What Type of Grade/Holder should Trimmed Books Receive?

[thirdgreenham]

The worst trim I ever had was outstanding

 

 

[kc120us]

Ya, know I was a big proponent of the varying label color scheme when I first found out about CGC but after a few years and listening to all the bickering and differing opinions, I think it might be better if we did a way with the colors. Instead of having four or five different colors, pick one and stick with it. If any work has been detected, indicate such on the label CLEARLY. Who cares if trimming is restoration or destruction? No ones likes it. Simply mark the label "TRIMMED". Let the buyer judge whether or not it has been restored or destroyed.

 

I agree. The unintended consequence of the purple label is that it connotates a value judgement to many. CGC's goal should be to deliver an objective report of grade and restoration techniques, plain and simple.

 

"Destruction" is a loaded term that CGC should avoid. The trimming was done to make the book look better, so on a high level it is a form of restoration. Let the buyers decide where they want to place trimming on the scale of restorative techniques.

 

(thumbs u

[G.A.tor]

by most any definition, restoration should be attempting to return a comic to its orginal state,appearance right?

 

well, removal of part of the cover , prevents that (unless you add paper back)... so, I contend that trimming can NEVER be considered restoration, either by laymans definition or by the comic community definition (Thumbs u

[ant]

by most any definition, restoration should be attempting to return a comic to its orginal state,appearance right?

 

well, removal of part of the cover , prevents that (unless you add paper back)... so, I contend that trimming can NEVER be considered restoration, either by laymans definition or by the comic community definition (Thumbs u

 

i agree fully! they cant "restore" a painting by cutting half of it away!

[Mr. Zipper]

by most any definition, restoration should be attepmting to return a comic to its orginal state, right?

 

Adding glue, color touch, pieces and spine reinforcement isn't returning the book to its original state. The intent is to make it appear to be closer to its original state, that is, making it look better. The same thing can be said for trimming.

 

We can debate the semantics till the cows come home, and that's fine.... just saying the CGC should just report the objective facts, not get involved in establishing a heirarchy of "acceptable restoration" versus "bad destruction."

[Mr. Zipper]

by most any definition, restoration should be attempting to return a comic to its orginal state,appearance right?

 

well, removal of part of the cover , prevents that (unless you add paper back)... so, I contend that trimming can NEVER be considered restoration, either by laymans definition or by the comic community definition (Thumbs u

 

i agree fully! they cant "restore" a painting by cutting half of it away!

 

Why is there so much hyperbole around this issue?

 

If you want to use extremes, you can't restore a painting by dipping it in a vat of paint and cleaning it with burning napalm.

 

[G.A.tor]

by most any definition, restoration should be attempting to return a comic to its orginal state,appearance right?

 

well, removal of part of the cover , prevents that (unless you add paper back)... so, I contend that trimming can NEVER be considered restoration, either by laymans definition or by the comic community definition (Thumbs u

 

i agree fully! they cant "restore" a painting by cutting half of it away!

 

Why is there so much hyperbole around this issue?

 

If you want to use extremes, you can't restore a painting by dipping it in a vat of paint and cleaning it with burning napalm.

 

[G.A.tor]

by most any definition, restoration should be attepmting to return a comic to its orginal state, right?

 

Adding glue, color touch, pieces and spine reinforcement isn't returning the book to its original state. The intent is to make it appear to be closer to its original state, that is, making it look better. The same thing can be said for trimming.

 

We can debate the semantics till the cows come home, and that's fine.... just saying the CGC should just report the objective facts, not get involved in establishing a heirarchy of "acceptable restoration" versus "bad destruction."

you are correct...cgc's job is to report what they find

 

on the debate part, there is no valid debate ... I guess I see the key word here is "adding" (any of the above you list....even adding heat and moisture in pressing is "adding")...

 

but, in no definition of restoration have I ever encountered included removal of part of the item to be restored (note, I didn't say removal of dirt, etc) that is done in trimming... sure, the idea might be to make it look "crisp or sharp" again, but you are not restoring it back to any former condition or appearance ... you are removing which is in the definition of destruction

[Mr. Zipper]

you are removing which is in the definition of destruction

 

Well, maybe there was a little too much left there in the first place by those sloppy printers, and it deserved to be removed.

 

One could say it was "rightsized."

