Restoration Professionals

[Kabuki]

New to this forum. I bought a Hulk 181 from comic con yesterday but it has water stains on the pack cover. Is there a well known professional company that can remove these stains? Its is on the pack cover, brown like.

 

 

Thanks and sorry if this answer was posted earlier.

 

 

[Comicdey]

http://www.classicsincorporated.com/

[Harvey Dude]

I believe Susan Cicconi is the best restorer in the business.

 

http://www.therestorationlab.com/

 

Check out her site regarding her impressive credentials. (thumbs u

[Mac Man]

On a related note, does having water stains removed count as resto or conservation? Sorry for the dumb question guys, but was wondering. Thanks!

[joeypost]

On a related note, does having water stains removed count as resto or conservation? Sorry for the dumb question guys, but was wondering. Thanks!

 

Water stains = damage. Removing damage = restoration. To remove the stains something has to physically be done to the book.

[Mac Man]

(thumbs u Thought so, but wasn't sure. And you know the problem with assuming something

[Ze-man]

Actually removing stains would fall more under conso. Disassembly and wet washing a cover is only taking out stains, not adding anything to the book like piece fill, CT or tape in tear seals.(i e restoration applications)

 

One could argue since something was done to the book it technically falls under restoration because removing the stain will improve the appearance grade of the book, and had to physically be removed. I guess it all depends on ones perspective. But since nothing was physically added to the book to improve the books appearance it falls under the umbrella of conso mainly because it is taking away possible damaging elements from a book, not adding things to it to improve it's appearance

 

 

Ze-

[Mac Man]

Okay, hypothetical scenerio: I take a copy of my water-stained New Mutants #100 and send it to Matt Nelson to remove said stains before sending it in to CGC. What label will I get back?

[Ze-man]

Purple of course, CGC does not differentiate between conso and resto that I am aware of. Just labels the work done as slight, moderate, or extensive.

 

Since washing is detectable CGC will make note of it on a Slight Professional Purple Label.

 

 

 

Ze-

[joeypost]

Actually removing stains would fall more under conso. Disassembly and wet washing a cover is only taking out stains, not adding anything to the book like piece fill, CT or tape in tear seals.(i e restoration applications)

 

One could argue since something was done to the book it technically falls under restoration because removing the stain will improve the appearance grade of the book, and had to physically be removed. I guess it all depends on ones perspective. But since nothing was physically added to the book to improve the books appearance it falls under the umbrella of conso mainly because it is taking away possible damaging elements from a book, not adding things to it to improve it's appearance

 

 

Ze-

 

On this one I will agree to disagree.

[Ze-man]

How so?, just curious.

 

As I said earlier it all depends on a persons perspective. Doing work to a book to help preserve its longevity is more akin to conserving the book, even if it falls under the definition of restoration. You can take a book and wash it just to make it look better add piece fill and CT to make it more attractive as part of the resto process. But if your only intent is to wash out a potentially harmful stain(not a water stain mind you) from further harming the book. Well to me that is conserving the book and is much more desirable when looking to buy the book, even though it might be sitting in a purple label.

 

Of course work like this falls under the wording of restoration, but to me there really is a difference.

 

Ze-

[joeypost]

If you are talking about removing something that is on the pages as opposed to something that has penetrated the pages I would agree. A water stain as we all know is hammered hard by CGC as opposed to writing or a date stamp on the book. Removing a stain like this is in my opinion bringing the book back, not conserving it. Conservation to me means maintaining the status quo. While restoration would men taking back in time (conditionally ) from the status quo of the book.

 

Wiping off some dirt or foreign material is nowhere near as bad as an aqueous or chemical bath to remove stains and discolorations that have penetrated the fibers.

[Mac Man]

Purple label, huh? While I might not slab my own books, I highly value the standard CGC sets in their grading. Note taken, and thanks!

[codfish]

Ah the conservation is not restoration debate ... imo it is just semantics whether it is conservation or "restoration" something is done to the book taking it from its true condition to a better condition. I think people are fooling themselves if they don't think conservation isn't adding or taking away from a artifact (even if it may only be a a microscopic or chemical level).

 

 

[Ze-man]

Of course it is all semantics, and who here said nothing was being removed, or added? Let alone fooling ourselves into thinking it's doesn't. Anytime you wet wash a book you are going to remove original material on some level but you are also removing tape, glue residue, or stains that are harmful to the books longevity.

 

Regarding adding to the book, again it depends on the circumstances but whatever it is you are adding to the book(in a wet or solvent wash) outweighs the harmful elements being removed well that's acceptable, to me anyways.

 

The term Conso obviously sprung from Resto techniques so they go hand in hand. But if ones intent is to try and only remove harmful elements and do little else to the book well that's where I think the work done leans to conserving a book more then restoring it. But at the same time extensively restoring a tattered book is also conserving it for future generations, so what was it you said about semantics again?

 

 

[codfish]

So then restoration and conservation are hand in hand yet conservation is not restoration and not worthy of a PLOD? As you say both are essentially removing harmful elements from a book and conserving it for future enjoyment(?) yet "conservation" techniques are not seen as restoration?

 

I should clear up something here I am not opposed to restoration or conservation. I never have been. What I really oppose is the shift away from declaring some restoration/"conservation" as restoration/conservation and assuming that other collectors dealers agree with this new habit just because "all the major dealer/collectors/"grading experts"" are in agreement. Of course they are because there is a ton of money or "bragging rights" in it. Any one opposed or going by some of the older "standards" is the "vocal minority".

