Darwination

A new one. It's so been so rainy for so long in Memphis this came out of the mailbox almost damp even though it was shipped well. Off the scanner and in between some books on the tight as hell shelf I use for vertical pressing. No worries, though, it's a reader and next stop is the nightstand. Self-portrait by Victor Kalin? I picked it up on the recommendation of Cynthia Carnahan, the youngest daughter of Worth Carnahan, an artist I've been working on (and she sent me a bunch of neat things to scan.) Worth worked on Burten's Follies and The Original Artists and Models way back in the 20s, the earliest covers in Harry Donenfeld's girlie pulp line on titles like Hot Stories, Joy Stories, and La Paree Stories c.1929, published his own magazine with Wild Cherries in the early 30s, was The Stamps Editor in The Lone Ranger Magazine for Trojan in the mid-30s, edited and drew for Champion Comics, Cyclone Comics, and was the packager for O.K. Comics for Bilbara in the late 30s before doing some work at Dell in the early 40s. During the war he moved to Nashville TN where he did commercial work before working for the state's Fish and Game Department and creating a famed line of hunting and fishing stamps. Little Fuzzy is a book Worth had given his daughter to read as young teen, and she shared photos of his boxes of (mostly SF) paperbacks he read into his old age. Worth had Cynthia when he was 56 years old, and she's in her mid-70s. She has an older sister still alive at 96, too. Getting to see his collection of paperbacks is pretty cool, cuz show me your books, and I can tell a little something about your very soul, eh?

These two gentlemen seem to have very different approaches, one seems to be waiting for what's given and the other just can't help but take life by the horns All lovely copies but that What's in it for Me? is so colorful and shiny

Heh, the first British Edition from 37 is a little pricey. The wiki says the Marie and Robert Weatherall translation is "uninspired" and there's a couple of newer translations, but I think I'm going to go with the one that yourself, Orwell and Vonnegut seem to like so much. Here I am with the typical conundrum - buy a 5 or 6 dollar shipping included used modern pressing, a vintage PB, or go with an IA scan. I'm picking that last one this time since I have a bunch of books on the bedside already and the digital option can be read after "lights out" in the love nest without rising the ire of the Mrs.

You have a preferred translation/edition, Pat?

So, I spend a lot of time working with scans and have also recently been taking many photos for eBay. When it comes to scans, most digital archivists like to have a "raw" scan that matches the color of the book so that any processing can get done via photoshop where you have all sorts subtle and not so subtle tools for tweaking an image. Most people that want a simple way to make their scans pop (or to more closely resemble their books if they are getting "dull" scans or washed out blacks from an older or not so great machine) will make pre-scan adjustments through their scanner software (often limited to contrast/brightness/saturation tweaks or maybe some sort of rough levels adjustment). If I'm working with a lower grade copy of a book, I can pick the right tools in photoshop and come closer to matching the colors on a high grade copy. I'd note here that when I work with images from either Heritage or MCS, two eminently trusted sellers fwiw, the images are almost always very close to where I'd tweak them to in terms of optimizing the final color. I *personally* leave my eBay scans in their raw state very purposely (since people know I do digital restoration), and my photos tend to show much more color than my scans. All this to say - it's pretty damn hard to be sure what the colors on a book in hand are going to look like compared to a scan. I've seen eBay sellers get called out for color manipulation on these boards before, but make no doubt about it HA and MCS have that angle on lock And I'm not knocking either for this, cause in fact MCS garners much trust from me, just stating facts. And photos, too, don't always tell the tale. Collectors here know that finding the guy that took a bad picture for his sweet comic's eBay listing is a godsend. Nothing kills an auction's potential like poorly lit and out of focus pictures. Otoh, soft lighting can hide all sorts of defects and minimize the appearance of waviness, creases, etc. A bright side lighting from an LED lamp can similarly "wash out" defects that might be seen better from light from an overhead source. For my auctions, if possible, I like to get nice, natural light of a certain angle which I can only get on sunny days at certain hours of the day because the color can't be beat, and it's natural. Like the photos you see in the please grade my comic section at CGC, close ups of reflective light can show all sorts of stuff you don't see in a scan. But how many eBay sellers take these types of photos? Often you get front cover and back cover and a grade that may or may not be ballpark. I think most amateur sellers want their buyers to be happy and recognize that having good pictures protects the seller, too, but often a dealer is just gonna give you a front cover and a back cover and their grade. The L.B. Cole thread's a great place for this little topic, btw, since his colors are what we're all fiending after... BTW, Pumpkin, I'd guess that blue Top Love Stories is from a proof, too ;)

