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

[FFB]

That figure 117 is just an other reason I don't want pressed books in which it is actually a method of finding what books are pressed by spot pressing. Also in my opinion that is damage since the paper courseness is smoothed and not as it was originally.

 

Figure 117 bears absolutely no relation to the forces being exerted on a comic book that is being pressed properly by someone who knows what he or she is doing.

 

The primary considerations when pressing a book are:

 

1) Is the paper fresh/strong/flexible enough to withstand a pressing? If it is brittle, the answer is no. If it is not brittle but has lost some of its flexibility, then you have to consider whether the risk is worth it. On a 70-year-old GA book with tanned pages, the answer is usually going to be no. On a 70-year-old DC GA book with fresh paper, the answer is probably going to be yes, as long as it is done properly (not too much heat, humidity, or pressure).

 

2) What is the least intrusive way to relax the paper fibers gently, if necessary, to press the book? Generally, this will be by warming the book up gradually and slightly to the point at which the fibers relax. If the book is badly warped or wrinkled, it may be necessary to humidify the book as well.

 

3) After relaxing the paper fibers (if necessary), what is the least intrusive way to keep the book under mild pressure while the book returns to a state of equilibrium with the surrounding environment? Sometimes this will be done in a dry mount press that contains a very soft internal pad, and sometimes it will be done by placing the book under a smooth, flat surface such as a weighted piece of glass (or a couple of Heritage catalogs, or whatever). In any case, the pressure exerted is no greater than the book would experience at the bottom of a stack of comics, and oftentimes less.

[bronze_rules]

That figure 117 is just an other reason I don't want pressed books in which it is actually a method of finding what books are pressed by spot pressing. Also in my opinion that is damage since the paper courseness is smoothed and not as it was originally.

 

Figure 117 bears absolutely no relation to the forces being exerted on a comic book that is being pressed properly by someone who knows what he or she is doing.

 

It seems like you are beginning to lose a bit of your objectivity. The goal is to find and measure attributes that effect 'pressed' comics and determine whether there is any statistical difference between original and modified objects. I should clarify: the primary goal, is to find whether pressing causes damage to comics. Whether the person knows what they are doing or not, isn't really relevant. You classify the response without any bias regarding who's doing the pressing. If you can reasonably isolate a pressed comic from a non-pressed comic through accepted scientific or engineering based measurements at a significant level (hence statistical reasoning), then you have established something.

If every sample was from a world class conservator who knew what they were doing, what would be the purpose of running the experiment? We are trying to represent the overall population of pressed comics; period. Next might be to isolate a good pressed from bad pressed comic.

 

To start getting into who's doing the pressing is introducing a bias into an otherwise unbiased experiment. We could classify properly pressed samples in one bin and non-properly pressed in another, but that makes the task more complex, and should be added at a later stage. And it is not only the 'forces' that are being considered, but additional heat, h20, etc that is added in short bursts (I know you are aware of this, but just clarifying the above comment). I mentioned to start out with the worst case pressing stresses, because if it is determined that there is no statistical difference in objectively measured properties, then that immediately eliminates need for further investigation. On the other hand, sampling only perfect jobs will mask any differences and create false negative results.

 

Your opinions (and obvious experience) are very valued here, so please try to remain objective and keep me objective as well. If everyone had and applied your knowledge and experience in resto, I think there would be a lot more trust in the field; unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be the case.

 

[tb]

I don't want to derail the thread from the original focus, but the new information I have learned over the past few weeks has made me think more about the broader picture.

 

Many of us are storing valuable collections, both in terms of cultural and market value, in varying environments across the US. We all try to do the best we can to protect them, but none of us understand the exact impact of lowering the room temperature, keeping the humidity more constant, etc.

 

If we were to approach a professional lab, which I think would be feasible given the amounts I see people investing in their collections every year, one possibility would be to have them to conduct a larger research study over longer period. For example, we could take 100 books as control samples, measure the various accepted scores today (tear, folding, ...) and then have collectors across the country store samples along with their collections. Other test samples could be stored in controlled conditions at varying temperatures and humidity. After a, say, 5 year period, we could have a much better understanding of what happens to the paper and the impact of making an investment in proper storage.

 

My own, incredibly naive, opinion is that my collection represents not only a cash total but, more importantly, a cultural value. I would like future generations to enjoy these books long after I am gone. This is important enough to me that I am willing to invest in this kind of research as I am confident it would make a contribution in terms of prolonging the life of pulps, magazines, comics etc.

 

I am realistic and not optimistic that collectors would care enough to help with such an experiment. It is easier to stick our heads in the ground and assume that the paper will last until we sell our collections. We probably don't really care what happens after that, anyway. But at least I wanted to use the opportunity to throw the idea out there.

