reglossing?

[buttock]

I have a book that may potentially be reglossed. As this is a fairly uncommon thing, I'm not confident that I can say one way or another. Does anyone have any experience with this? Any tips? Any experience with removal?

 

One thing I would expect with reglossing is to have a uniform gloss across the entire cover (i.e. you wouldn't see varying degrees of gloss depending on the color of ink), but I can also imagine a scenario in which this is not the case.

 

I've seen the "gloss in a can" which is more like a shellac, and this doesn't seem to be that style.

 

I've heard that cooking sprays like "Pam" have been used, and if I had to guess this would be the style that was done.

[Ze-man]

Removal of after production gloss? Nothing short of a wet or solvent bath would work, well anyways.

 

Many times a CT'ed area has different gloss, same as different printing methods, sometimes different colored inks can be totally void of gloss.(paging DiceX)

 

Yeah, gloss in a can makes it all shiny and stiff.

 

Cooking spray?.. thats gotta be bad. Oils on a comic?

 

Without seeing what you are looking at it's impossible to say, take a photo please.

 

[buttock]

Thanks Ken, I tried getting a photo that would capture what I'm talking about, but no can do. I think reglossing is a cinch to identify when it's done with the typical "spray-in-a-can" stuff, but this one is a different animal. I would think if this had been done with cooking spray you'd see some grease bleeding through, but that's not the case. The cover just seems to have a glossiness that isn't quite natural. Front & back cover. It may simply be due to the way it was stored, but no way to be certain, I suppose.

[divad]

I'm sure using PAM would leave a residue to the touch, and/or eventually turn rancid and smell accordingly.

 

I have encountered several books that looked "overglossed" and had a kerosene (note: not mothballs - huge difference) smell to them.

 

Absent touch and feel clues, and obvious odors, and stiffness as Kenny mentions, I would think they may just be VGB's . . . (very glossy books)

[FFB]

I have a book that may potentially be reglossed. As this is a fairly uncommon thing, I'm not confident that I can say one way or another. Does anyone have any experience with this? Any tips? Any experience with removal?

 

One thing I would expect with reglossing is to have a uniform gloss across the entire cover (i.e. you wouldn't see varying degrees of gloss depending on the color of ink), but I can also imagine a scenario in which this is not the case.

 

I've seen the "gloss in a can" which is more like a shellac, and this doesn't seem to be that style.

 

I've heard that cooking sprays like "Pam" have been used, and if I had to guess this would be the style that was done.

 

How glossy are the interiors of the front and back cover? How do the whites of the interior cover compare with the whites of the exterior cover in terms of glossiness? Same? Markedly different?

 

How about the staples at the centerfold. Does the book look like it has been disassembled?

[buttock]

CF hasn't been monkeyed with. The bottom staple may have a tiny touch of glue. There's a clean 1.5 inch spine split which is the thing I would have fixed if I was going to do anything, but I suppose the split could have come after the re-glossing.

 

The interiors aren't as glossy, but the ratio of glossiness of outer to inner cover isn't out of whack with what you'd see on other books - although the interior is a little more natural.

 

It's very squirrely, I wish I could convey the look/feel appropriately, but I can't.

 

One thing that's a little worrisome is that there's sort of a "spotty" appearance to the FC. Only when you hold it to transverse light.

 

I'm more inclined to call this a natural phenomenon, but I'd rather be more certain. Maybe I'll make another run at taking some photos.

[DiceX]

Gloss can often be based on the paper type. There can be gloss added during production that is sprayed on, and gives it a lot more gloss than you can achieve with the paper alone.

 

I have seen consecutive issues of the same title, in original owner collections, that had a HUGE difference in gloss. Likewise, I have seen same issues from different collections, with the same HUGE difference. I don't think there was anything sprayed to achieve gloss until probably the '90s. The differences I'm siting is coming from different paper, and can happen on single issues.

 

It's not uncommon to have an oddball issue that has a huge difference in gloss from others. It was just different paper. If I were to guess, this is what you're dealing with. I'd guess it's probably a slim chance that someone actually sprayed something on it to give it gloss.

 

Z-Man and FFB can give you more ideas on how to spot after market gloss.

 

 

[buttock]

Gloss can often be based on the paper type. There can be gloss added during production that is sprayed on, and gives it a lot more gloss than you can achieve with the paper alone.

 

I have seen consecutive issues of the same title, in original owner collections, that had a HUGE difference in gloss. Likewise, I have seen same issues from different collections, with the same HUGE difference. I don't think there was anything sprayed to achieve gloss until probably the '90s. The differences I'm siting is coming from different paper, and can happen on single issues.

 

It's not uncommon to have an oddball issue that has a huge difference in gloss from others. It was just different paper. If I were to guess, this is what you're dealing with. I'd guess it's probably a slim chance that someone actually sprayed something on it to give it gloss.

