Tough question Gary - @garyis2000,.
I personally wouldn’t risk getting a PSA 10 1st ed base Charizard candidate signed incase of damage during the signature process etc. I also think the card would lose value having an Arita signature in comparison to left untouched. So I guess getting the case signed would be my choice if it they were the only two options - but given the chance I’d instead get a less value card signed directly.
Poll outcome would sway heavily depending on the card in question. Might even end up with a lot of “don’t sign at all” as a 3rd option.
If I was getting something signed by an artist it would be something I planned on keeping forever. That being said, I would rather them sign a specific pokemon & artwork that I really like than the most valuable card I can throw at them.
As an example, I’d have much rather have Arita sign a Sandstorm mawile than any charizard. It would also fit much better in my mawile binder than a random signed card amongst sets of unsigned cards.
Theoretical question:
If a card is signed and the signature is deemed not authentic is the card no longer eligible to receive a numerical 1-10 grade? Should be declined for being inked/“altered”, correct? Imagine having someone sign a 4 figure + card and just get sloppy during their sig preventing authentication. I mean some famous people must have sloppy inconsistent signatures that lead to these issues from time to time I would imagine. Given the tech of today and the inherent variability in signatures due to us all being human I’m honestly surprised authenticated forgeries haven’t become much more of an issue than they apparently are. To fake a base 1st zard one needs to deal with ink, holo, stamp, age of stock while matching a fairly consistent product etc. loads of factors. To fake a sig one only needs to use black sharpie and meet within human eyes a collection of several other examples that exist on a spectrum. You aren’t needing to hit one target, but to hit a few key characteristics convincingly within a range. I guess it’s harder than it sounds.
Honestly it is a joke IMO that PSA grades either the card or the signature. The only thing they should be doing is authenticating both the card and the sig. The card doesn’t deserve a grade as in any other situation it is considered inked/damaged/altered and to grade on a 10 scale an autograph is just dumb as hell.
Inexpensive, relatively plentiful card: on the card.
Expensive, rare card: on the case.
Yeah it’s cool to have the signature on the card, especially from the guy who made the art, but putting any kind of ink on an extremely limited, exceedingly rare card would rustle my jimmies a bit.
You fundamentally misunderstand autographs.
Graded autos are for historical preservation. Pokémon autos are all new and everyone is still alive, so no one understands the concept of graded signatures. For someone like a Babe Ruth or any famous person in the past century the auto grade determines the difference in value like a card grade.
The term “inked” refers to purposely conceal damage, usually on borders or frequent damage points. Just because you have trouble conceiving grading a card with an auto doesn’t inherently make it impossible or invalid. It’s just another factor to consider.
@smpratte, I admit and do realize that I really don’t “get” autographs.
If I sign a card myself will PSA still grade the card on their 1-10 scale? If you sign it will they? Or once a card has ink on it is the only way the card is going to get a PSA 1-10 grade is if the signature is of somebody known and the signature is at least deemed authentic?
This is the thing that confuses me. If certain people put sharpie on the card in a certain way then it’s fine. I get that some people enjoy them and I understand that the market values them. It isn’t me just crying because I don’t like the high prices they fetch at times, it is just genuine confusion as to how it all works.
If auto grades are grading the condition of the signature meaning that a fresh sharpie signing is going to be a 10/10 whereas a 50 year old faded, partially rubbed off, dirty signature on a played baseball is going to get a 2/10 then I understand that I guess. For some reason I thought I had seen fresh looking autos that got a 9/10 because they didn’t look as nice or something? Perhaps there was just “wear” over the sig or something I was missing.
This is why PSA makes the initial distinction when submitting: “signed or unsigned cards”.
If signed the cards go to a different department. I have yet to see a cards condition graded with a deemed fake auto.
As for auto grades, just like pulling cards from a pack, not all are gem mint. Plenty of factors can affect the auto, low ink, pressure, smudge. Similar to cards with off centering, whitening, etc. Just like graded cards, it’s not for everyone. Some people don’t care, some want the best example.