I like the word solid, too, Pat. And it's kind of a problem I have with grading in general where the grade assigned often has more to do with cosmetic appearance than anything else. When I get a comic or pulp in G or VG and it's described as solid with still supple pages, I know I can likely read the thing and breathe easy. That is, there is merit in a book having been read because the pages have been flexed and tested. Not so important for a display copy.

I like a simple grading scale as well. For PBs, just give me a good picture of the front, back, and spine, and I'm good to go. I agree there can be a ton of difference between one seller's VF-NM-Unread and another's but one of the things I like about the paperback market is the simplicity. I'm pretty much at a place with the PBs where I'm only looking for one of two things, either a cheap reader copy that still presents well that I can treat like, you know, a paperback, or a display copy which I hope to be the finest specimen I can find or afford and will never ever read (pb spines are so delicate and covers crease so easily ) Mostly the vintage PBs are a fun way to read a physical copy of a book for me, and the price is usually right in the ballpark of buying a used, more modern printing anyways.

Heh heh, no I got the joke Maybe the best romance title ever. Forbidden Love is pretty good, too, though. Those are both absolutely killer comics - I don't think I've seen either.

I took a little closer look at Gay Book Magazine. Some of the things about it don't quite get me as jazzed as more traditional girlie pulps, but, damn, those covers are fantastic. The Bolles there from 34 is underappreciated, and he did a couple of other great ones, too, before Bergey took over. But then Bergey takes over a does some of the most interesting work in his career. I worked with this one today but quickly as I intend to a find the right copy for myself: I've shown this one before but also a classic in a similar vibe from the same period Then there's this one: What compelled this magazine to jump to photocovers in it's dying breath, I do not know

It's a weird one, because Hazel's qot the thought bubble of a mean girl but the face and reaction of the poor girl wronged. An odd Baker composition imo, but it still has its charms.

Restoration like glued covers and the like is common in the pulps, but I'd point out that 90 percent of the time I see "restoration" it is simply a case of someone wanting to keep a book in readable shape. I don't think color touch happens too often or that's there's often an intent to deceive in what people have done to keep their books together, but maybe that's just my low-roller experience.

and, from an early repository of girlie art and appreciation of form, Jay Weaver

"a revealing and riotous story of the bosom business"

Both of these are killer

*man shakes fist at sky*

and truly fine pin-up artist Ruth Eastman

Yep, second-hand book shops are often mentioned as sellers of girlie pulps as church groups increased pressure on the newsstands towards the end of the girlie-pulp era, so that's definitely an angle. At least they are a lot more subtle/attractive than other varieties, I barely even notice them. It might be because I'm distracted by the pretty ladies

I wasn't familiar with them on the later era comics at all I like the red one on the Buck Rogers. My quick survey was seeing them on mid-30s girlie pulps, at least a few different varieties of stamp. I'll be keeping an eye out now to see if I can't figure out their purpose and if maybe they were on some other types of mags as well.

I see a funky one at the bottom, so I'll bite on the mags per usual, Stirring Adventures 1942-01, recognized that quick from Heritage in October Secret Love Revelations 1942-01 Another funky title, lasted 2 issues, never seen one before but now I want one. James Cagney here, the other ish has a Bogart cover. Since we're at this place I'll even put one up in one of these silly blue boxes (not to mention the reds are fantastic) one last oddball, Intimate Confessions v01n01, likely a one-shot EDIT: OOPS, thought I'd landed in the newsstands thread, muh bad, messing up the Centaur-ness

Enoch There's the star, @waaaghboss was talking about in the girlie pulp thread the other day, but this time it's a cut-out. I've noticed a few different star stamps since he mentioned it. and other fine pin-up art - from a lot of 24 Judge I picked up recently, most in very solid shape, lovely haul. John Holmgren here, a little bit more dinginess on this one and a few scuffs, but I love it and another Holmgren, again with the killer background

v01n01 of four issues published by Atlantis (William Sims), edited by William Thompson.

Yep, good spot