James J Johnson

On 5/25/2022 at 1:28 PM, mrwoogieman said:

Has me wondering about this signed print 

 

 

This would have me wondering too. Wondering about why Kirby would draw, not write; draw, an oddly segmented and shaky 4 piece 'J' with atypical lift points indicative of starting and stopping. And why, as an artist, with all that white area to sign in, why he would start his signature so close to the portraiture and at an angle that the top of his sugnature would run into the portraiture and his imprinted signature. 

Also, the signature appears to be drawn, not written; drawn, in very close proximity to the imprinted signature to make copying it an easier task. IMO, odds of this being by a hand other than Kirby = 80/20. Lots of red flags here, IMO 

On 5/23/2022 at 7:52 AM, The Lions Den said:

Good points, Stronguy...  

On this book, it looks like the intent wasn't just to tack the cover back on, but to seal the crack where the cover meets the pages, almost like the use of caulking around a bathtub or tiles, which is what it looks more like than glue, "nothing exceeds like excess", I imagine.

On 4/21/2022 at 8:35 AM, Stronguy said:

The spine of a comic should be rounded when it is properly pressed.  Some pressers think the answer to stubborn spine ticks is to up the pressure.  Oftentimes, especially if they use a lot of moisture, you will see a crushed spine.  It's more of a V shape than a U shape.

I tend to believe that staple placement will have the final say in the matter of a rounded spine with a sideways U-shape, like this: ( , versus a "crushed" spine with a V-shape more like this:  < 

Books that have the staples positioned dead center on the edge of the spine, at the midpoint between what constitutes the front and back cover will almost always have a V-shape, like this: < , pressed or unpressed, unless there is a spine roll present. So before allowing the V or U shapes of a spine to be a determining tell for press or "crush", the placement of the staples, relative to the edge of the spine should always be considered. 

On 5/17/2022 at 2:43 PM, The Lions Den said:

This looks like a classic example of amateur resto. And it's also possible the cover has been married as well...  

No. In this case, that is the cover that this book was manufactured with, which became completely separated and was reglued using either some brand of epoxy that dries "white", or a combination of Elmer's + White-out, maybe even paper glue and white acrylic paint. Seeing what was done and that this is the original, formerly separated cover is easy. To analyze exactly what susbstance or combination of substances was used to reattach the cover would require the book in hand. 

My feeling is that if we had the exterior images of the book, finding an image of it once slabbed could be done, because chances are 95%+ that it once was slabbed with the notes, "cover detached". Either a lesser grade blue label or a middle grade green label, prior to the horrific Frankenglue-job. 

On 5/17/2022 at 6:53 AM, Mr. Zipper said:

Regarding OP book signature: Atypical size, stiff looking, lack of fluidity... appearance of stops and starts. It has issues. I can't say with 100% confidence it's bad, but I have significant doubts. 

Be confident, Mr. Z. There are 9 distinct formation issues with this signature, any one of them that you will never find in any legit Lee signature from any era.

On 5/16/2022 at 11:14 AM, Whoa!! said:

Irony + infinity .

Are you a good guesser? Take a wild guess about when the next time will be when I offer assistance to anyone asking a question. Then take that guess and multiply it by irony X infinity. 

On 5/16/2022 at 11:20 AM, comicginger1789 said:

I mean I can see similarities to a lot of other signatures. I also like to ask myself why would somebody fake a signature on THIS book? Kind of a random one to do it on. Sure, perhaps done to increase the value of an otherwise cheap low grade copy but...I still say it is more real than fake. If concerned though, return and stick to buying legit signature. If you can live with a lie and the price, that is good too. And if you really must know, certain people will charge you for such things.

Because the book had little value, that is, significantly less value it would have had without the Stan Lee "signature", which is why the forgers typically raid the "bargain boxes", low grade, low demand books for their signature fodder. 

On 5/16/2022 at 11:14 AM, Whoa!! said:

Irony + infinity .

