joeypost

Kenny, There are 2 things I am trying to accomplish. 1) Is prolonged exposure to heat (this page is the test subject) and is placed just under the books. It is about as close to the top platen as the bottom cover would be. So It is probably getting hit hard enough for the purpose of the test. 2) The rest of the book is being cut in half. Half will be pressed numerous times and the othe rhalf will not. That is the main tests. After 20 pressings I will scan both sections and post the results as well as any observations regarding the pages getting brittle, ink transfer, etc.

Here is the page in question. I will leave it in for the equivalent of 30 pressings. Unfortunately I leave tomorrow for Heroes and I will not be able to pick the experiment back up until Sunday night.

OK. Scans will follow later tonight. The book has been selected. A beater copy of Fantastic Four #123. Day 1 Pages are still very supple and appear OW in color. No odors, foxing or tanning to the covers.

Maybe one of the lawyers can chime in but I don't really think that is a good idea. Connor has done more damage to himself than any title could. Personally, even though he has not "technically" broken the forum rules he does need to be banned.

Removing pages beforehand is not going to give you a good control sample because paper degrades differently in stacks and in book form than in individual sheet form. You really need to cut the book in half from side to side in order to have a proper control sample. Instead of using printer paper in your machine, use a piece of newspaper. It's not going to be exactly the same as the newsprint used in comics, but it'll be a lot closer than printer paper. Or better yet, just pull a wrap out of a beater comic and use that. You got it. I will take high resolution scans of all the pages to do a before and after comparison.

I get frustrated because I don't think people consider this enough. They extrapolate one book's results to all books. They press a book from 1968 successfully and think it will be similar for a book from 1942. And the scary part for me is that even with all these unknowns out there, it is not slowing down the amounts of Golden Age books being "processed". SDJ: Your last paragraph sums up my own feelings. You seem to understand paper as well as anyone here and I am glad you and FFB have taken the initiative to this thread. I simply don't understand how hundreds of boarders can post tens of thousands of messages about pressing, but when it comes to actually taking the initiative, doing the work, and paying the money required to answer the question scientifically there is dead silence. Honestly, that's why I am reluctant to put any of my own time, which is sparse enough as it is, into this. I do know several professors at UC Berkeley but none associated with the Forest Lab that FFB mentions. Also, knowing what it is like to be on tenure track at a competitive university, I fear it would be difficult to get anyone to help with this project for free. I think the best bet would be to contact authors of some of the papers that FFB mentions. If they won't do the experiments, they should at least be able to comment on how we could conduct such experiments ourselves. FFB: I like your suggestion of cutting the books in halves. The other types of experiments that you mention sound valuable but I am not familiar with the literature and don't know how to conduct them in practice. The one experiment that I suggested seems like something that wouldn't be too hard to do, unless, of course, everyone is too busy talking about pressing over in the General forum. tb, I have the equipment and know-how to do the pressing if you've got some particular cheap books you want to use as samples. The thing I don't have is the MIT folds testing equipment. If we could track down someone who does and who would be willing to run the tests, we could do it. FFB (who is sick and tired of all of the endless debates re the goods or evils of pressing and would love to get some real data to talk about) Count me in as willing to help. Got any GA books with reasonably decent page quality that you wouldn't mind being cut in half for the good of the collective? Sure. I can come up with some stuff. Shoot me a PM to remind me and I'll do some digging. I would also like to help. I have been thinking about this for quite some time and about 2 months ago I placed a single sheet of printer paper under the bottom support in one of my presses. This piece of paper has been in the press for about 3 weeks now and has been subject to the press turning on and off, heating and cooling many, many times. I am going to leave it in a few more weeks and then replace it. I will keep that piece of paper and bring it with me to the Chicago show. I am also going to do this with a bronze age beater that I will press maybe 20 times. Again, I will take before and after photo's as well as remove a few pages so we have something to compare them against at the show. If anyone would like to see them or possibly have a small get together and discuss the results in Chicago let me know and we can possibly do this over lunch or in one of the corners of the convention hall. I will even bring a few books. Some pressed some not and see if the "experts" can pick them out.