 

[FFB]

That figure 117 is just an other reason I don't want pressed books in which it is actually a method of finding what books are pressed by spot pressing. Also in my opinion that is damage since the paper courseness is smoothed and not as it was originally.

 

Figure 117 bears absolutely no relation to the forces being exerted on a comic book that is being pressed properly by someone who knows what he or she is doing.

 

It seems like you are beginning to lose a bit of your objectivity. The goal is to find and measure attributes that effect 'pressed' comics and determine whether there is any statistical difference between original and modified objects. I should clarify: the primary goal, is to find whether pressing causes damage to comics. Whether the person knows what they are doing or not, isn't really relevant. You classify the response without any bias regarding who's doing the pressing. If you can reasonably isolate a pressed comic from a non-pressed comic through accepted scientific or engineering based measurements at a significant level (hence statistical reasoning), then you have established something.

If every sample was from a world class conservator who knew what they were doing, what would be the purpose of running the experiment? We are trying to represent the overall population of pressed comics; period. Next might be to isolate a good pressed from bad pressed comic.

 

To start getting into who's doing the pressing is introducing a bias into an otherwise unbiased experiment. We could classify properly pressed samples in one bin and non-properly pressed in another, but that makes the task more complex, and should be added at a later stage. And it is not only the 'forces' that are being considered, but additional heat, h20, etc that is added in short bursts (I know you are aware of this, but just clarifying the above comment). I mentioned to start out with the worst case pressing stresses, because if it is determined that there is no statistical difference in objectively measured properties, then that immediately eliminates need for further investigation. On the other hand, sampling only perfect jobs will mask any differences and create false negative results.

 

Your opinions (and obvious experience) are very valued here, so please try to remain objective and keep me objective as well. If everyone had and applied your knowledge and experience in resto, I think there would be a lot more trust in the field; unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be the case.

 

I'm not losing my objectivity. I just happen to know what is involved in the kind of pressing of comics that most people care about - the kind that will take a VF book and turn it into a NM book. I am a bit past the point of "turn on the steam iron up to the high setting and see what it does to a comic book if I protect it with a single sheet of Xerox paper."

 

If you really want to get some observable data about what high pressure will do to a comic book, take a comic book out on the sidewalk and hit it with a hammer. It will bear about as much of a relationship to the kinds of pressing that is done to take a VF to a NM as the technique used to create the sample in your Figure 117 does.

 

I'm happy to discuss and explore the effects that professional pressing has on comic books. I'm not really interested in exploring the many ways in which one can damage a comic book by doing it wrong.

[FFB]

I don't want to derail the thread from the original focus, but the new information I have learned over the past few weeks has made me think more about the broader picture.

 

Many of us are storing valuable collections, both in terms of cultural and market value, in varying environments across the US. We all try to do the best we can to protect them, but none of us understand the exact impact of lowering the room temperature, keeping the humidity more constant, etc.

 

If we were to approach a professional lab, which I think would be feasible given the amounts I see people investing in their collections every year, one possibility would be to have them to conduct a larger research study over longer period. For example, we could take 100 books as control samples, measure the various accepted scores today (tear, folding, ...) and then have collectors across the country store samples along with their collections. Other test samples could be stored in controlled conditions at varying temperatures and humidity. After a, say, 5 year period, we could have a much better understanding of what happens to the paper and the impact of making an investment in proper storage.

 

My own, incredibly naive, opinion is that my collection represents not only a cash total but, more importantly, a cultural value. I would like future generations to enjoy these books long after I am gone. This is important enough to me that I am willing to invest in this kind of research as I am confident it would make a contribution in terms of prolonging the life of pulps, magazines, comics etc.

 

I am realistic and not optimistic that collectors would care enough to help with such an experiment. It is easier to stick our heads in the ground and assume that the paper will last until we sell our collections. We probably don't really care what happens after that, anyway. But at least I wanted to use the opportunity to throw the idea out there.

 

tb,

 

I think that quite a bit of research has been done already regarding the proper way to store artifacts made of ligneous groundwood (like comics and newspapers). A stable, cool, dry, and dark place with no air pollution is ideal. If the books are kept in mylar sleeves or other enclosures, they should have Microchamber paper inside of them. For your bigger Disney magazines, some Microchamber boxes and Microchamber folders (like the kind they sell at www.conservationresources.com ) are probably the best bet. I just bought several of them for my mother-in-law's ancient newspaper collection, along with a large volume of deacidification spray.

 

For any book that is not a white-paged beauty, you should really consider talking to a knowledgeable conservator about deacidification. Even under the best storage conditions, these books won't last forever. If you can deacidify the pages, however, they'll last a lot longer. (Compare the lifespan of alkaline paper with acidic paper - 1,000 years vs. 50-100 years.)

