-
When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
rich_TMNT
-
Posts
451 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
CGC Journals
Gallery
Events
Store
Posts posted by rich_TMNT
-
-
On 8/9/2023 at 9:34 PM, stock_rotation said:
Also, for anyone assuming good faith, honest mistake, etc. You should actually look at the auction in question. Seller included a picture of the interior that has @rich_TMNT watermarks all over it. How does that happen accidentally?
Yikes! I hadn't noticed a picture on the listing was from my site. I don't understand why it's even included because there's also a picture of that full page spread from the actual book - which doesn't at all match with mine from a 1st printing. Definitely concerning - something's amiss. Starting to get a sense that maybe this wasn't found at a store after all and we're all being duped. Hope I'm wrong.
-
On 8/9/2023 at 8:36 PM, stock_rotation said:
This is not true. You can buy 11x17 newsprint that will run in any modern digital copier.
https://paperworks.com/store/products/newsprint-white-11x17-30lb-5lbbox
Ebay is full of repro SA comics that use this paper.
This is also not true. I personally scanned my TMNT 2nd print which I bought when it was released. I recently sold this book on eBay, so I'm no longer in possession of it, but I have full 600DPI scans of every page. This is a crop of the bottom of the page in question.
And since you'll probably ask, yes, it has the mark at the top of the left hand side of the page.
Thank you @stock_rotation for the response and feedback on this.
In regards to the sheets of newsprint paper, I've seen that paper before but it's my understanding that paper is for art / packing usage and is not suitable (at least not recommended) for use in copy machines since it absorbs too much ink and results in bleeding / runs on the page. There's a statement to that effect on the page you linked to. During research for my articles, I went to a local FedEx Kinkos and asked them about the possibilities of newsprint paper and they said their machines wouldn't work with newsprint so they referred me to a local print shop. That shop didn't recommend using newsprint sheets (due to the bleeding) but instead recommended newsprint rolls through a different machine that ran the paper faster through than a normal sheet-fed machine would (similar to how an offset web press would work). That, of course, doesn't mean it couldn't be done on a copier so I suppose that it might be worth maybe doing a test in the future to see what's possible with that type of paper when used in a copier (and what it looks and feels like). If it turns out that paper works in a copier and produces decent results, that might change my theory about "counterfeits" possibly being proofs. I am meeting this fall with a major printer on the east coast and will definitely ask about the possibilities of newsprint paper printing (aside from web offset).
In relation to the Page 33 fist - thank you for providing that picture of your 2nd printing. Would you believe that you're one of three people that have now provided me images of their 2nd printing having the full fist viewable on Page 33? So...that means it may or may not be fully visible in the 2nd printing which also means that's likely true for the 1st printing as well (maybe even for the 3rd, too). I'll keep trying to source more interior page images for further research. But, one neat thing about knowing this fist may or may not be fully visible on Page 33 is that it helps with further authentication of the TMNT #1 Negatives. That fist being fully visible on the negative but not being visible on the printed page really was a mystery to me since it seemed to be something that SHOULD have printed - but now I see that it's just a printing anomaly that affected some copies but not all. AND, knowing your Page 33 has the mark in the upper left margin - that's definitely awesome!
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Hi everyone. Sorry I'm late to the game here. I was in talks with @Mike Oliver (the OP buyer) on my FB page about this book and just now saw that @SpideyFein had tagged me here (thanks, btw!). All this can get SO confusing and there's so much to discuss - I'll try to clearly lay out a few things. However, bottom line here is that this is 100% not a 1st, 2nd, or 3rd Printing of TMNT #1 and isn't an official reprinting of #1 that's ever been made for retail sale by Mirage, IDW, or any other publisher. But, I hesitate anymore to use the "counterfeit" label / term on these copies that aren't official but have interior pages on newsprint (although for the sake of labeling them for clarity, I'll use the term "counterfeit" in parenthesis here). I say that because, as @Dr. Balls mentioned previously, printing on newsprint paper (unless there's something I'm unaware of) requires offset / web press printing that is very logistically involved and really isn't something cost-effective for something you only see a few copies of surface every once in a while. There are also very weird / unique interior page characteristics with the counterfeits I've seen to date that makes me wonder where the heck these ever came from - things that don't completely mesh with using full scans of actual copies. Let me lay out some things here about TMNT #1 that hopefully provides some good insights (and I've linked to pics and info. in order to save space). There's also a wealth of info. about TMNT #1 (specifically related to the TMNT #1 Negatives) in the articles I wrote about the authentication work I did on them.