The process and chemistry of making newsprint versus freesheet is so different. Depending on when that test was done, the brightness on that Springhill Offset was either 83 bt., 86 bt., or what it is today, 90 bt. Offset standards have changed through the years. In comparison, newsprint today is 59-60 bt. And back as recent as the 1970's, it was 56 bt. That is a huge difference in brightness and the amount and types of chemicals used in the process to "whiten" the sheet are very different. I understand the acidity, but there are lots of differences in composition besides that and I can't imagine them not having an impact. Can you get a ratio? I don't know, perhaps. But in order to get one, you have to test the newsprint and the coated groundwood. And if you do that, you have a much better answer regardless of the freesheet test. Are there any tests out there on newsprint and/or coated groundwood? How about those two grades from samples manufactured in the 1940's or 50's? The grade standards were a little different then, so it could make a difference within similar grades. Either one of those I would love to see. But even those wouldn't be a "be all end all" because of all the variables involved. But I'd rather slice and disect that one. So would I (that's why tb's experiment sounds so interesting), but we are getting far afield of the original point that fantastic_four raised when he started the thread. The question was whether a typical dry mount press job would cause "long term damage" to a comic. My point was that it will cause at most negligible damage on a molecular level, but nothing appreciable in terms of fold strength, suppleness, tear strength, or any other test of paper freshness or strength. It doesn't seem like you're disputing that, right? Anyway, if you want some data for testing newsprint from the 1970s exposed to accelerated aging, this 1979 study from the JAIC has some data. http://aic.stanford.edu/jaic/articles/jaic18-02-001_3.html It took about 17 days for the unwashed sample (the control sample) of newsprint to turn brittle when aged in a 90C 50%RH oven. If you look at the plot line for the 90C/50%RH sample in the Library of Congress tests for the Springhill Offset paper and follow it to the bottom of the graph (where it would endure zero folds), it took about 17 days for the Springhill Offset to get there. So really, the accelerated aging tests show that the Springhill Offset paper performs pretty closely to 1970s newsprint, despite all of the differences in methods of manufacture, brightness levels, etc. I'll grant you that newsprint quality varied from publisher to publisher over the decades, but all of this misses the point. The point is that I do not believe that a few minutes at 60-65C in a dry mount press is going to cause appreciable damage to the paper strength, even if you have to introduce humidity to relax the fibers to remove a warp. Whatever damage is caused by a few minutes in the press is going to be dwarfed by the damage caused by whoever owns the book and doesn't store it in ideal conditions over the next 30 years. So are you saying pressing does cause damage but very very minor damage? So would reading a comic, or leaving it in a hot car or warehouse, or improper storage techniques, or if the relative humidity was too high, or mailing abook improperly (or even properly). In which I would hope we would try and do those things as less as possible for those of us that want to kep our comics pristine as possible. Thus pressing = BAD. Don't you have a sales thread to troll? How am I trolling here? You listed things that where negative and simalar to pressing books thus through deduction if those where bad then pressing was bad. I think I have been pretty civil in this thread. Did you even read FFB post? The second a book comes off the press (printing press) it is downhill from there. The effects of pressing are comparable to any other agent that acts against the integrity of the book. Handling a book = BAD. Reading it = BAD Everytime you re-bag it = BAD Doing nothing to the book = BAD So if I followed your logic owning a book = BAD since it is ageing anyway. Considering books have been around since the 1930's and have not turned to powder. Considering they are digging up newspaper that has been in the ground 60 years and is still in good enough shape to read. Considering the lengths collectors go with proper storage techniques and micr-chamber paper and UV protection and temperature/humity control I would say the minute or two a book is in the press has little impact on the book compared to all the other outside forces it is constantly fighting against.

