Hypothesis: Pressing causes long-term damage to comics 2 2

[FFB]

Many other kinds of pressing use no heat at all.

 

Are you referring to just humidity + pressure? If not, what types do you mean?

 

There are "heatless" pressing techniques that use moisture and there are heatless pressing techniques that do not use moisture. Mechanical, localized pressing is one example.

 

 

 

And you have, yourself, conducted these techniques in the same manner as a LBC conservator would?

 

Do you have a point, or are you just trying to pick a fight? You obviously have nothing of substance to add to the discussion, so why don't you just head on back to the kiddie pool.

 

 

 

Did you avoid the question for a reason? Do you have an answer or are you just avoiding the fight? If you wanna play expert on what you have read researched on web plaese do so. But if you think that qualifies you as an expert in print and press technology when you haven't heard the presses roll in that warehouse in the less desirable side of town...step off.

 

Stick to the law books sonny..............

 

I "avoided the question" for the same reason I'm going to pay no more attention to you - because your posts are stupid and add nothing to the discussion.

[bronze_rules]

Can you give the man a chance to speak before you go on with your baseless demonizing? I have as much bias against pressing as you do, but I'll be the first to admit I'm not an expert on the subject. So far he has made cogent commentary, while you on the other hand, have made none.

 

If you want to support the pressing is bad camp, at least do it with some intelligent thought. You are doing nothing to help the cause with your lack of substance.

 

Many other kinds of pressing use no heat at all.

 

Are you referring to just humidity + pressure? If not, what types do you mean?

 

There are "heatless" pressing techniques that use moisture and there are heatless pressing techniques that do not use moisture. Mechanical, localized pressing is one example.

 

 

 

And you have, yourself, conducted these techniques in the same manner as a LBC conservator would?

 

Do you have a point, or are you just trying to pick a fight? You obviously have nothing of substance to add to the discussion, so why don't you just head on back to the kiddie pool.

 

 

 

Did you avoid the question for a reason? Do you have an answer or are you just avoiding the fight? If you wanna play expert on what you have read researched on web plaese do so. But if you think that qualifies you as an expert in print and press technology when you haven't heard the presses roll in that warehouse in the less desirable side of town...step off.

 

Stick to the law books sonny..............

[ImageMask]

Many other kinds of pressing use no heat at all.

 

Are you referring to just humidity + pressure? If not, what types do you mean?

 

There are "heatless" pressing techniques that use moisture and there are heatless pressing techniques that do not use moisture. Mechanical, localized pressing is one example.

 

 

 

And you have, yourself, conducted these techniques in the same manner as a LBC conservator would?

 

Do you have a point, or are you just trying to pick a fight? You obviously have nothing of substance to add to the discussion, so why don't you just head on back to the kiddie pool.

 

 

 

Did you avoid the question for a reason? Do you have an answer or are you just avoiding the fight? If you wanna play expert on what you have read researched on web plaese do so. But if you think that qualifies you as an expert in print and press technology when you haven't heard the presses roll in that warehouse in the less desirable side of town...step off.

 

Stick to the law books sonny..............

 

I "avoided the question" for the same reason I'm going to pay no more attention to you - because your posts are stupid and add nothing to the discussion.

 

Indeed, you avoided the question, because MY POST ARE STUPID......... (thumbs u .

 

 

 

Airman..........A great way of life..........................

 

 

 

[Ze-man]

Many other kinds of pressing use no heat at all.

 

Are you referring to just humidity + pressure? If not, what types do you mean?

 

There are "heatless" pressing techniques that use moisture and there are heatless pressing techniques that do not use moisture. Mechanical, localized pressing is one example.

 

 

 

And you have, yourself, conducted these techniques in the same manner as a LBC conservator would?

 

Do you have a point, or are you just trying to pick a fight? You obviously have nothing of substance to add to the discussion, so why don't you just head on back to the kiddie pool.

 

 

 

Did you avoid the question for a reason? Do you have an answer or are you just avoiding the fight? If you wanna play expert on what you have read researched on web plaese do so. But if you think that qualifies you as an expert in print and press technology when you haven't heard the presses roll in that warehouse in the less desirable side of town...step off.

 

Stick to the law books sonny..............

 

I will go on the record and say Scott has read more, done more research and talked with more conservators then I have regarding all things paper.( and I have read and talked to a lot) He knows his stuff.

 

The mere fact that Scott is offering what he is should be applauded, not scoffed at. You can disagree with him but I wouldn't question his credentials.

