Qalyar

I've reached out to Fantagraphics also, but haven't heard back yet. I don't expect a rapid reply from them -- most people probably aren't interested in printing information from 20 years ago. But I figured it wouldn't hurt to check in here; the surest way to determine that something exists is for someone to have a copy of it! And, besides, if the history of comics printings tells us nothing else, it's that sometimes more things get created than were "supposed" to exist, right?

No, no, not the ~1980 Whitman series with the chase #4 issue, but the 1995-2004 Kitchen Sink Press/Fantagraphics series by Charles Burns. As an aside, if you're not familiar with this coming-of-age/body horror series with Burns' disturbingly beautiful black and white artwork, and think that chain of descriptors is even a little interesting, I strongly recommend picking up the easily-accessible TPB. Now, back to the printings... So, I know this started with KSP. Issues 1-4 were printed with KSP indicia. Issues 1 and 2 sold well enough that KSP reprinted them (as 2nd printings). In 1999, KSP went bankrupt and the series was acquired by Fantagraphics, who continued publication. Issues 5-12 exist only as Fantagraphics books. Additionally, Fantagraphics re-issued (at least some) of the KSP issues: #1 (3rd printing), #2 (3rd printing), and #3 (2nd printing) are all Fantagraphics books. Which brings me to the questions at hand: 1) Is there a Fantagraphics re-issue of #4? 2) Which issues from #5 onward received 2nd printings? Both mycomicshop and Mile High list 2nd printings for #5 an #9, but no others. Are there others?

DC is apparently sourcing one or more alternative printers (to replace their current printer, which has suspended operations) and is exploring non-Diamond distribution options. Especially if they run comics at multiple different printers simultaneously, folks should be on watch for oddities and unplanned variants once distribution resumes. Marvel, meanwhile, is Disney, and has all the money there is. The idea that this will put Disney in financial hardship is ... not realistic. They can weather the storm better than almost anyone else, despite theaters and parks and comic stores all being shut down right now. I would not count the industry out yet, although the toll for LCSs -- especially in oversaturated markets -- may well be very steep.

Recreating this particular piece is rather complicated by the death of Herb Trimpe in 2015. Anyway, especially with unique items, I don't think it's ever bad for the collecting community to know when they've wandered off, just in case they turn up via an inappropriate third party or the like.

That is an impressive set of Punishers. And yeah, I can imagine it's tough to find 9.8s for random issues late in a run that virtually no one else slabs. Do you just pick them up in relative bulk and put them through the CGC prescreen?

For the 1995 (volume 2) series, I can confirm #1,#2, and #5 exist with newsstand versions. I'm not aware of any of the other issues as newsies. In particular, I really don't expect #4 in newsstand, since some combination of the polybag/unbagged split probably was used in that way.

I'd absolutely slab an Action 1, AF15, or Det27 with no BC and half a FC. Copies of all of those trade regularly for pretty solid folding money in even worse condition than that.

I'm not sure how much hope I'd have. Has anyone else read their auction participation terms -- and I'd like to make clear that this means "Relic Vintage" specifically, not all of Invaluable? That's some of the skeeviest fine print I have ever read. Relic Vintage offers absolutely no guarantees of any sort about the material they're auctioning, including no guarantee that they have legitimate title to sell it in the first place. But still no returns for any reason. They require the bidder agree that "the dispute resolution specified in the foregoing paragraph as the bidder's sole means to resolve any and all disputes" -- that preceding paragraph, for the record, stating that there is no dispute resolution at all. And they demand that you don't complain if they screw you: "the bidder specifically agrees that they will not file a dispute or chargeback of any kind with an online venue, a credit card merchant, or any other third-parties". Finally, since they went out of the way to point out that they don't ensure they have legal title to the stuff they sell, they require their buyer "waives and releases Relic Vintage Inc. from any and all claims, of whatever nature based on alleged defect(s) in legal title". This is bad enough boilerplate that I'm not sure it's even legally enforceable, although clearly that's not an argument anyone should get into on an internet chat forum. But yikes. No one should do business with people like this.

Man, that Crow #3 cover looks fantastic in that grade. I owned most of that series at one point, but mine looked like it had come back from the dead for vengeance...

