Welcome To Garthe's Insect Gradebook Homepage -- condition grading of specimens [ A1 ex-pupae ] DESIGNATION [ A1 ] DESIGNATION [ A1- ] DESIGNATION [ A- ] DESIGNATION [ A2 ] DESIGNATION [ B ] DESIGNATION S U M M A R Y (Photostrip) Cedar Oil Cedar Oil --pg. 2 Mounting Tips S U M M A R Y (Text )&(Guestbook) Visitor's Images for Grading Input Rarities I Rarities II Photo Photo

Grading specimens as [ A- ] ----- for 80% to 90% of Top Dollar

1.  Specimen is fine and mostly intact. 

2.  Antenna may be broken in half or a small part of one antenna missing IF the other one is completely intact.  A piece of a tail may be missing or broken IF the other one is completely intact.

3.  Very very small rubs, splits, tears, chips, are allowed if such small imperfections do not detract from appearance of specimen, but may be barely noticed.

4.  Small evidence of flight wear is allowed as though it flew for a few days, but is still a fine specimen. 

5.  (if mounted), no more than size 0 pin holes in wings allowed.  One minor vein crimpage ( a vein is 'bent' where it looks to normally straight) is allowed if it does not detract from appearance.  A broken vein is allowed if it is easily repairable and does not detract from the look or compromise the integrity of the wing.

6.  Specimen repair can be allowed  IF  1. it is a very small repair, 2. does not, in any way, detract from specimen, 3. it is marked as such at the time of listing.

Note 1:  This A- grading is one that is for a nice specimen, but the specimen is clearly not A1 or A1- quality.  It is, however, notably better than an A2 specimen.






[ A- ] O. croesus

Notice the edges of both FWs---there is some fraying from flight.  Also, the left HW has some noticable smudges that show up, but do not really detract from the specimen.  It is a clean specimen which is not A1-, but is better than an A2.

[ A- ] Papilio polytes romulus

This specimen is generally pretty nice, but she has some smudges, wear, and tiny splits in the right FW.  There is tiny wear present in the left FW as well.  Her imperfections show up but don't detract much from the specimen.

[ A- ] Papilio palamedes

A large area in the wings has very light wear, there is an emergence flaw in the upper right wing tip, a couple of scratches on the right FW and HW, and a 2-3mm chip in the right HW.  This specimen is nice in that it is better than A2, but is not in the league of A1 or A1-.  Also, the pin hole in the left FW is too noticable/large.  Lastly, there is a very small stain in the yellow band of the left HW.  Would I generally be happy to catch a butterfly like this?  Yes I would------I just would not call it an A1 or A1-.   

[ A- ] Hypolimnas monteironis

This specimen has slight wear marks towards the wing-tips.  Its main imperfection is the rather noticable rubbing/smudge at the lateral part of the left FW.  There is tiny smudging in the left HW as well.  The butterfly is good with a smudge that shows up, but the smudge does not detract from the specimen too much.

[ A- ] Graphium weiskei

The butterfly here has minimal wear on the wings with a couple of small scratches on the left HW, but the determining factor is the crimped vein at the right side of the thorax near the head.  The vein is folded over cutting in to what should be thorax showing.  While the vein crimp here is not too big, it is noticable.  The other imperfection is that the left antenna is shorter than the right one with the very tip missing.

[ A- ] Appias nero

This specimen has quite the wing wear and scratches.  It is close to being an A2, but the scratches and one black flaw are not enough to call it an A2.  The color is good, the wing edges are good without nicks, splits, or chips.  It is primarily an A- because an A2 is generally worse.

[ A- ] Catocala amatrix

This moth is a good specimen with a couple of small imperfections.  The nick on the left FW, split in the left HW, and small smudge make it an A-.  If another flaw were present, I'd be inclined to list it as a nice A2, but this specimen is better than A2 by just a bit.

[A-] Morpho cypris (female) form 'cyanites'

Except for some flight wear on the FWs, this is a fine example.  The fact that I have dreamt about having this one for some thirty years, I had to grab it while I could.  She really is pretty decent, but has a few noticeable spots of wear on the FWs.  Sometimes, the condition has to take a backseat due to the rareness of the bug.  I am fortunate to own this girl:)

[A-] vs [A1-]...a tough call, Phoebus avellaneda

This specimen has a right FW tip emergence flaw, and some tiny rubs/nicks/splits on the HW bases. It is really hard to determine the exact rating. It is not A1 and I really feel is above an A-. When I have a real hard time deciding, however, I usually go with the lower rating, especially if the specimen in question is pricey. I actually got him at a price between A1 and A- a few years ago from my wife for Christmas.  Again, I'd be inclined to label him as a 'good A-'.  One factor that keeps me 'true' to the rating system is that fact that there were more than one flaws which helped keep me in check.

[good A-] Hypolimnas usambara

Once again, the rarity of this butterfly caused me to grab it even though it was not A1. It is a real nice specimen, but has a couple of FW rubs, and a nick in the left HW. Because it has both flaws evident, it is an A-, but a pretty nice A- at that. The flaws, while small, do show up and thus the rating. I also feel that putting 'good' in front of the A- describes the fact that (overall), it is getting near an A1- designation.  But it is not there as I see it.  Am I darn glad to finally have this one in this condition?  Actually, I would have taken one in worse shape.