Page 29 - in the lower right corner of Page 29 on the 1st & 2nd printings, a line missing from the artwork, which is directly tied to the way the TMNT #1 Negatives used to make the 1st & 2nd printings were prepared (stripped). The 1st & 2nd printings are the ONLY printings of TMNT #1 I've ever found to be missing this line (which makes sense since the 3rd printing used a different printer and thus, a different set of negatives, plus subsequent printings -including IDWs- likely used original artwork scans or digital files made from the original artwork or master files). My personal "counterfeit" copy of TMNT #1 (which isn't just a 2nd or 3rd printing with the printing designation removed) ALSO does not have this line present in the Page 29 artwork. However, the "counterfeit" copy in question in this thread DOES have this line present. So, that would seem to indicate that 1) the TMNT #1 1st & 2nd printing negatives could have been used to produce some of these newsprint "counterfeits" and 2) scans of 1st & 2nd printings couldn't have been used for the "counterfeit" in discussion here. A 3rd Printing could have been used for this "counterfeit" being discussed (or even the negatives for the 3rd printing, which don't exist anymore) - the quality of the 3rd printing was sub-par and the page images are smaller than 1st & 2nd printings (just like in this "counterfeit" - although I find the print quality on this "counterfeit" to be better than a 3rd printing).
Page 33 - this page has a bunch of stuff that's interesting between the 3rd printing and the 1st/2nd printings. But, the thing about this page that is really unique when it comes to the "counterfeits" is Shredder's left fist in the lower left panel. The first three printings (1st, 2nd, & 3rd) of TMNT #1 don't print the entirety of this fist - the knuckle of Shredder's little finger is cut off. However, in the newsprint "counterfeits" I've seen (one of which I own - the other is the one from this thread), the entire fist is printed / visible. That's a real oddity for a couple reasons - 1) "counterfeits" I'm aware of couldn't have used scans of the first three printings since they don't show the full knuckle - 2) the negative used to print the 1st & 2nd printings actually has the full fist visible and unmasked so it SHOULD have printed completely on the 1st & 2nd printings but didn't - likely because that fist extends far outside the printable page boundary that was burned to plate by the printers. So, we already know from Page 29 that the TMNT #1 negatives COULD have only been used for one version of the "counterfeit" but not the one here since the line is present. But now with Page 33 from both "counterfeits" having the full fist visible AS WELL AS the negative having the full fist visible - it's kind of a mystery.
I won't go into other pages here but there's more about other pages in the articles I wrote. All to say, I've come to a feasible hypothesis on newsprint "counterfeits" which is essentially that I do think there is a good possibility that these newsprint copies that don't match 1st, 2nd, or 3rd printings and get labeled as "counterfeits" might actually be some type of proof copies or something akin to that. I continue to study all the printings of TMNT #1 as much as possible and I've just not found a good reason why there are very few newsprint "counterfeits" that actually exist (or, at least that have surfaced). With newsprint page printing requiring so much effort, if these "counterfeits" were intentional to pass as authentic copies, why aren't there hundreds or even thousands out there?
Regarding the covers on "counterfeits," mine doesn't have the detailed cross-hatching on the cover in the mainly dark areas and the red isn't as vibrant (almost more pink) - that's a pretty obvious giveaway that doesn't match the 1st printing cover. But, is that because the cover used for it was a proof of some sort that got rejected for mass production due to poor quality with the color and cross-hatching? For the cover used on the "counterfeit" in question here, there's the obvious omission of the price on the back cover below the copyright info. It would seem that's a pretty glaringly obvious thing that shouldn't have been omitted by a counterfeiter (especially when you think about how in the world that cover could have been scanned from an original copy and NOT have that price on there - that's bizarre to me since every 1st, 2nd, & 3rd printing has that price on the back cover). So, is that price missing on this "counterfeit" because it was a proof of some sort that got rejected due to the missing price? But, if so, why does the cover of this "counterfeit" more closely match the 1st/2nd printings that it does a 3rd printing yet the interiors more closely resemble the 3rd printing in terms of artwork size and page spacing?
