Bronty Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 I don't really think of it that way. Realistically they got their printer to print a few advance copies to sell at the ny con. There was never any intention for them to be different or for them to be a separate print in any way. It's a unique case that's as much a printer error as an early print Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sofistocat Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 #2: First print and second print are nearly identical on the outside. Open the cover and the second print should be clearly indicated as such on the inside cover. The 3rd print is a standard comic size as opposed to the 1st and 2nd prints, which are magazine-sized. #3: First print is magazine sized, 2nd print is standard sized with a different cover altogether. #4: First print is magazine sized, 2nd print is standard sized with a different cover altogether. Show off... I thought the single blue cover variant #3 was made that way because it was a rush job to get the books from the printer to the NY show. Thought I read somewhere there wasn't enough time to run the covers through the second color roller(light blue). I'm even gonna go out on a limb and say the it was Ralph DiBernardo, owner of Jetpack Comics, that delivered them to KE and PL at the show. Think it's mentioned in the story Ralph wrote in the PBBZ variant of #1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChadH Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 Anybody grab any of the two SDCC Lego TMNT promos? Gonna try to get a couple graded. The covers are awesome looking! Also, has anybody seen the cover B to the SDCC variants for TMNT? BeachBum and Toasty were selling cover A but cover B seem's to be a unicorn at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
valiantman Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 There's also a "first" first print of #3 that has Laird's Photo lettering in white, not light blue. While this is technically true, most people consider it a variant instead of considering it a "first first" or "pre first" or whatever print. It's true because the variant came off the line before the rest of the 1st print run and every issue afterwards was corrected. Here's what the variant looks like. You'll see that there are 4 colors on the regular cover: black, white, dark blue, and light blue. The variant cover is missing the light blue color on the cover. Looking at your copy, it seems that something else was different about the coloring. The light blue is certainly missing, but the word "Photo" in Laird's Photo is dark blue instead of white. The correct #3 has "Photo" in light blue. If only light blue was missing, "Photo" should also be white. If light blue was replaced with dark blue, then both "Laird's" and "Photo" would be dark blue. I'm not sure what combination causes "Laird's" to be white and "Photo" to be dark blue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rich_TMNT Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 There's also a "first" first print of #3 that has Laird's Photo lettering in white, not light blue. While this is technically true, most people consider it a variant instead of considering it a "first first" or "pre first" or whatever print. It's true because the variant came off the line before the rest of the 1st print run and every issue afterwards was corrected. Here's what the variant looks like. You'll see that there are 4 colors on the regular cover: black, white, dark blue, and light blue. The variant cover is missing the light blue color on the cover. Looking at your copy, it seems that something else was different about the coloring. The light blue is certainly missing, but the word "Photo" in Laird's Photo is dark blue instead of white. The correct #3 has "Photo" in light blue. If only light blue was missing, "Photo" should also be white. If light blue was replaced with dark blue, then both "Laird's" and "Photo" would be dark blue. I'm not sure what combination causes "Laird's" to be white and "Photo" to be dark blue. Think of it this way. There were 3 "colors" intended on the #3 cover...White, Dark Blue, Light Blue. The NYC variant is missing the Light Blue. It's as easy as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
valiantman Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 There's also a "first" first print of #3 that has Laird's Photo lettering in white, not light blue. While this is technically true, most people consider it a variant instead of considering it a "first first" or "pre first" or whatever print. It's true because the variant came off the line before the rest of the 1st print run and every issue afterwards was corrected. Here's what the variant looks like. You'll see that there are 4 colors on the regular cover: black, white, dark blue, and light blue. The variant cover is missing the light blue color on the cover. Looking at your copy, it seems that something else was different about the coloring. The light blue is certainly missing, but the word "Photo" in Laird's Photo is dark blue instead of white. The correct #3 has "Photo" in light blue. If only light blue was missing, "Photo" should also be white. If light blue was replaced with dark blue, then both "Laird's" and "Photo" would be dark blue. I'm not sure what combination causes "Laird's" to be white and "Photo" to be dark blue. Think of it this way. There were 3 "colors" intended on the #3 cover...White, Dark Blue, Light Blue. The NYC variant is missing the Light Blue. It's as easy as that. It's not that easy. "Photo" is in dark blue on the NYC. If the light blue missing was the only difference, "Photo" would be white. