James J Johnson

One buyer leaves neutral feedback because, "the VF comic was more like Fine". However, the fact that the signature is worthless doesn't appear to be of any issue.

Tell them to take their time with it. The results may be better to moderately press it twice rather than to aggressively press once!

The only visible flaw I can see is the wing on the bottom of the spine (a production micro-tear), visible on the back cover image. While I might allow for that in 9.8 on an otherwise flawless Bronze age book, or older, I wouldn't grade any modern era book 9.8 if any flaw at all was visible on a scan, so 9.6.

Once cleaned, it's well suited for pressing and will benefit from it.

IMO, too small a spot to be of major consideration on a book in this grade range. Devastating on an otherwise NM or better of newer vintage, but not on this, maybe of one tic consideration.

No. No rust at all. The close up reveals the absence of rust. Just a normal, mild coat of surface oxidation coating the outside, giving that grey appearance, but the paper is clean and the rusting process is absent.

Jeff, aside from the major-league staple pull, my main area of concern is that back cover left edge. It looks very fragile, almost as though it's crumbling. What might only appear to be creases on that edge in the scan may actually be fractures, the paper very susceptible to dislodge, even with very careful handling. I have books with that exact look and on rare occasion, when handled, pieces break off on the table or in the Mylar/board, just sliding them in and out.

What bears mention is the paper quality, colors, and gloss. It's in a miraculous state of preservation, especially when you consider that 50s/early 60s Atlas books were printed on the cheapest paper you could buy. The storage environment was perfect, neither kept long term in a basement nor an attic. Those colors look like the day it was printed, you almost never see Atlas issues with these type of colors.

This. And this is a perfect example of why you need multiple graders, multiple findings like the CGC employs to finalize a grade. This was a fast grading for me. In the time it took me to page down through the first post, I thought, "4.5". I've seen so many books just like this one graded 4.5 and when I paged down to see the first estimate, ComicShark's 4.5, I thought, "Yep, I'm in the zone", because a defect like fade can go either way depending on the whole. Then I reached the point where Ahsoka opined, "4.0", and I paged back up for another look, "what did he see to drop this a tick from what most might conclude is an obvious 4.5?". I looked more carefully and there may be more to the accumulation of defects than the eye readily sees, when examined more closely, and sure enough, beyond the fade, beyond the accumulation of flaws easily seen, there are more you really have to peer at to see and fathom to what degree they affect the whole. I think Ahsoka's 4.0 and anybody else who agrees with that is right on the money. Grading is really a team effort, input and onservation are key and not everybody can see everything. That's what makes this section of the forum so great and probably the best learning tool on the net for grading.

Just a Tonfulle-84 still going strong with his endless supply of $10 to $50 "Stan Lee" autographs on bargain box dreck. https://www.ebay.com/sch/tonfulle-84/m.html?_trksid=p3692

Yes they do appear to be, but for lack of a better image to tell for sure, I'm going only by the owner's assessment that they aren't rusted.

It's foxing, and a close look at that area inside the back cover should show some minor evidence of it. Even though minor, foxing is the grading kiss of death for late Silver age and up books, it most definitely impact the grade, in this case an otherwise book of 6.0 to 6.5 appearance demoted to 5.5, IMO, a good call, Ahsoka.

You don't need me on this one, Ahsoka, I couldn't have stated it any more eloquently or assessed it more accurately.

Sure you can! Backboard and mylar.

+1. It's a textbook 4.0 but it should slab 4.5. It has the "right" defects to be more attractive than the technical grade and that will bring over GP 4.5 due to lots of eye appeal, both subject matter and the colors

Plus, the cover paper is so nice that if you mate this cover to that interior it's going to look like a roast beef sandwich on white bread.

I think the member's name was Joey, possibly Joey Post or something to that effect. I remember seeing examples of his leaf casting entire new sections of cover, with major new areas that were indistinguishable from the vintage paper and thinking, "That's not restoration, that's magic. He must have used a magic wand to do that". It was the best I've ever seen, bar none.

Front cover is all there and clean, over the majority of it. Too much so to call it 0.5 despite the rough back cover. Grading is not supposed to be front or back cover biased, a book should be graded on its whole. But books with a demolished back cover and relatively sound front cover tend to grade higher than the inverse, so that in mind, based on the presentation of the front cover, IMO, it's at least a CGC 1.0, which would warrant slabbing if resale was in mind. Were the front cover like the back and the back like the front, it's a CGC 0.5.

Not much expense, and I favor Classics Conservatory as being one of the best in the biz and affordably reasonable. There's a member here also. I've seen a few posts of his, showing some of his work, and it's top notch. I can't remember his forum ID but I do know that he worked with Matt. He's great too! I'm sure another member will guide you to him.

If that does feel like sandpaper grit, chances favor that most of it can be flicked off without making the appearance of the areas worse, and certainly high chance of improving it. If you do decide to give it a try, let us know how it went.

Alf, whatever that dark matter is, it doesn't appear to have completely soaked through the cover, leading me to believe that those spots may be 3-dimensional and rest on or embedded into the cover stock. If these are actual flecks of matter, just adhered to or slightly embedded into the cover, have you tried to dislodge one of them with the edge of a sharp implement. Not digging into the paper underneath, but the point into the side of one of those flecks to try to dislodge it without marring the cover? You may be able to rid the cover of most of that by giving it a try on just one small fleck, you certainly won't hurt the paper in that way as there's no color to flake off.

Cover is real nice, and the artwork fantastic. A Whiz 4 cover that nice? A rusting, brittle interior? I wouldn't let them even touch one another. Set a time frame, say a year. I'm sure you'll find a bargain on a sound, coverless #4. Then you send cover and interior out to a preacher to be professionally, properly married, you submit the finished product and you'll have either a beautiful addition to your collection, or a piece to sell that will bring more than the expense incurred, I'm sure, as we'll be talking qualified FN or better without another else done other than attaching the cover.

+1. It can get worse over time, even if stored in archival material and in an ideal, temperature/moisture controlled environment. Once the oxidation process has begun it will deteriorate further, even if removed from the environs that caused it in the first place. Along with brittle paper, oxidation/rust is the closest equivalent to cancer for comic books.

Also, with rusted staples, the advent of storage comes into consideration. Where the book was stored for the majority of its life. Rust is exacerbated by moisture. Most comics stored in a basement = a moist environment, which exacerbated the oxidation. So aside from the staples, when present, a book with rusty staples should also be meticulously examined for waves, tidelines, spotting, mildew, etc., etc, the typical signs of moist/damp environment long-term storage, which also will effect the grade accordingly. Some of these textural surface defects cannot be readily seen on even clear, high quality scans.