So much to think about and it all just adds to the mysterious and awesome history of TMNT #1. I hope to someday get to the bottom of all of this but, until then, it sure makes for an awesome thread.
-
On 5/5/2023 at 10:38 AM, jaybuck43 said:
Just spoke to HA. Probably will be removed within 12 hours.
Edited to add: They just sent me an email saying they've removed the book from auction.
Nice. I couldn't see any buyer being pleased with this purchase no matter what price.
-
On 5/4/2023 at 12:22 PM, jaybuck43 said:
But depending on what this goes for, I wouldn't be surprised if you saw a bunch of 4.0 and less second print copies getting their covers ripped off and submitted to CGC.
I thought the same thing. This could be the first of many coverless TMNT #1's coming to market. LOL
-
Check this out - a coverless TMNT #1. Not sure how CGC authenticated this as a 1st printing since the interior pages for both the 1st & 2nd printings of TMNT #1 are essentially identical (given they were both printed from the same set of negatives). Additionally, it could even be a 3rd printing but I'd need to see the interior pages to know for sure. You can also tell a 3rd printing by the size of the book - a bit smaller than 1st & 2nd printings - but no way to know that from the pictures.
Very interested to see what this sells for. With CGC labeling it as a 1st printing it could go closer to a 1st printing price but this could actually be a 2nd printing (or, even worse, a 3rd printing). Yikes.
-
On 4/10/2023 at 11:05 AM, jaybuck43 said:
Rich I would assume that the fourth printing would have had separate negatives and their own printer proof since it was reduced from magazine size to comic size. That came out September 85 (same time as me lol) which in theory this could also be, putting it closer to his time. But again, it’s definitely not the first edition printer proof (which is most likely the ones heritage sold back in 2012 for around $4k with a copy of the book). Man if a third print printers proof is worth $300-350,000, what’s the original art to Raph one I own worth at this point? $10 million? $20?
It's hard to know for sure but I think every printing would typically get its own set of negatives. The 1st & 2nd printings of #1 only used the same negatives because 1) they were printed just a month apart (May & June 1984 respectively) and 2) The Journal Tribune retained the negatives in their flats (saving the need to re-strip them). The Journal Tribune only printed two printings of TMNT - TMNT #1 1st & 2nd printings. For the 3rd printing of #1, E&L used The Lakeville Journal in Lakeville, CT. Then, for the 4th printing, that would likely have been done at Southern Duchess News since the timing is similar to TMNT #4 (June, 1985) and Raphael #1 (April, 1985).
It's hard to tell from the pictures of this printer's proof whether it's oversized or modern comic sized. It looks to be oversized but I don't recall ever seeing any sizing information.
-
On 4/7/2023 at 9:34 AM, jaybuck43 said:
Here's the thing... if he has the comic link copy, the one someone paid $12,000 for in august 2020? It's more than likely the printers proof for the 3rd print. How do I know? Simple, here's the picture from the Comiclink auction. The first and second prints have a small part of the letter a for "and" on the second page. The third print doesn't. Sadly, Heritage only imaged the first page, so I have no way of knowing if that is the same printing. I am thinking it is not though, since it does not have the cover/staples in it that he has/the comic link one had (see below). O and for anyone wondering why these are all coverless? When Mirage was running distribution on there own (#1-#3 including reprints) the covers were printed at a different printer, per Pete's notes the interiors were printed, collated and folded, then delivered to the cover printer (the Journal-Tribune did not have a facility that could print color) who would trim and staple them all together. So any interior printer proof back in the that initial run would be coverless, because they didn't print it.
Totally spot-on @jaybuck43 ! Just based on the lack of gap between Pages 2 & 3, I'd almost guarantee this is a proof of the 3rd printing (which would put it at 1985, not "nineteen eighty-uh six I think-somewhere like that" - LOL).
The real tell would be on Page 29 - but I have yet to see Page 29 from this proof copy.
