Announcement

Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Definition of trimming?

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • GillesRen
    started a topic Definition of trimming?

    Definition of trimming?

    Here are two pictures from the same card. How much shorter than the real size can a card be cut before it is considered trimmed by PSA?

    1951 Parkhurst McCleod: Click image for larger version

Name:	McCleod.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	637.5 KB
ID:	7205


  • Billyberu
    replied
    Cards can be factory short or oversized on both length and width. In my experience if a card is inside 1/16" short on regular cards and does not have evidence of trimming (which can be recognized by grader) it will grade. If it is oversized it will still grade as long as they can fit it in the holder.

    1951's and 52's undersize limits may be just a factor of that 1/16" I mention on regular cards. Probably more in line with 1/32"?

    Now if a card is too far outside these limits for length/width PSA will send it back (Min-Size) and will not charge you.

    Leave a comment:


  • harpervalley7
    commented on 's reply
    To me this is sad, real sad, that PSA takes this approach.Just another reason not to send your cards in to get graded as far as I’m concerned.Anybody that’s been in the hobby a reasonable amount of time knows it’s common knowledge that Topps and OPC back in them days produced cards born in the factory that were cut different sizes ,ragged edges.and so on so to cop out and not grade is pathetic and they should do so because they are out of the factory that way and PSA is in the business of grading so do your jobs and grade them perhaps with a notation on the label that they are not standard size but factory born!!! And OK !!!!

  • strohman
    replied
    I have submitted some 1969 OPC cards in the past that I thought were going to grade PSA 9, but they came back ungraded: Min Size. This is a card that is slightly smaller than a standard card, but hasn't been trimmed. It came from the factory that way. It was really disappointing that these cards were in NrMInt+ condition and hadn't been trimmed, but wouldn't be graded by PSA.

    I wonder if the 51 Parkie on the left is just smaller because it came from the factory that way. In all reality, the card on the left looks fine and the one on the right looks a little oversized.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stampsfan
    replied
    I distinctly remember opening 1970-71 packs as a kid, and pulling out over time 3 different sized Tom Webster (OPC) cards. I remember putting them in my hand and noticing three different sized cards, top to bottom. As I rarely seem to sell anything, there is a good chance I still have all three somewhere.

    I also have a beautiful pack pulled Orr card from 1969-70 OPC that was part of my first (and only) attempt at grading. It came back "Min Size".

    I know for a fact all my cards in that vintage were pulled from a pack by me.

    Leave a comment:


  • GillesRen
    commented on 's reply
    Never seen before. NIce!!!

  • Jim
    replied
    Ha. I remember those

    Leave a comment:


  • rocket9richard
    replied
    As anybody seen or used one of these before? I've had them for about 25 years and never saw others.

    You get the size of all hockey cards 1910-1993 and all baseball card 1914-1993. There is a legend on the back with sizes in inches.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	card sizer.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	207.9 KB
ID:	7212
    Last edited by rocket9richard; 04-14-2019, 09:32 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • rocket9richard
    commented on 's reply
    Yes the right one sorry

  • GillesRen
    replied
    Thank you all for your input. I keep in mind the 1951 Parkhurst can be smaller in size by 1 mm or even more without being qualified has smallsizeq or trimmed.
    Someone having the right tools to trim a card from that year would have good flexibility to reduce the size in order to enhance the sharpness of the corners and edges.

    As for the 1953 Parkhurst, literally strafed with red dots, the PD qualifier is a roll of the dice with the examiner, even for a grade 9!.


    Leave a comment:


  • GillesRen
    commented on 's reply
    ''Don't you think the left one has an issue with the white dots in the black background''
    I guess you meant the right one. I have seen many grade 8 with less obvious printing defects being qualified has PD.
    In my opinion, it should have been rated PD for obvious reasons.

  • 'NuckFan
    replied
    Originally posted by GillesRen View Post
    Here are two pictures from the same card. How much shorter than the real size can a card be cut before it is considered trimmed by PSA?

    1951 Parkhurst McCleod: Attachment
    L card is shorter. R card is narrower.
    As noted, these cards were hand cut with a standard guillotine cutter. Slight size variations are prevalent.
    PSA screws up occasionally, but unless you personally handle scores of these cards in high grade raw condition I would lean towards usually trusting their judgement.

    Leave a comment:


  • rocket9richard
    commented on 's reply
    I Don't agree, if a card is in it's original untouched condition, then it's fine and can't be qualified as trimmed because it's not trimmed!.Not every year and issue has very precise size.1951Park sheets were cut by hand with a guillotine trimmer causing small size variations.
    For a card to be qualified as trimmed, it needs to be trimmed!

  • rocket9richard
    replied
    Just my opinion:

    1- For the Park 1951 the left card seems standard and the right card looks a little bit oversize to me. Those were not all exact equal size. In most case if a card is trimmed, there is evidence of trimming when looked at with appropriate Tools. If there is no evidence of trimming and the card is of acceptable standard, then it's not trimmed. I Don't think any of these 2 is trimmed. Talking about printing defect, Don't you think the left one has an issue with the white dots in the black background?

    2- For the Park 1953, again it is not evident that one card is below the standard size. It would need to be looked at closely to answer that. What concerns me more is the strong possibility that the right card was washed causing the faded colors This is a common way to improve cards that has no qualifier and is still an alteration or human modification just like removing glue on the back.

    This is a delicate and subjective topic, but the higher the grade and card value, the higher the impact...
    Last edited by rocket9richard; 04-13-2019, 03:51 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • rocket9richard
    commented on 's reply
    I totally agree
Working...
X