Why would someone willingly wish to do harm to a hobby? My presence here in this thread is to answer a fellow forum member's question about what the heck he was seeing on his Annual 2. I gave a concise answer to that. Nobody else appeared to be certain of what it is, however, I am sure of what it is thus answered his questions. To go into greater detail than I did would serve to instruct others on how the things I can readily identify can be remedied. 

That's a thing that would serve no one's best interests other than someone trying to cover tracks being given instructions by proxy on how to do it. Being able to identify raw books that were previously slabbed can come in handy when investigating provenance of a particular book. Giving away that tool and how to defeat it would be foolish and not in the spirit of serving the hobby's best interests, a strong hobby state being of paramount significance to all. 

On 5/16/2022 at 10:29 AM, comicginger1789 said:

He could hint...just a little. Which picture to examine more? A cryptic clue? Is there a reason to hide such a thing? Is knowing a raw book was once slabbed a power that helps? 

Really though I just want to learn is all. 

I understand. The dilemma being that type of intel will also benefit those who wish to use it not for the greater good. 

On 5/16/2022 at 10:26 AM, Whoa!! said:

If that dude gave away all his secrets he'd be in jail 

On 5/16/2022 at 6:18 AM, comicginger1789 said:

only thing I can think of that you are alluding to is the indentations on the back cover from the staples, perhaps suggesting that the books was sandwiched between an inner well, causing such marks.

No. That is unaffected by both the slabbing process, transit, and storage, unless possibly a weight was substantial enough to compress it was placed atop it. It's something else, and fairly obvious in this case. 

It's also one of several tells that can positively identify previously slabbed raw books and their images. 

On 5/15/2022 at 12:22 PM, buttock said:

It's glue that's pulling the superficial layer of the inside cover off with it.  Impossible to say if it's manufacturing or not without seeing it in hand.  

This cover looks to me like it was completely separated from the pages prior to the glue/epoxy/paste job. The book was not manufactured with adherent that would look like that, even if overly and sloppily applied. This sealant is unlike any other I've ever seen used during the 1960s in the assembly/production of these annuals. 

We might as well be discussing a book held together with nuts, bolts, washers, and debating whether or not being manufactured with nuts, bolts, and washers holding it all together is possible. 

This is completely atypical of manufacturing norms and is obviously the byproduct of after-production manipulation. 

On 5/13/2022 at 11:58 AM, dcollett said:

Hi, All

 

I have a FF Ann #2 and am trying to find out if anyone has experienced the phenomena shown in the photos before. I am hoping that this is manufacturing glue, used to bind the book cover to the spine, which has seeped out the join. I am hoping that this is NOT whiteout fluid added in an attempt to strengthen the join

 

On close inspection, it appears that the white is the gloss from the opposite side of the inside back cover, as if clear glue in manufacturing process was used, but too much was used, it spilled out of the crack, and glued the inside of the back cover, then when the back cover was opened to read, the glue stripped the surface of the inside back cover off, leaving the whiteness from the paper stripped off on top of the glue

 

Many thanks from Darren Collett at www.splatcomics.com

I've never seen anything even remotely like that before, unless an annual cover was very sloppily and overly Elmer-glued back on, which this appears to be. Also, I see tell-tale signs that this was at one time in a graded slab. 

There's no external image of the comic to match up to images of past slabbed green and purple label Annual 2s, but my feeling is that if you run an extensive search, chances favor your being able to find an online image of this book in its likely previously slabbed state. 

On 3/28/2022 at 3:17 PM, ryanritc said:

Recently picked this up does it look legit I have my concerns 

IMO, your concerns are well justified. Regardless of the fluidity, the absence of hesitation, there are 9 blazing red flags here. the combination of any two of the nine, IMO, pointing to this not being Stan's track. 

On 5/8/2022 at 7:29 AM, Thunk said:

Love it  

You never know where you'll find the king of deception  

i wholeheartedly agree. The Devil is usually hiding in the details. Quite often enough, literally, in plain sight. And I already know you're probably not going to believe this but I've seen it happen time and time again, shudder to think, right?. History is an endless loop. A conveyor belt. Nothing is new. Be vigilant and above all, beware: 

On 5/7/2022 at 6:41 PM, The Lions Den said:

I'm not saying that's what this is, but you should consider a number of possibilities, and yes, that is one of them.  

