Here's what the spray was for... got it from the horse's mouth, in the form of an old girlfried my brother had who worked at the local magazine distrubutor for our area.
Comics were delivered weekly, so every week all the comics for that week leaving the distributor were given a shot of the same colour. When the arrived at the newsstands, the vendors could then quickly remove the books from the previous week, which had been sprayed with a different colour. So, for example, all of last week's 'red' books got pulled, and all this week's new 'blue' books got racked.
Make sense, as I have many books that I bought off the shelf from the same store in the 80s that exhibit a few different colours of overspray.
Man, I wish I could go back in time to that store!
Shep
This statement is correct.
The marks were used so the person in charge of rotating the books could easily identify which comics were to be pulled.
This kept them from having to go through and look at the cover dates. They could just look at the stack from the top, and pull all the red comics. (Or whatever color)
I don't know what type of ink/paint they used, but from what I understand it was water based, and did not have any tac. Meaning the comics did not stick together.
Something else to note is that the marks are still present on newsstand comics (to my knowledge, at least until a few years ago). But the marks are actually printed on the interior pages.
This practice started sometime in the '80s.
This eleminated the need for the ink spray at the top of the books.
Bob, there were also marks put on books that were returned. A little different than the ones used for the newsstand.
Our own David Dunbar could possibly be a sorce of more information on this topic.
For the record, unless it's a major, major stain...An average distributor ink stain does not bother me at all.
I see nothing wrong with Sterling's book. Other than that issue is a [embarrassing lack of self control] to find with a perfect wrap and cut.