 

Z-Man and FFB can give you more ideas on how to spot after market gloss.

 

 

(thumbs u

 

Thanks!

[mackenzie999]

How glossy are the interiors of the front and back cover? How do the whites of the interior cover compare with the whites of the exterior cover in terms of glossiness?

 

I'm certainly no expert on the subject of comic gloss, but as a designer who has worked with printers and paper vendors I can tell you it is very common for glossy paper stock to be finished differently on either side, so mis-matched interior/exterior gloss shouldn't be a definite indicator of resto shennanigans. Additionally, if the gloss has been achieved as a layer of varnish during the printing process it is also very likely to be applied to one side only.

[FFB]

How glossy are the interiors of the front and back cover? How do the whites of the interior cover compare with the whites of the exterior cover in terms of glossiness?

 

I'm certainly no expert on the subject of comic gloss, but as a designer who has worked with printers and paper vendors I can tell you it is very common for glossy paper stock to be finished differently on either side, so mis-matched interior/exterior gloss shouldn't be a definite indicator of resto shennanigans. Additionally, if the gloss has been achieved as a layer of varnish during the printing process it is also very likely to be applied to one side only.

 

 

I know that, but based on who started this thread, I am assuming we're talking about golden age comic book cover stock. With very few exceptions among GA books, the gloss on each side of the folio (inside and out) should match in the uninked areas.

[buttock]

Yup, 1940.

[Hero Restoration]

CF hasn't been monkeyed with. The bottom staple may have a tiny touch of glue. There's a clean 1.5 inch spine split which is the thing I would have fixed if I was going to do anything, but I suppose the split could have come after the re-glossing.

 

The interiors aren't as glossy, but the ratio of glossiness of outer to inner cover isn't out of whack with what you'd see on other books - although the interior is a little more natural.

 

It's very squirrely, I wish I could convey the look/feel appropriately, but I can't.

 

One thing that's a little worrisome is that there's sort of a "spotty" appearance to the FC. Only when you hold it to transverse light.

 

I'm more inclined to call this a natural phenomenon, but I'd rather be more certain. Maybe I'll make another run at taking some photos.

 

I have a comic with that spotting your talking about and suspected a solvent wash and I am sure its been pressed.

[PovertyRow]

Thanks Ken, I tried getting a photo that would capture what I'm talking about, but no can do. I think reglossing is a cinch to identify when it's done with the typical "spray-in-a-can" stuff, but this one is a different animal. I would think if this had been done with cooking spray you'd see some grease bleeding through, but that's not the case. The cover just seems to have a glossiness that isn't quite natural. Front & back cover. It may simply be due to the way it was stored, but no way to be certain, I suppose.

 

Buttock - can you say what the book is? 1940 covers a big range and publishers did use different stocks. From 1940 (or 50 or 60 or 70 or 80 - who knows about 90's or the 2000's?) I don't think any book had "gloss" added. Any gloss would just be the result of a "hard" paper (more "clay" in the formula) and having been calendered (passing it though rollers to compress and make a hard, shiny surface surface) to achieve the gloss.

 

So can you tell us the book and any chance of taking a shot with a camera in raking (angled) light?

[buttock]

Thanks Ken, I tried getting a photo that would capture what I'm talking about, but no can do. I think reglossing is a cinch to identify when it's done with the typical "spray-in-a-can" stuff, but this one is a different animal. I would think if this had been done with cooking spray you'd see some grease bleeding through, but that's not the case. The cover just seems to have a glossiness that isn't quite natural. Front & back cover. It may simply be due to the way it was stored, but no way to be certain, I suppose.

 

Buttock - can you say what the book is? 1940 covers a big range and publishers did use different stocks. From 1940 (or 50 or 60 or 70 or 80 - who knows about 90's or the 2000's?) I don't think any book had "gloss" added. Any gloss would just be the result of a "hard" paper (more "clay" in the formula) and having been calendered (passing it though rollers to compress and make a hard, shiny surface surface) to achieve the gloss.

 

So can you tell us the book and any chance of taking a shot with a camera in raking (angled) light?

 

Funny this should come up. It's the book pictured below, Mystery Men 9, and I was just looking at it again last night. Nothing else has been done to the book. There's a 1.5 inch split at the top and the bottom staple is cleanly popped. CF hasn't been monkeyed with.

 

After looking it over again, I'm pretty convinced this is simply how the book aged. I base that primarily on looking at the back cover where there's a 1/2 inch border of white around some colored areas. The "extra-glossy" feel is there over the entire back cover, but it's more so in the colored area. I looked at the book for quite a while and the same holds true in the word 'comics' in the logo on the front. It's not a huge difference, but it's there.

 

I apologize that I can't get any pictures up that reflect this. It's just very subtle and nothing seems to capture the way I want it.