[ImageMask]

Can you give the man a chance to speak before you go on with your baseless demonizing? I have as much bias against pressing as you do, but I'll be the first to admit I'm not an expert on the subject. So far he has made cogent commentary, while you on the other hand, have made none.

 

If you want to support the pressing is bad camp, at least do it with some intelligent thought. You are doing nothing to help the cause with your lack of substance.

 

Many other kinds of pressing use no heat at all.

 

Are you referring to just humidity + pressure? If not, what types do you mean?

 

There are "heatless" pressing techniques that use moisture and there are heatless pressing techniques that do not use moisture. Mechanical, localized pressing is one example.

 

Is this directed to me? If it is you missed my point.....

 

 

 

 

And you have, yourself, conducted these techniques in the same manner as a LBC conservator would?

 

Do you have a point, or are you just trying to pick a fight? You obviously have nothing of substance to add to the discussion, so why don't you just head on back to the kiddie pool.

 

 

 

Did you avoid the question for a reason? Do you have an answer or are you just avoiding the fight? If you wanna play expert on what you have read researched on web plaese do so. But if you think that qualifies you as an expert in print and press technology when you haven't heard the presses roll in that warehouse in the less desirable side of town...step off.

 

Stick to the law books sonny..............

[comixcroz]

Just because a conservator isn't born knowing it doesn't mean that one of them will have done an extensive scholarly article on the topic. Feel free to keep looking though.

 

I have no expectation of finding an article devoted to pressing--just someone who does more than mention it in passing with the same presumption you alluded to, that it's simply standard practice. One or two sentences with some specific details about when to press or when not to, or some explicit reference that pressing is something that's appropriate for any type of paper, or alternatively that there are times you shouldn't use it. One of the main jists of the recent pressing arguments which I can't just refute out of hand is that pressing might be fine for sturdier documents, but not for the cheap pulp comics are printed on.

 

You aren't going to find anything like that because pressing IS fine for comics. Every comic book ever made was subjected to greater forces during the production process than it would be exposed to in a standard pressing job. Instead of looking for a mythical, scholarly article that does not exist, do some research on the processes involved in making comics. Compare the forces exerted during the production process to what you know of the comic book pressing/restoration process.

 

In terms of the "long term effects," whatever molecular damage is done to a comic book during a professional pressing job using heat and moisture is insignificant when compared to the damage that will be caused over the course of decades from keeping a comic book in less than ideal storage conditions (which is virtually every comic book in every collection of every person who posts here).

 

FFB, what are the ideal conditions? I have been doing my best with my limited knowledge to give my comics an ideal environment for long term storage. Right now i keep my comics in their own climate controlled room. Relative Humidity is set at 35% and temperature is set 64 degrees F with its own single room air conditioner and dehumidifier. I also have a Idylis Air purifier running in that room. The room has no access to sunlight. I store my slabs in a custom built cedar wood box. Inside the box I keep the books in a acid-free cardboard box and each slab is in a mylar bag. I have been told cedar wood may not be the best storage box if paper comes in direct contact with the wood but should be fine with my current set up.

 

what would be ideal? any suggestions you could give me to improve the environment or am I on the right track?

[namisgr]

With all of the discussion surrounding the potential degradative effects of pressing, little attention is being paid to another concern with the process: the potential for reversion. Do non-color breaking surface impressions, bends, and spine rolls of a comic stay flat for decades, or do some techniques for localized pressing allow for reversion over time?

[joeypost]

Many other kinds of pressing use no heat at all.

 

Are you referring to just humidity + pressure? If not, what types do you mean?

 

There are "heatless" pressing techniques that use moisture and there are heatless pressing techniques that do not use moisture. Mechanical, localized pressing is one example.

 

 

 

And you have, yourself, conducted these techniques in the same manner as a LBC conservator would?

 

Do you have a point, or are you just trying to pick a fight? You obviously have nothing of substance to add to the discussion, so why don't you just head on back to the kiddie pool.

 

 

 

Did you avoid the question for a reason? Do you have an answer or are you just avoiding the fight? If you wanna play expert on what you have read researched on web plaese do so. But if you think that qualifies you as an expert in print and press technology when you haven't heard the presses roll in that warehouse in the less desirable side of town...step off.

 

Stick to the law books sonny..............

 

I "avoided the question" for the same reason I'm going to pay no more attention to you - because your posts are stupid and add nothing to the discussion.