 

 

 

[G.A.tor]

you are removing which is in the definition of destruction

 

Well, maybe there was a little too much left there in the first place by those sloppy printers, and it deserved to be removed.

 

One could say it was "rightsized."

 

 

ok, you have a point... let the debate continue

[Ze-man]

you are removing which is in the definition of destruction

 

Well, maybe there was a little too much left there in the first place by those sloppy printers, and it deserved to be removed.

 

One could say it was "rightsized."

 

 

 

I wonder how many people reading this wonder if you are serious, or kidding.

 

[Stronguy]

I have argued for a long time that a trimmed book should in no way be in a purple label, as the book isn't restored. Trimming a book is the equivalent of cutting a coupon out.

 

:thumbsup:

[Mr. Zipper]

you are removing which is in the definition of destruction

 

Well, maybe there was a little too much left there in the first place by those sloppy printers, and it deserved to be removed.

 

One could say it was "rightsized."

 

 

 

I wonder how many people reading this wonder if you are serious, or kidding.

 

 

 

The thought crossed my mind as well.

 

Newsflash: Guy with a NOD logo in sig line thinks trimming is good! Therefore, NOD supports trimming!

 

 

Just trying to raise some questions regarding "conventional wisdom." It does seem if there is almost a Pavlovian, frothing at the mouth hate-fest every time the word trimming comes up. Cripes... people are tossing books in the trash for what may be a tiny sliver shaved from a corner. Seems a little extreme to me. The same way some people portray every pressed book as a pancake crushed with 5,000 psi and roasted.

 

[Ze-man]

by most any definition, restoration should be attepmting to return a comic to its orginal state, right?

 

Adding glue, color touch, pieces and spine reinforcement isn't returning the book to its original state. The intent is to make it appear to be closer to its original state, that is, making it look better. The same thing can be said for trimming.

While I agree both resto and trimming(for the most part) have the same goal, I would debate that resto tries to return a book through adding material versus cutting material away. Hence commonly used verbage to describe each process as restorative vs destructive. Then again when removing resto sometimes you may have to cut away part of the book and in doing so destroy part of the book, but it's not viewed in the same negative light as trimming even though both books had parts removed, or "destroyed" I am really starting to not like using that word to describe trimming but don't know what else to call it.

 

We can debate the semantics till the cows come home, and that's fine.... just saying the CGC should just report the objective facts, not get involved in establishing a heirarchy of "acceptable restoration" versus "bad destruction."

That is something I have always wanted too, more info. If they see something, put it on the label and let folks figure out what to do with it. But I guess the question I would ask is who today would disagree with CGC that trimming in itself is not considered acceptable restoration?

 

And can I just say how impossible it is to try and type with an 8 month old on ones lap, so I will try and type it all out later.

 

later Steve

 

[Moondog]

you are removing which is in the definition of destruction

 

Well, maybe there was a little too much left there in the first place by those sloppy printers, and it deserved to be removed.

 

One could say it was "rightsized."

 

 

 

I wonder how many people reading this wonder if you are serious, or kidding.

 

 

The dreaded "overhang" comes to mind here. If it were trimmed away it could get slabbed.

[namisgr]

I believe the idea that trimming is "destruction" is a bit off-base. Of course, it isn't restoration, but I wouldn't call it destruction either, since the book is still (nearly) all there. "Destructive" is probably a better way to think of it. Let's remember that all books are trimmed during production. Indeed, the amount of production trimming varies alot from copy to copy of a given ish, and copies come through the process in a variety of shapes and sizes.

 

I certainly don't condone trimming, and with one exception try my best not to buy any books that may have been trimmed. The exception is the book with the Marvel file copy cover. Since these were oversized from having never been machine trimmed, they had to be hand-trimmed and married to an interior. They most often receive a green label from CGC. Having never been put out on the newstand or bundled with other comics, they are the cleanest, flattest, and best-preserved covers I've ever seen. Definitely not deserving of being dismissed as unworthy to collect.

[szelim]

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I thought that if trimming was the only defect (i.e., otherwise no restoration), the book would get a purple label saying "TRIMMED" but would not get slight/moderate/extensive or pro/amateur notations.

 

[Mac Man]

In my opinion trimmed books are destroyed books,throw it in the trash,set it on fire and use it to light your crack pipe (thumbs u

 

I'll send you my address and I'll take all of your trimmed books off your hands!-)

 

And that goes for the rest of you too! Hate the trimmer, not the comic