On 5/7/2022 at 10:45 AM, Qalyar said:

Agreed, that's not color touch. The question is whether CGC will view it as overspray or merely a stain. For my part, it doesn't really look like a traditional overspray pattern...

No. It doesn't appear to resemble any distinct overspray patters typically encountered, but......... the spray must start to run out at some point; a weakened stream, or paint sputtering out of the nozzle in the process of running dry, so that might be what we're seeing here. No way to know the exact cause for sure.

As has been stated, the application appears to be completely at random, thus no improvement, either deliberate or accidental to any defects as would be typical with the application of what CGC would consider color-touch. 

On 4/22/2022 at 3:56 PM, Cephusdog said:

I purchased this comic, Thor 148, through a reputable dealer. After looking it over I noticed it many of the edges were not close to straight and it was a lot smaller than a typical Silver age comic. It measures at most, less than 6 and 11/16" on both the top and bottom edges, about a quarter-inch smaller than most of my other Silver and early Bronze Age comics. Since I've been burned once before by a trimmed comic a lot more expensive than this one, I'm always a little skeptical. Admittedly, I'm certainly not an expert at detecting this, so I was hoping the boards could give their opinions.

Thanks, everyone!

 

One glance is all it takes at this point. Not trimmed. No question about it. Send to CGC in complete confidence. It will not return trimmed. 

On 2/15/2022 at 5:05 PM, Mr. Zipper said:

I agree… But they PLOD low-grade books with marker touches or glue that don’t improve the appearance or technical grade. So how is that really “restoration”? It seems as though the PLOD policy is as punitive as anything else.

And there are no lack of examples. A low to middle grade book with a veinous network of color-braking fractures, and yet someone saw fit to try their hand at concealing 1/100oth of the fractures with a few swaths of ink. Why bother, right? No improvemnet at all really, and yet will garner a purple label and rightfully so. Effective or ineffective color touch can generate a purple label as it should be..

On 2/15/2022 at 4:41 PM, kav said:

I can see a lot of potential $$$ in this question.

But this has been covered before. Suggestions of acquiring a Sharpie signature over existing ink/color touch? 

On 2/15/2022 at 1:14 PM, joeypost said:

8.0 range +/-

I agree with the wizard 

On 2/14/2022 at 7:20 AM, Mr. Zipper said:

The other possibility is it's a smear of glue. You can easily tell glue by running your finger over it and feeling the difference in texture of the surface. 

Then again, seems like an odd place to apply glue.

If it was glue, likely the tear wouldn't still be evident. It would appear to be tamped down and tacked in place slightly more than it does. 

On 2/14/2022 at 7:15 AM, Mr. Zipper said:

I think it's foreign matter that just happens to be a similar color. Actually looks like toothpaste. 

The spine has a number of creases in the dark area. It makes no sense that someone would touch up this minute crack in the upper edge and then leave all the spine stresses.

That's what I see. Matter upon the surface of the paper that may be as simple to remove as moistening a piece of tissue and carefully testing the central part of the area to see if any dislodes on the tissue, q-tip, or other type of only slightly abrasive swab or swath. 

On 2/13/2022 at 7:46 AM, Croatbag said:

Thanks everyone for the feedback, very helpful.  Only thing I haven't seen is does anyone have any specific thoughts on the book I posted? Would residue from a tape pull pop under blacklight?

Is there any sign of soak/bleed through to the inside of the front cover where that spot in question is located? Also, does whatever the coloration is look like it is absorbed into the surface, or just resting on the surface? Because to me, it looks like the latter. And if so, immediate remedy may be an option. 

On 2/11/2022 at 2:39 PM, Mr. Zipper said:

I think black light is kind of fake news when it comes to resto detection. I've read that the companies rarely use them. It takes a certain frequency and strength and even then they overlook some things and pop false positives on others. Good ol' fashioned eyeballs work best. 

Absolutely. Might be a good indicator for some color touch but not conclusive for all.  Eyeballs + light + magnification + experience in detecting it.