-
On 1/30/2023 at 10:25 PM, spracknetch23 said:
Thanks! I acquired my first one in 1998, so completing it was a looong journey. I wasn't too picky about condition, but lucked out on many of them in that respect. The '86 Mike was framed on someone's wall for decades, so it's a bit faded, and the Fugitoid has some foxing or something near the bottom. Otherwise all are in pretty nice shape considering they're pushing 40.
I can totally relate to the long journey to get all these. I've collected TMNT for almost 40 years and am still missing a few of these.
-
On 1/30/2023 at 4:12 PM, jaybuck43 said:
A running joke in my family is “what should we get him for a gift? More wall space!”. An entire floor of my house is covered in just mirage turtle art
the later stuff is in binders still. Did you test the off gassing on the pelicans? Is the 1650 waterproof? I’m always concerned about using anything like fireproof and waterproof safes because of the damage it causes staples etc. I use BCW’s graded comic bins. Modified slightly with foam on the sides and bottom for protection. Has the added bonus of being stackable (I don’t travel with my books so no need)
I really only have a select few OA pieces on my wall but I can imagine the difficulty of fitting everything (or trying to). The Pelican 1650 is water and air tight but that's due to the rubber seal around the lid and not any kind of lining or filling in the walls. I can't imagine that the Pelican would affect comics adversely since it's essentially just a more rugged version of a storage container (and much more secure since it's can be padlocked). It's not fireproof though, but (as you said) those aren't good for comics. Any type of fireproof container (like fire safes) gets its fire protection from special linings which have very high moisture content - thus, the staple rust damage that can occur when stored in those.
-
On 1/30/2023 at 12:49 PM, sorrenmj said:
So I finally got my first CGC graded slab back, it looks fab! I've not removed it from the plastic bag yet. I'm just curious though, what do people do with theirs? Do they hang them on the wall somehow? Present them in some way? The slab looks awesomely presentable it would seem a shame to put it away in a box now that I have it back. Just curious with what those with experience do
I store mine in Pelican 1650 cases with custom foam - one fits modern size slabs and the other fits magazine slabs. But I do take pics of them first and then post them on my website. I have way too many books to have them all out and displayed.
-
On 1/30/2023 at 12:45 PM, sorrenmj said:
Did the 1986 ones look the same and just dated 1986?
Yes, the 1986 ones (especially the Turtles) look a bit different (and Fugitoid was added for 1986). The Turtles have the same poses but the 1984 are darker and are more "bubble-like" in appearance. Also the TMNT logo is vastly different between 1984 & 1986. You can see the differences in the pics that @spracknetch23posted. They can be hard to identify in the wild if you don't know what to look for. I don't recall that there are any dates on the iron-ons themselves so that makes it even more difficult.
- sorrenmj and spracknetch23
-
1
-
1
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
On 1/23/2023 at 12:24 PM, spracknetch23 said:Finally completed this set. Incredible amounts of patience required.
Very cool. This is quite an accomplishment - the four Turtles and Fugitoid are very tough to find, especially in great shape like the ones you found.
Not everyone realizes there are two different sets of these (1984 & 1986) so that makes this all the more special. Congrats!
-
On 1/18/2023 at 8:10 PM, SpideyFein said:
We need this!!! I could speak for all when I say well done and I can’t wait to see these/this in person. Amazing!!! I’m with Jay and want to see these in NY. I will travel though. I wish I could’ve seen these months ago.
Thank you much.
I'm really pushing to get these to larger Cons like Boston, NYCC, and maybe even SDCC.
-
On 1/18/2023 at 12:16 PM, BDubs said:
Just purchased a t-shirt! Thanks!
Awesome! You'll love it - really comfy. Appreciate the support.
On 1/18/2023 at 12:11 PM, BDubs said:Amazing!!! This is so cool and the executed vision of what I was wanting to do with my completed Mirage Studio Vol. 1 Set! We definitely have to connect. I need to fly out to a show to see this in person! Well done!
Thanks ! Hopefully I can get some shows to schedule the exhibit this year or next - would be great to meet you.
-
On 1/16/2023 at 7:12 PM, jaybuck43 said:
Saw this in New Hampshire. It is stunning in person and Rich truly entertains while explaining the provenance and importance of these.
On a side note, Rich, have you reached out to anyone about organizing something for next year here in NY (either standalone or at NYCC). I think we need to united the major pieces at some kind of exhibition to celebrate the 40th anniversary.