 

For example, the pressing debate exists because there are many folks that disagree that it is restoration. Again I am not opposed to pressing but I do know that many people out there would prefer NOT to own a pressed book if they could avoid it because they consider it restored. To them whether or not pressing is detectable is moot they just want a book in as "original" condition as possible.

 

The problem I see with the "new rules" of restoration is that there are plenty of books that are needlessly undergoing "conservation" they are already high grade books and many of the defects they have are not seriously compromising their structure. So just why are conservation techniques applied to them? Many folks would say it is all greed. Along the way though these changes affect all of us because clearly many folks will say well if the "experts" say it is not restoration then I will try and do this stuff myself and then I can sell or claim my book to be (worth) more. Eventually you get these practices running rampant like restoration several years ago and more amateurishly restored books on the market or even lose a bunch of books due to people not knowing how to do stuff properly.

 

Like I say it is all semantics and I don't know how much consultation with the general collecting public was made before the changes were made. Yet all these changes eventually will effect every collector at every corner of the world.

 

 

[Ze-man]

So then restoration and conservation are hand in hand yet conservation is not restoration and not worthy of a PLOD? As you say both are essentially removing harmful elements from a book and conserving it for future enjoyment(?) yet "conservation" techniques are not seen as restoration?

Of course they are, but when I think of the term conso I consider it a different beast then I do resto, monetarily and aesthetically. Both of course receive a plod and when reading that label to see what was done to the book it plays a part in determining why a book was worked on. If it was mostly structural while visible flaws are left then I consider the book more conserved, if it had pieces added and CT that leans more towards resto. The term restoration carries a stigma, as does conservation. But people can call it whatever they want because in the end the book was worked on for specific reasons but that does not mean all restored books fit into the same box. Hence the need I suppose to try and separate what was done by creating new definitions, I never said they were perfect or 100% correct but rather how I personally interpret them.

 

I should clear up something here I am not opposed to restoration or conservation. I never have been. What I really oppose is the shift away from declaring some restoration/"conservation" as restoration/conservation and assuming that other collectors dealers agree with this new habit just because "all the major dealer/collectors/"grading experts"" are in agreement. Of course they are because there is a ton of money or "bragging rights" in it. Any one opposed or going by some of the older "standards" is the "vocal minority".

 

For example, the pressing debate exists because there are many folks that disagree that it is restoration. Again I am not opposed to pressing but I do know that many people out there would prefer NOT to own a pressed book if they could avoid it because they consider it restored. To them whether or not pressing is detectable is moot they just want a book in as "original" condition as possible.

 

The problem I see with the "new rules" of restoration is that there are plenty of books that are needlessly undergoing "conservation" they are already high grade books and many of the defects they have are not seriously compromising their structure. So just why are conservation techniques applied to them? Many folks would say it is all greed. Along the way though these changes affect all of us because clearly many folks will say well if the "experts" say it is not restoration then I will try and do this stuff myself and then I can sell or claim my book to be (worth) more. Eventually you get these practices running rampant like restoration several years ago and more amateurishly restored books on the market or even lose a bunch of books due to people not knowing how to do stuff properly.

 

Like I say it is all semantics and I don't know how much consultation with the general collecting public was made before the changes were made. Yet all these changes eventually will effect every collector at every corner of the world.

 

 

While I would love to try and break down the can of worms the rest of your posts opens I dont know what good it would do, because I am not sure if you were asking specific questions or just making a statement.

 

Might be easier to discuss over a beer.

 

[PovertyRow]

Might be easier to discuss over a beer.

 

I assure you - don't discuss ANYTHING with this man over a beer! Three hours later you may touch on the topic for a moment!

[codfish]

Well I assure you he would probably pass out before I finished my first beer. I am not much of a drinker.

 

Ze-Man, the rest was just a statement and you if you wanted to address it you also had the choice no skin off my back either way. We clearly just differ in opinions and that is fine with me.

 

I really question why some books over an 8.0 have been worked on regardless of the end result. When it comes to early SA and GA books I certainly have no problem being happy with almost any book over a VG since they are truly scarce. I don't think I have ever considered at any time gettin a mid to high grade book restored.

 

The stigma will remain as long as restoration/conservation as long as people perceive, either rightly or wrongly, that people are attempting to profit off of it. That is why I wish to see ANY work disclosed and let the customer decide. IMO those that have issues with whatever work won't buy it or will offer less. Those that either have no issues with restoration or do not consider certain techniques restoration will buy it. If no one buys it then the seller is asking too much.

 

Many people are adamant about having restoration/conservation free books or do not want to pay for a grade they feel is not representative and it is for those people that disclosure is important as they are the one that will likely make the biggest "scene". That and it just sucks to find out a book you were very happy to get may not have really been in that condition ... leaves with the feeling that you were duped ... even if one may not be opposed to resto.

 

I think having restoration experts (that have been formally educated at an accredited facility) are important to have in this hobby and for their work to be stigma free we all have to find common ground on this matter somehow. The way it is now is clearly very divisive. We will need these people down the road to actually help our books to survive the test of time ... it is a media tha tis really not designed to last.

[codfish]

Might be easier to discuss over a beer.

 

I assure you - don't discuss ANYTHING with this man over a beer! Three hours later you may touch on the topic for a moment!

 

Bah. Likely would drop it and talk about comics. Talking resto/ conservation is just too frustrating.

 

heck I would rather talk about what we like about comic than this ... or go to the Simpsons movie.