The process and chemistry of making newsprint versus freesheet is so different. Depending on when that test was done, the brightness on that Springhill Offset was either 83 bt., 86 bt., or what it is today, 90 bt. Offset standards have changed through the years. In comparison, newsprint today is 59-60 bt. And back as recent as the 1970's, it was 56 bt. That is a huge difference in brightness and the amount and types of chemicals used in the process to "whiten" the sheet are very different. I understand the acidity, but there are lots of differences in composition besides that and I can't imagine them not having an impact. Can you get a ratio? I don't know, perhaps. But in order to get one, you have to test the newsprint and the coated groundwood. And if you do that, you have a much better answer regardless of the freesheet test. Are there any tests out there on newsprint and/or coated groundwood? How about those two grades from samples manufactured in the 1940's or 50's? The grade standards were a little different then, so it could make a difference within similar grades. Either one of those I would love to see. But even those wouldn't be a "be all end all" because of all the variables involved. But I'd rather slice and disect that one. So would I (that's why tb's experiment sounds so interesting), but we are getting far afield of the original point that fantastic_four raised when he started the thread. The question was whether a typical dry mount press job would cause "long term damage" to a comic. My point was that it will cause at most negligible damage on a molecular level, but nothing appreciable in terms of fold strength, suppleness, tear strength, or any other test of paper freshness or strength. It doesn't seem like you're disputing that, right? Anyway, if you want some data for testing newsprint from the 1970s exposed to accelerated aging, this 1979 study from the JAIC has some data. http://aic.stanford.edu/jaic/articles/jaic18-02-001_3.html It took about 17 days for the unwashed sample (the control sample) of newsprint to turn brittle when aged in a 90C 50%RH oven. If you look at the plot line for the 90C/50%RH sample in the Library of Congress tests for the Springhill Offset paper and follow it to the bottom of the graph (where it would endure zero folds), it took about 17 days for the Springhill Offset to get there. So really, the accelerated aging tests show that the Springhill Offset paper performs pretty closely to 1970s newsprint, despite all of the differences in methods of manufacture, brightness levels, etc. I'll grant you that newsprint quality varied from publisher to publisher over the decades, but all of this misses the point. The point is that I do not believe that a few minutes at 60-65C in a dry mount press is going to cause appreciable damage to the paper strength, even if you have to introduce humidity to relax the fibers to remove a warp. Whatever damage is caused by a few minutes in the press is going to be dwarfed by the damage caused by whoever owns the book and doesn't store it in ideal conditions over the next 30 years. So are you saying pressing does cause damage but very very minor damage? So would reading a comic, or leaving it in a hot car or warehouse, or improper storage techniques, or if the relative humidity was too high, or mailing abook improperly (or even properly). In which I would hope we would try and do those things as less as possible for those of us that want to kep our comics pristine as possible. Thus pressing = BAD. Don't you have a sales thread to troll?

The process and chemistry of making newsprint versus freesheet is so different. Depending on when that test was done, the brightness on that Springhill Offset was either 83 bt., 86 bt., or what it is today, 90 bt. Offset standards have changed through the years. In comparison, newsprint today is 59-60 bt. And back as recent as the 1970's, it was 56 bt. That is a huge difference in brightness and the amount and types of chemicals used in the process to "whiten" the sheet are very different. I understand the acidity, but there are lots of differences in composition besides that and I can't imagine them not having an impact. Can you get a ratio? I don't know, perhaps. But in order to get one, you have to test the newsprint and the coated groundwood. And if you do that, you have a much better answer regardless of the freesheet test. Are there any tests out there on newsprint and/or coated groundwood? How about those two grades from samples manufactured in the 1940's or 50's? The grade standards were a little different then, so it could make a difference within similar grades. Either one of those I would love to see. But even those wouldn't be a "be all end all" because of all the variables involved. But I'd rather slice and disect that one. So would I (that's why tb's experiment sounds so interesting), but we are getting far afield of the original point that fantastic_four raised when he started the thread. The question was whether a typical dry mount press job would cause "long term damage" to a comic. My point was that it will cause at most negligible damage on a molecular level, but nothing appreciable in terms of fold strength, suppleness, tear strength, or any other test of paper freshness or strength. It doesn't seem like you're disputing that, right? Anyway, if you want some data for testing newsprint from the 1970s exposed to accelerated aging, this 1979 study from the JAIC has some data. http://aic.stanford.edu/jaic/articles/jaic18-02-001_3.html It took about 17 days for the unwashed sample (the control sample) of newsprint to turn brittle when aged in a 90C 50%RH oven. If you look at the plot line for the 90C/50%RH sample in the Library of Congress tests for the Springhill Offset paper and follow it to the bottom of the graph (where it would endure zero folds), it took about 17 days for the Springhill Offset to get there. So really, the accelerated aging tests show that the Springhill Offset paper performs pretty closely to 1970s newsprint, despite all of the differences in methods of manufacture, brightness levels, etc. I'll grant you that newsprint quality varied from publisher to publisher over the decades, but all of this misses the point. The point is that I do not believe that a few minutes at 60-65C in a dry mount press is going to cause appreciable damage to the paper strength, even if you have to introduce humidity to relax the fibers to remove a warp. Whatever damage is caused by a few minutes in the press is going to be dwarfed by the damage caused by whoever owns the book and doesn't store it in ideal conditions over the next 30 years. So are you saying pressing does cause damage but very very minor damage? So would reading a comic, or leaving it in a hot car or warehouse, or improper storage techniques, or if the relative humidity was too high, or mailing a book improperly (or even properly).