I think grading signatures makes sense but a 10 point scale is too much resolution. What is the difference between a PSA 3 auto and a PSA 4 auto? What is the difference between a 9 and 10? It seem so arbitrary. But I agree a faded auto done with a dry pen is probably not as good looking as a fresh sharpie. IMO, something like a 4 point scale would make more sense: Poor, Good, Crisp, Exemplary. Something like that.
IMO I think the same can be said about cards. This is probably why we both collect primarily nice looking 9’s.
But I don’t think the resolution is necessarily too fine fundamentally. There have been billions of cards printed, hell probably near a trillion, across all types and in history, so I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think it may take 18 or more grade scores to properly identify/classify each one as to it’s level of damage. As far autos there have got to be millions I’d imagine and again they are from 100 years ago to current from current untouched cards to decades old used baseballs, gloves and such.
My issue for both cards and autos is more in the grade reproducibility and so the resolution is too fine for practical reasons. Which I now realize may be exactly what you meant. For the same reason I hate the PSA 8.5 I pretty much hate any grade under a 7. Grading companies just aren’t consistent enough for me at any grade really, but when you get down to the super low grades and any X.5 grade really I would bet anyone on just about any X.5 card or 2, 3, 4 that upon crack and resubmit it wouldn’t get the same score. I know BGS gets crap for anything under a 9 and it may be well deserved I haven’t held any cards that low in BGS cases I just think PSA deserves more crap maybe for their oddball and low grades. Many BGS oddities crop up with their algorithm taken from the 4 subs.
I agree auto grading can be more subjective, but there are definitely noticeable differences in cleaner signatures. Ultimately all grading is subjective.
Here are some quick examples of graded sports autos where you can see the difference in clarity:
The Mantle Ball is aged. Surface is important for signatures. Something round like a baseball is going to be more difficult:
Here is a solid Michael Jordan Auto. Typically a large surface and paid signing are going to be clean:
Here is a psa 9 Gretzky rookie auto, one of my favorites considering real estate is limited on trading cards:
Lastly is probably one of the most attractive full autographs I own (PSA 10 Auto). A great example how surface area allows for better legibility. A nice contrast to the card above:
I had to make this decision very recently when I met Arita last weekend. I don’t know why but it bearly even came into my thoughts to get a PSA graded card signed. It just doesn’t appeal to me as much being on a plastic case. I feel like the auto looks more crisp and satisfying on the card and I like the permanence of it. But I guess it’s each to there own! But I would think twice about getting a signature on a extremely rare, gem mint card.
That is a very good question. I think for a grail card like that I would just get it graded. Having Arita sign the card just increase the chances of the card getting damaged and there is no guarantee that the autograph will be clean and grade well. With too many variables that could ruin the card I would just grade it and leave it alone.
Good points:)
Even if the case contains a card illustrated by the artist… you’re still making him sign a plastic case that he is not related with.
Of course a card is just a print of his art, not the original version… but it’s related to him. As a collector of autographs in Pokémon I can’t imagine asking an artist to sign a case, I almost find that disrespectful to him 
When it comes to very big cards (a gem mint No Rarity Zard, or a Trophy Pika), well I’d rather not have them signed at all, maybe just have a picture of the artist holding the card in his hands I guess
I’ve never been interested in getting cards autographed. If the opportunity knocks for me to get a card signed I would prefer the case to be signed.
I think the case is best so the sharpie doesn’t deface the art, unless the autograph is worth more than the card.
I’m going to vote case though 
When you choose to get the case signed over the card:
Card for sure. That is the real thing. And meeting the artist in person. 
Not the worst fake kanji/English I’ve ever seen, but a standard terrible fake Pikachu haha
Cheap card? Sign the card. Expensive card, sign the case. You can always remove the sig from a case but can’t from a card.