 

One especially sad thing about the comic book hobby's attitude toward restoration is the fact that a treatment like deacidification is still frowned upon by many. You can deacidify your book and no one will be the wiser, but if you do and you "disclose" it, you run the risk of the book being considered tainted or "manipulated." Eventually, though, all of those platinum and golden age books are either going to be deacidified or they will decay to brittleness, whether it be 50 years from now or 150 - what is certain is that it IS going to happen unless measures are taken to deacidify them. I don't know when the tipping point will be in terms of the attitude toward deacidification, but it will be a tragedy if it has to wait until several Church, San Francisco, and Central Valley pedigree books have crumbled to dust.

Edited June 23, 2009 by FFB

[bronze_rules]

I get it now.

 

thanks,

BR

 

P.S. I have nothing against professional restoration (as I've already said ad nauseam), only lack of informative disclosure and systematic detection of any type of intentional cosmetic alterations; professional or not.

 

That figure 117 is just an other reason I don't want pressed books in which it is actually a method of finding what books are pressed by spot pressing. Also in my opinion that is damage since the paper courseness is smoothed and not as it was originally.

 

Figure 117 bears absolutely no relation to the forces being exerted on a comic book that is being pressed properly by someone who knows what he or she is doing.

 

It seems like you are beginning to lose a bit of your objectivity. The goal is to find and measure attributes that effect 'pressed' comics and determine whether there is any statistical difference between original and modified objects. I should clarify: the primary goal, is to find whether pressing causes damage to comics. Whether the person knows what they are doing or not, isn't really relevant. You classify the response without any bias regarding who's doing the pressing. If you can reasonably isolate a pressed comic from a non-pressed comic through accepted scientific or engineering based measurements at a significant level (hence statistical reasoning), then you have established something.

If every sample was from a world class conservator who knew what they were doing, what would be the purpose of running the experiment? We are trying to represent the overall population of pressed comics; period. Next might be to isolate a good pressed from bad pressed comic.

 

To start getting into who's doing the pressing is introducing a bias into an otherwise unbiased experiment. We could classify properly pressed samples in one bin and non-properly pressed in another, but that makes the task more complex, and should be added at a later stage. And it is not only the 'forces' that are being considered, but additional heat, h20, etc that is added in short bursts (I know you are aware of this, but just clarifying the above comment). I mentioned to start out with the worst case pressing stresses, because if it is determined that there is no statistical difference in objectively measured properties, then that immediately eliminates need for further investigation. On the other hand, sampling only perfect jobs will mask any differences and create false negative results.

 

Your opinions (and obvious experience) are very valued here, so please try to remain objective and keep me objective as well. If everyone had and applied your knowledge and experience in resto, I think there would be a lot more trust in the field; unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be the case.

 

I'm not losing my objectivity. I just happen to know what is involved in the kind of pressing of comics that most people care about - the kind that will take a VF book and turn it into a NM book. I am a bit past the point of "turn on the steam iron up to the high setting and see what it does to a comic book if I protect it with a single sheet of Xerox paper."

 

If you really want to get some observable data about what high pressure will do to a comic book, take a comic book out on the sidewalk and hit it with a hammer. It will bear about as much of a relationship to the kinds of pressing that is done to take a VF to a NM as the technique used to create the sample in your Figure 117 does.

 

I'm happy to discuss and explore the effects that professional pressing has on comic books. I'm not really interested in exploring the many ways in which one can damage a comic book by doing it wrong.

[george bailey-migration]

FFB wrote:

I'm not losing my objectivity. I just happen to know what is involved in the kind of pressing of comics that most people care about - the kind that will take a VF book and turn it into a NM book.

-----

I do not know whether most people are concerned with high grade books turning into even higher grade books by pressing, or if their concern is with any grade book being pressed with the hope of achieving a higher grade.

As your focus is solely on paper you see as being fresh, strong, and flexible enough to withstand a pressing, and localizing the process to a single small bend or NCB while staying away from the spine, then you can leave this discussion with the knowledge that pressing, in your case, will most likely leave no significant damage.

 

I on the other hand have said that removing a spine roll from a comic that could potentially have Off-White or Cream pages concerns me far more. My collection is mostly composed of 1940's comics where NMs are few and far between. I would like to know the ramifications to my collection if someone were to press a mid-grade comic that I end up purchasing. Must I be wary of any FN+ comic advertised as "Lays Flat"?

 

As Ze-man and others have noted the spine is the weak point in the comic and may show a large variance in degradation over its entire length. The paper has been bent in place for many decades and therefore has lost much of its flexibility relative to the center of the book. If splits were to appear in central wraps following the pressing process, how would I know? If Creamy paper that has been folded for over fifty years was flattened will it lose a significant portion of its strength? I'd like to know.

 

In my opinion, any testing must include the use of a fresh piece of paper being folded, then artificially aged while still folded, and finally pressing it so that no fold whatsoever is apparent. Once this is done we can finally age the sample to see what long term damage, if any, has occured.