 

(thumbs u

[FFB]

With all of the discussion surrounding the potential degradative effects of pressing, little attention is being paid to another concern with the process: the potential for reversion. Do non-color breaking surface impressions, bends, and spine rolls of a comic stay flat for decades, or do some techniques for localized pressing allow for reversion over time?

 

Bob,

 

Did you realize this was your 6666th post???

 

I think we need a few of these to wash the evil from this thread: :angel::angel::angel:

 

To answer your question, there are generalized and localized pressing techniques that may result in reversion, but in my experience, the reversion happens in the short term (minutes to hours later), not months and years later.

[FFB]

Just because a conservator isn't born knowing it doesn't mean that one of them will have done an extensive scholarly article on the topic. Feel free to keep looking though.

 

I have no expectation of finding an article devoted to pressing--just someone who does more than mention it in passing with the same presumption you alluded to, that it's simply standard practice. One or two sentences with some specific details about when to press or when not to, or some explicit reference that pressing is something that's appropriate for any type of paper, or alternatively that there are times you shouldn't use it. One of the main jists of the recent pressing arguments which I can't just refute out of hand is that pressing might be fine for sturdier documents, but not for the cheap pulp comics are printed on.

 

You aren't going to find anything like that because pressing IS fine for comics. Every comic book ever made was subjected to greater forces during the production process than it would be exposed to in a standard pressing job. Instead of looking for a mythical, scholarly article that does not exist, do some research on the processes involved in making comics. Compare the forces exerted during the production process to what you know of the comic book pressing/restoration process.

 

In terms of the "long term effects," whatever molecular damage is done to a comic book during a professional pressing job using heat and moisture is insignificant when compared to the damage that will be caused over the course of decades from keeping a comic book in less than ideal storage conditions (which is virtually every comic book in every collection of every person who posts here).

 

FFB, what are the ideal conditions? I have been doing my best with my limited knowledge to give my comics an ideal environment for long term storage. Right now i keep my comics in their own climate controlled room. Relative Humidity is set at 35% and temperature is set 64 degrees F with its own single room air conditioner and dehumidifier. I also have a Idylis Air purifier running in that room. The room has no access to sunlight. I store my slabs in a custom built cedar wood box. Inside the box I keep the books in a acid-free cardboard box and each slab is in a mylar bag. I have been told cedar wood may not be the best storage box if paper comes in direct contact with the wood but should be fine with my current set up.

 

what would be ideal? any suggestions you could give me to improve the environment or am I on the right track?

 

Your storage conditions sound fine. The exact temperature and RH are less important than keeping temp and RH stable (no fluctuation). The storage conditions are not "perfect," but they're as good as you're going to see outside of a well-funded musuem or the Rotunda at the National Archives.

[namisgr]

With all of the discussion surrounding the potential degradative effects of pressing, little attention is being paid to another concern with the process: the potential for reversion. Do non-color breaking surface impressions, bends, and spine rolls of a comic stay flat for decades, or do some techniques for localized pressing allow for reversion over time?

 

To answer your question, there are generalized and localized pressing techniques that may result in reversion, but in my experience, the reversion happens in the short term (minutes to hours later), not months and years later.

 

That covers part of my question, Scott. There remains the question about what happens over decades to areas that have been pressed. Do rolled spines tend to come back, at least a bit? Do creases or raised edges once removed begin to reappear? Do storage conditions affect the "permanency" of pressing? In other words, are there a bunch of pressed books currently sitting in slabs with high numbers on them that will begin to show defects over many years?

 

I think this is an even more important topic than whether localized pressing accelerates aging of the paper (which it is likely to do only imperceptibly).

[FFB]

With all of the discussion surrounding the potential degradative effects of pressing, little attention is being paid to another concern with the process: the potential for reversion. Do non-color breaking surface impressions, bends, and spine rolls of a comic stay flat for decades, or do some techniques for localized pressing allow for reversion over time?

 

To answer your question, there are generalized and localized pressing techniques that may result in reversion, but in my experience, the reversion happens in the short term (minutes to hours later), not months and years later.

 

That covers part of my question, Scott. There remains the question about what happens over decades to areas that have been pressed. Do rolled spines tend to come back, at least a bit? Do creases or raised edges once removed begin to reappear? Do storage conditions affect the "permanency" of pressing? In other words, are there a bunch of pressed books currently sitting in slabs with high numbers on them that will begin to show defects over many years?