There's actually even more funny business going on here than just these two crappy fake Ditkos. Take a look at this one. Already posted in this thread? NOPE! There's a spot on Spidey's back that's white here, but black in the current auction... and a different, but equally fake, Ditko signature. This one isn't up for auction right now. It sold in a different auction last year (seemingly unrelated to this one, but I'm not sure I'd trust that either).

I think the weaknesses in the paper started out as a production defect, but at the point where they're ugly open tears instead of production creases... ehh. The book is visually appealing enough that I can't imagine not marking it down fairly starkly (defects matter more in otherwise higher grade books).

Kerry Callen's parody covers are more believable...

Yikes. Okay, ignore what I said previously. This is the southbound product of a north-facing yak. If this is authentic, I'll eat my hat.

I mean, sometimes artists do quick sketches. Or try something different. Or have bad days, and produce a piece that's not really representative of their greater body of work or their level of talent. It's a big step to directly claim that a house is auctioning fraudulent or counterfeit material, absent actual evidence to that effect. I won't go that far from just looking at pictures on the screen. But... what I am saying is that I sure wouldn't want that "Ditko Spiderman" (because it's hideous) and I wouldn't suggest anyone else touch it unless it comes with solidly documented provenance.

Yeah, I have a few easier targets that I'll probably be completing before tackling Albedo for really reals. Honestly, my biggest worry with Albedo is how much it'll annoy me to permanently lack the first-print yellow table Prototype, which I neither expect to encounter nor be willing to pay for. But at least the idea of slabbing up some drek to make full runs of small series doesn't mean I'm crazy alone around here.

Has there been any evidence of Midnight Nation newsies? I know that the previous Joe's Comics book, Rising Stars, got dual distribution for at least some (and I suspect all) issues. Midnight was in 2000+, though, at what was already the tail end of Image's newsstand distribution program. But, at a minimum, newsies of Witchblade and Spawn were still going for several more years, so there's a possibility. I haven't seen any. But I'd sure like to know if they're out there.

Is there any guidance to how sets should/do handle later printings, reprints, etc.? There doesn't seem to be a lot of consistency, but I imagine I might be missing something. For example, the Albedo registry set considers all the printings any of the first three printings (or their variants) of the #0 Prototype to be a single slot with varying point values, but treats the 1st and 2nd printings of Albedo #1 as different slots. On the other hand, I know that a lot of more mainstream titles ignore subsequent printings entirely. What's the rule of thumb for this sort of thing? What determines when a later printing/reprint is its own slot vs. a lower-point slot fill vs. excluded from set consideration?

A lot of what I collect is from fairly self-contained targets with 10 or 20 books to chase, counting whatever variants exist (here used broadly, including alt covers, limited editions, art-swapped reprints, and sometimes even stuff that goes beyond what CGC cares about: DM/newsies, subsequent printings, and so on). I like the hunt. I also like chasing high grade copies. I have no illusion that this is an investment. I collect what I want, and I'm quite comfortable doing so. I enjoy the appeal of slabbing my prey because it provides the grading with an imprimatur, and because I think CGC's slabs look pretty classy, frankly. I have TPBs and reading copies to, well, read. But, um, a lot of this sort of thing starts off really strong and then goes for... awhile. I'm curious how other people handle that. How far do you let a set wander off into the weeds before you stop slabbing? As an example that I haven't targeted (yet, anyway) but that should be familiar to everyone: Albedo. Obviously, Albedo #2 is a key copper indie, and the Albedo #0 1st print yellow desk is one of the great rarities of the era. But the Thoughts and Images series runs to #14 (to say nothing of the Antarctic Press and Shanda Fantasy Arts series, which I frankly assume are of interest only to their primary demographic). As I type this, there are zero slabbed copies of Albedo #9-12, 14. Obviously, despite starting with several rare, fairly high-dollar, and even key issues... no one is actually interested in slabbing the full run. So, what does everyone else do when their set starts strong but ends in drek? Is the cost of encapsulation enough to deter making full run match for storage and presentation? Or does everyone just put the boring fill in mylar to think about what it (hasn't) done?