doesn’t” grade trimmed cards. If PSA thinks a card you submitted is trimmed they don’t put in in a slab, they send the card back in a card saver.
Reason I put quotes around the doesn’t is because there are rumors that if someone has connections at PSA, they essentially get the grades they want. Don’t know if their true, but there was a recent situation were a NFL player admitted to trimming and altering cards, and getting them in PSA holders. Don’t know if you’ve heard about that.
Edit: they can catch trimming under a microscope, I believe the edges look more frayed. There might be pictures or videos out there if you do more digging.
@@ThatwasaSTRIKE thanks for feedback. I just saw alot of videos from vintage card curator where cards were bought in auction on purpose to crack+trim+regrade through PSA. Check them out.
That card is from a home that had pets
That’s either completely accurate or the funniest comment I’ve seen to date.
@@NicoSportscards Why not both? 🤷♂️
What do you use as a microscope?
Check the description of video - I posted the link
Psa doesn't use a 200x magnification
10x I’ve heard.
Thats not how they grade tho. they got a 5000x scope, nerds and a x-ray machine..your cards are a PSA negative 3 lol
First comment to get a legitimate chuckle out of me. Well done.
Is this a repost? I feel like I've seen you do this type of video before
This is my 3rd video where I’ve looked at different cards I’m gonna submit to PSA. Different videos
Man those old card edges are really hairy!
Hahah. No other way to put it
The Ozzie Smith has fantastic centering on the front, but on the back it is way off-center left to right. ruclips.net/user/clipUgkxiKsPFzSlHf0dnhB1Xl-Y8DMVPqDJSmCx
For sure. I’ve found that they are generally more forgiving on back centering but it’s probably 75/25 so maybe they have to ding it
Comment on the loop and magnification you used
Lmao 🤣 yet they based it off eye 👁 appearance/ appeal ……….graded under a microscope 🔬 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,as if anyone would bust out a microscope to take a look at your collection ,,,,,,,,,,Grading is a Racket
"Loupe"
Most likely it will grade a 7 at best
I’ll take it !