 

I think this is an even more important topic than whether localized pressing accelerates aging of the paper (which it is likely to do only imperceptibly).

 

Assuming (as I do) that glossy comic book paper reacts the same way as other kinds of paper, there is no real evidence that I know of that a properly pressed artifact will revert to its pre-pressing state decades after the fact. There are thousands of artifacts that have been pressed (including the Declaration of Independence) that have not reverted despite the passage of decades.

[FFB]

I think this is an even more important topic than whether localized pressing accelerates aging of the paper (which it is likely to do only imperceptibly).

 

I missed this comment in my prior reply.

 

Localized, mechanical pressing (no heat or moisture) does not accelerate the aging of paper. It is heat and moisture that accelerate the aging process, however slightly.

[Ze-man]

I think you also need to factor in how/who pressed it.

 

I could possibly see a severe spine roll reverting somewhat someday, but not completely.

 

HG books with minor flaws coming back?...doubtful or at least I have not seen any.

 

Of course there will be those instances of a book that displayed flaws that should not have been pressed out reverting because of the nature of the crease( whole book sub creases come to mind) But it is also likely it was not pressed out completely to start with.

 

 

 

 

[buttock]

I've been doing a little digging on this myself. Here's what I've been able to find.

 

Let me first preface by saying:

 

1) I can't find any empirical testing of the effect of what a short pressing does to a comic book. The likely reason for that is that the time exposure is so brief that it's essentially inconsequential and therefore immeasurable.

 

2) The testing of the effects of heat, light, and moisture on paper is very controversial. This is because the field is geared toward simulating aging, and there isn't a consensus about what the best way to simulate this is. For the situation we're interested in, simulating aging isn't what we're interested in, rather we are interested in what the direct effects of pressure with or without heat and/or humidity are. Therefore, the experiments aren't designed to test what we're after, but many conclusions can be drawn from the experiments - with the caveats of: (1) the experiments weren't designed to test these effects and (2) the conditions may or may not be similar to what a comic book experiences when pressed.

 

3) each comic book is going to be different. Different publishers and eras will have different paper treated in different ways. Generally speaking, newsprint is very low-quality paper and will probably be more sensitive to any exposures than what is generally tested.

 

With that in mind, I would direct you to this website from the LOC.

 

To sum up some of the information from that site, here are some graphs & tables.

 

This table shows the effects of several factors on the aging of paper. Focus on the top 4 rows, I'll talk about the bottom 4 rows with the next graph. I converted the temperatures to Fahrenheit to make them more recognizable. Pressing a comic book doesn't require temperatures this high, so take that into mind. Also, the time exposure here was not noted, although based on other experiments I'd guess you're looking at a minimum of 24 hours. Notably:

 

Temperature and humidity are both detrimental in a proportional fashion. There aren't enough data points to get an idea if this is a linear or exponential relationship, but it looks more linear.

 

Temperature PLUS humidity is worse than either alone. This looks to be multiplicative rather than additive, but again, the data points are too few. None of this should be surprising.

 

The interesting finding from this table is that paper in stacks degrades far worse than single sheets of paper. All of our comic books are in "stacks" of paper. The pages being in contact with each other allows them to "swap" degradation products and accelerates the decay.

 

 

 

(sorry, I tried doing this as an image and it didn't work. Should still be easily readable)

                                 Temperature (°F)	Relative Humdity (%)	Lifetime T*
Single sheets                   	176                          	65	                 12.00

Single sheets	                194	                        25	                 10.00

Single sheets                   	194                          	50	                  4.80

Stacks of 100 sheets	        194                          	50	                  2.50

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 12, 2009 by buttock

[buttock]

Interesting point number two. Sealing a book within mylar is terrible for it. Below is a graph showing the rate of decay (for paper kept at these conditions for this time) with varying amounts of "encapsulation" within mylar. Notice that there's little difference for mylar sealed on all 4 sides (sealed) vs only on two sides (half sealed). By putting a comic book in a relatively sealed environment, you're effectively doubling its rate of decay.

 

In this graph, Permalife represents paper sealed with an alkalinized paper (Permalife brand) which can be considered similar to microchamber paper. HOWEVER, this was a 1:1 match (one sheet of paper to one sheet of microchamber paper), NOT the 2:32 or 2:64 ratio used in CGC encapsulation.

 

 

 

[buttock]

What do I take from this?