I'm currently working to get these out on tour for 2023/2024. Still nothing solid - more to come.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
-
On 12/3/2022 at 11:27 AM, Gazoony said:
Hi guys. A little over 2 years ago, I decided to try and collect the TMNT Vol. 1 run in CGC 9.8, excluding #1 of course. All first print.
#1 - 7.0
#2 - #62 - 9.8
I just received the last book I needed to finish the run, the ever elusive #13. After several years of looking all over the place to piece my collection together, it feels weird to be "done".
I just wanted to thank the board members here that helped me here on these boards with advice, some books and just generally have a good time in my hunt.
Now to figure out what's next to collect. 😀
Quite the accomplishment! Great job. #13 is my all-time favorite cover.
- ADAMANTIUM and Gazoony
-
1
-
1
-
On 12/1/2022 at 9:11 AM, jaybuck43 said:
Like the time I sent in a dual signed ASM 50 (Sr and Lee) and got back ASM 278 blue label?
Yikes! That's shameful.
-
On 11/30/2022 at 8:17 PM, Turtle said:
I sent this and one other book back to be reslabbed due to case damage. Unfortunately, CGC sent me back the wrong books and so far has been unable to locate my books.
Are you serious? They sent you back the wrong books? Just hard to believe how bad CGC has gotten. I had to send back all of my books from the Last Ronin signing due to case issues but at least I got the same ones back. LOL
But, can you imagine if you sent in a TMNT #1 and you got back a different book?
-
Great seeing you again! So glad you enjoyed the exhibit - appreciate the compliments. It was a ton of work to get them to the point they could be easily displayed but now they are ready to travel. Hope to do more shows here in the coming year.
- ADAMANTIUM, MattLaw90, sorrenmj and 1 other
-
4
-
On 8/14/2022 at 9:10 PM, Turtle said:
Here's a cool one that I just came back from the Last Ronin signing (FINALLY after CGC's policy wouldn't allow for the boxes to be picked up at the FedEx facility...dumb policy
). Definitely have to tag @rich_TMNT since this is one of his variants. It's Last Ronin 4 and Rich commissioned the great Jim Lawson for a cover featuring the best turtle and a little cameo by the Fugitoid. It's signed by the entire creative team and comes with the Last Ronin label.
It arrived with a crack in it, so it'll need to get reslabbed. If I'm lucky, I'll get it back before the Granite State show next month and I can have Rich and Jim sign the case.
This is awesome! Definitely get it sent back to CGC ASAP for re-holder so you can have it back for Granite Con. I sent all of mine back that came from the signing due to quality issues with the cases. It only took about 2.5 weeks to get them back.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Hey everyone. The public debut of The TMNT #1 Production Negatives will be at Granite State Comicon next month in Manchester, NH. These are incredible pieces of TMNT history so get out to see them if you're able to attend - and also say "hi" - would be great to put faces with names.
- MetalPSI , SpideyFein, spracknetch23 and 5 others
-
7
-
1
-
On 6/18/2022 at 5:53 PM, R Colvin said:
Have you run into the TMNT Authorized Training Manual Michaelangelo #2 with the ink error? I picked this up a while back. I will put the error copy and original side-by-side. I was excited to add this to my collection.
There's also another version of this error where the magenta color is missing. I've been trying to find a copy for years - still looking. Both error copies are really tough to find.
the later stuff is in binders still. Did you test the off gassing on the pelicans? Is the 1650 waterproof? I’m always concerned about using anything like fireproof and waterproof safes because of the damage it causes staples etc. I use BCW’s graded comic bins. Modified slightly with foam on the sides and bottom for protection. Has the added bonus of being stackable (I don’t travel with my books so no need)
I'm really pushing to get these to larger Cons like Boston, NYCC, and maybe even SDCC.
). Definitely have to tag 
What did I just buy TMNT #1??
in Comics General
Posted
The cover (with exception of the missing price) actually looks pretty good for a non-authentic copy - colors are decent, cross-hatching seems there, and the blood on the sword seems accurate. But the interior page art scaling doesn't at all match with a 1st, 2nd, or 3rd printing so the interiors are completely something else.