Are you referring to just humidity + pressure? If not, what types do you mean? There are "heatless" pressing techniques that use moisture and there are heatless pressing techniques that do not use moisture. Mechanical, localized pressing is one example. And you have, yourself, conducted these techniques in the same manner as a LBC conservator would? Do you have a point, or are you just trying to pick a fight? You obviously have nothing of substance to add to the discussion, so why don't you just head on back to the kiddie pool. Did you avoid the question for a reason? Do you have an answer or are you just avoiding the fight? If you wanna play expert on what you have read researched on web plaese do so. But if you think that qualifies you as an expert in print and press technology when you haven't heard the presses roll in that warehouse in the less desirable side of town...step off. Stick to the law books sonny.............. I "avoided the question" for the same reason I'm going to pay no more attention to you - because your posts are stupid and add nothing to the discussion. (thumbs u

He was on the list before? Early on. I believe it was a sales thread of October's... then he stiffed me second. He concocted some elaborate story to get out of a deal with comicdey a couple of years ago. Hopefully Collin will chime in.

A a minor...perhaps contacting his father first may be more appropriate...maybe you guys could get Mark to do it in an official capacity. I always liked Cap and can't help but wonder what may have triggered this dramatic change in his nature. My 17 year old has a record and it's caused him a world of trouble...it would be nice if some positive intervention could help avoid that. GOD BLESS... -jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u If he is a minor, then why is he even permitted to be posting much less conduct business on these boards? I have been here three years and he has claimed to be 18 the entire time. Sorry....my mistake.GOD BLESS... -jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u No way. There were pictures of him and Borock from SD last year. He is like 16-17 now and was 13 or 14 when he started posting here. If that's the case...someone really needs to get his parents involved. This could be a sign of a much deeper issue that's causing him to act out...maybe even worse behavior can be nipped in the bud.GOD BLESS... -jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u So is he or is he not a minor? Either way getting his parents involve dbefore the authorities would be the best way to go. What kind of money are we talking about here? Hundreds? A thousand?

I have looked at that cover dozens of times and for the first time I am noticing the guys head

Still, We need more pictures.

You've done this for a year now, so if you ever get the goods I don't hear about it unless I do a random drive by in your threads. I will be at Charlotte....... So will I

(thumbs u grade A kung-fu Appears so. Congrats.

Kudos to GAcollectibles. Even though I fogot to pay Andy (4 or 5 times) he came through like a champ.

Always a pleasure Sterling.

absolute rubish...can I take it off your hands Possibly. Check back in a month or so. I just picked up a sweet raw copy that puts this to shame. 9.4 feels like 9.0 nowadays, don't it? Too true. Would love all 9.6/9.8 copies but the 9.4's do just fine. Then you boys should see all the stuff I have on the way back... Why does this always happen just before a big Convention Looking forward to what you have coming up Dale.

You will witness it firsthand in 2 weeks. Will it be anatomically correct? Do we have to prop it up or will it constantly fall down?

absolute rubish...can I take it off your hands Possibly. Check back in a month or so. I just picked up a sweet raw copy that puts this to shame. 9.4 feels like 9.0 nowadays, don't it? Too true. Would love all 9.6/9.8 copies but the 9.4's do just fine.

Kudos to r1970d for the last batch of books. Thanks Roy.

Well said. I would say it is safe to assume that anyone who has dealings with TFL from this point on would find themselves in the same bucket the rest on the list are.

He makes more now then he ever did whent he show aired live.

+ half the globe. Alone, Seinfeld is weak. With the original cast, better. +1 I'm sure he stays up at night worrying about the half of ther world that hates him. Way I see it he has a hard time endorsing all the checks he is receiving from the shows syndication.