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rich_TMNT Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 There's also a "first" first print of #3 that has Laird's Photo lettering in white, not light blue. While this is technically true, most people consider it a variant instead of considering it a "first first" or "pre first" or whatever print. It's true because the variant came off the line before the rest of the 1st print run and every issue afterwards was corrected. Here's what the variant looks like. You'll see that there are 4 colors on the regular cover: black, white, dark blue, and light blue. The variant cover is missing the light blue color on the cover. Looking at your copy, it seems that something else was different about the coloring. The light blue is certainly missing, but the word "Photo" in Laird's Photo is dark blue instead of white. The correct #3 has "Photo" in light blue. If only light blue was missing, "Photo" should also be white. If light blue was replaced with dark blue, then both "Laird's" and "Photo" would be dark blue. I'm not sure what combination causes "Laird's" to be white and "Photo" to be dark blue. Think of it this way. There were 3 "colors" intended on the #3 cover...White, Dark Blue, Light Blue. The NYC variant is missing the Light Blue. It's as easy as that. It's not that easy. "Photo" is in dark blue on the NYC. If the light blue missing was the only difference, "Photo" would be white. Hmmm. It is that easy for most of us. So, what is it you're trying to figure out with all this? Which came first? NYC variant came first. There is some dark blue and light blue on the "Laird's Photo." Granted, it's not the same exact placement as in the NYC copy and maybe not as dark. Why? It's a different print run entirely. When you take away the light blue, you're left with dark blue. A "mostly white 'Laird's Photo'" is how to identify this edition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaybuck43 Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 Valiantman: It is pretty much as easy as that. Laird's was meant to be light blue. It appears white. Photo was meant to be light blue AND dark blue. That's why it looks the way it does. Look at the bus as well. Note this: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChadH Posted August 6, 2014 Share Posted August 6, 2014 Here is better scan of that sketch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icculus308win Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 That is one sweet arse sketch!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parabellum Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 That is one sweet arse sketch!! +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Anybody grab any of the two SDCC Lego TMNT promos? Gonna try to get a couple graded. The covers are awesome looking! Also, has anybody seen the cover B to the SDCC variants for TMNT? BeachBum and Toasty were selling cover A but cover B seem's to be a unicorn at the moment. I keep getting sniped on the Lego Variants. I've got a WTB thread up for them. If anyone here has extras, I'm interested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChadH Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Anybody grab any of the two SDCC Lego TMNT promos? Gonna try to get a couple graded. The covers are awesome looking! Also, has anybody seen the cover B to the SDCC variants for TMNT? BeachBum and Toasty were selling cover A but cover B seem's to be a unicorn at the moment. I keep getting sniped on the Lego Variants. I've got a WTB thread up for them. If anyone here has extras, I'm interested. I got one that came in that should be a 9.8 and the other I don't know about. I have some more coming in. If I have extra's Adam I'll let you know for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChadH Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Also, have any of you checked out the Cover B for the SDCC TMNT reprint books? It's the gray/white cover? It looks like all of them are signed...weird.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan. Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 They were pre-signed before the show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChadH Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 They were pre-signed before the show. So no matter what they are gonna be green labeled by CGC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan. Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 They were pre-signed before the show. So no matter what they are gonna be green labeled by CGC? Well you could have them signed again with a witness and take the grade hit for the original signature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChadH Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 Just got in this print signed and numbered by Kevin. Can't wait to get it framed with a green mat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icculus308win Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Dope!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whetteon Posted August 8, 2014 Share Posted August 8, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