 

1) I'm not sure how well any of this reproduces what a book goes through with pressing. If you look at the graphs the exposures are all on the order of days, rather than minutes. I can't see how a few seconds to minutes at these conditions would be that harmful. But if you don't know what you're doing, you can probably screw a book up pretty easily.

 

2) I have HUGE reservations about putting any book in a slab now. That being said, I'm concerned about my books in mylars as well.

 

3) I need to invest in some microchamber paper, and place it between every leaf.

 

4) relative humidity as low as possible.

 

 

[FFB]

Hey B,

 

Great post. You're definitely on the right track based on your prefaces.

 

My one comment is on the question you raised re the length of time the samples of Springhill Offset paper (an alum rosin sized paper, non-archival quality) experienced in the aging chambers. If you read all of the accompanying articles, it seems that the various samples degraded to a state of brittleness as quickly as 6 hours (in the case of the stacks aged in aluminized PET at 100C and 50%RH) and that the total length of the testing exposure was 90 days for the various samples.

 

I've been doing a little digging on this myself. Here's what I've been able to find.

 

Let me first preface by saying:

 

1) I can't find any empirical testing of the effect of what a short pressing does to a comic book. The likely reason for that is that the time exposure is so brief that it's essentially inconsequential and therefore immeasurable.

 

2) The testing of the effects of heat, light, and moisture on paper is very controversial. This is because the field is geared toward simulating aging, and there isn't a consensus about what the best way to simulate this is. For the situation we're interested in, simulating aging isn't what we're interested in, rather we are interested in what the direct effects of pressure with or without heat and/or humidity are. Therefore, the experiments aren't designed to test what we're after, but many conclusions can be drawn from the experiments - with the caveats of: (1) the experiments weren't designed to test these effects and (2) the conditions may or may not be similar to what a comic book experiences when pressed.

 

3) each comic book is going to be different. Different publishers and eras will have different paper treated in different ways. Generally speaking, newsprint is very low-quality paper and will probably be more sensitive to any exposures than what is generally tested.

 

With that in mind, I would direct you to this website from the LOC.

 

To sum up some of the information from that site, here are some graphs & tables.

 

This table shows the effects of several factors on the aging of paper. Focus on the top 4 rows, I'll talk about the bottom 4 rows with the next graph. I converted the temperatures to Fahrenheit to make them more recognizable. Pressing a comic book doesn't require temperatures this high, so take that into mind. Also, the time exposure here was not noted, although based on other experiments I'd guess you're looking at a minimum of 24 hours. Notably:

 

Temperature and humidity are both detrimental in a proportional fashion. There aren't enough data points to get an idea if this is a linear or exponential relationship, but it looks more linear.

 

Temperature PLUS humidity is worse than either alone. This looks to be multiplicative rather than additive, but again, the data points are too few. None of this should be surprising.

 

The interesting finding from this table is that paper in stacks degrades far worse than single sheets of paper. All of our comic books are in "stacks" of paper. The pages being in contact with each other allows them to "swap" degradation products and accelerates the decay.

 

 

 

(sorry, I tried doing this as an image and it didn't work. Should still be easily readable)

                                 Temperature (°F)	Relative Humdity (%)	Lifetime T*
Single sheets                   	176                          	65	                 12.00

Single sheets	                194	                        25	                 10.00

Single sheets                   	194                          	50	                  4.80

Stacks of 100 sheets	        194                          	50	                  2.50

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[FFB]

What do I take from this?

 

1) I'm not sure how well any of this reproduces what a book goes through with pressing. If you look at the graphs the exposures are all on the order of days, rather than minutes. I can't see how a few seconds to minutes at these conditions would be that harmful. But if you don't know what you're doing, you can probably screw a book up pretty easily.

 

2) I have HUGE reservations about putting any book in a slab now. That being said, I'm concerned about my books in mylars as well.

 

3) I need to invest in some microchamber paper, and place it between every leaf.

 

4) relative humidity as low as possible.

 

 

Permalife isn't the same as Microchamber paper. Microchamber paper is different than Permalife, which is just an alkaline buffered sheet of paper. While Microchamber paper also places an alkaline reserve within the enclosure, it does more than just absorb and neutralize acids.

 

Also, you don't want to get RH too low because you don't want the paper to dry out. If you keep RH at around 40%, that is considered ideal for storage. The most important thing is for RH and temperature to remain stable.

[buttock]

You're right about the Permalife. Microchamber's site was claiming something like 170X the protection.

 

Scott, do you know whether or not putting only 2 sheets in between the covers is effective at all?

 

Dan