[tb]

FFB, that's a very helpful link and I will look at it very carefully. Some of these products look like they would help.

 

Your point that a lot of work already has been done in this area is well taken. I will take some time to read up on the literature. The more people we can get interested in this subject, the more informed discussions and decisions we can make.

From my experience on the boards, I'd expect that acquiring this knowledge and communicating it to collectors will be two completely different challenges. The poster who made a single "sleepy" graemlin actually made an important statement that sums up my own observations: even if this information was available, I doubt most collectors would care to read or act on it unless it was presented in a form that they could relate to. Eventually, I think doing some kind of experimentation on actual comic books with lots of illustrations will help communicate the knowledge. But before I can contribute to design such experiments I need to have a better grasp on what has already been done.

 

george_bailey: In terms of the spine, I am actually more interested in very high grade comics that only have been opened a few times. It is interesting to hear other angles to the same problem.

[bronze_rules]

For those that asked, here are the final empirical results from the collectors illustrated 1/2s, regarding top and bottom samples. The first experiment actually caused some of the strongly contaminated solution to be absorbed into the container; after many washings you could not only measure the same ph in the new solution of distilled water, but the rank smell was even embedded in the dry cup walls!

 

So a new container had to be used for each tested sample. Virtually identical containers were used, and virtually identical water volume, structural folds, and content were used for testing pressed/non-pressed samples.

 

Results?

Pressed Top: PH = 5.0

Bottom Non-Pressed PH = 6.0

 

Non-Pressed book split in 1/2

both samples ~ 5.4 PH

 

Yes, the pressing contained heat and steam from an iron.

Yes, it is only two samples.

 

p.s. for those that don't understand what ph is...

higher is better. Ideal ph should be somewhere closer to 7.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

In short, pressing, no matter how minimal it is must be considered a form of restoration. Not disclosing it is an unethical and deceptive practice. Susan Cicconi,

recognized expert and long term veteran in comics preservation and restoration.

[Mr Dee-migration]

Wow what an awsome read. I am new here and I just wanted to say Hi.

[slym2none]

Wow what an awsome read. I am new here and I just wanted to say Hi.

 

WTTB!

 

 

 

-slym

[Monstro]

Wow what an awsome read. I am new here and I just wanted to say Hi.

 

[fantastic_four]

So I just got a response from the original question I asked the LoC in the first message. I haven't pondered the response enough yet to know whether or not to post a follow-up, which their site explicitly allows for, but here's the response--if anyone knows of a relevant followup, please post it here and I'll likely pass it along. I'm fairly surprised by the response about heat--the conservator who answered seems to generally agree with the "pressing causes permanent damage" hypothesis. If we find reason to agree with this sentiment and the credibility of the response, it may be time to pull Matt Nelson, Tracey Heft, and Susan Cicconi in to comment on this.

 

Thank you for contacting the Library of Congress Preservation Directorate. Please accept our apologies for the delayed response to your question. We have been undergoing personnel changes that have impacted the turnaround time for our email reference service. We expect to return to our usual level of service shortly. Thank you for your patience.

 

Your question was referred to a paper conservator in our Conservation Division. Her response follows below:

 

Using heat to reduce creases, wrinkles, or other planar distortions is not recommended by professional paper conservators. Many studies have shown that increased heat accelerates paper aging, especially papers made from groundwood pulp. Groundwood pulp ages faster than other papers because many of the naturally-occurring constituents remain in the sheet after processing, including lignin (in contrast to chemical pulp papers which have been bleached or otherwise chemically processed to remove/reduce harmful elements such as lignin). Groundwood papers, as seen in newspapers, were originally made for temporary use and even tend to yellow in sunlight.

 

In controlled environments, conservators sometimes use humidification to flatten works. However, the method by which it occurs and on what kinds of paper are both very broad factors that are considered. Once any moisture is introduced into the paper sheet, any number of chemical reactions can begin. Many conservators elect to accept minor wrinkling and creasing as part of the artifact's history of use, rather then subject the work to what may begin or cause premature aging and discoloration.

 

Professional paper conservators do not regularly subject paper materials to high heat and do not have a singular, analytical way to determine the previous existence of wrinkling or other planar distortions before a "pressing" action. Looking under low magnification (8x - 30x) may show evidence of broken cellulose fibers occurring in a straight line--one may infer that this was once a crease, but there is no definitive analytical method to identify a pre-existing crease or wrinkle with absolute certainty.

 

Here are a few web links that contain some ideas for comic book storage:

 

< http://www.adorama.com/LIFB1115.html >

Light Impressions flat storage box

 

< http://www.metaledgeinc.com/Products.tpl?cart=yzvppxzzjo&id1=19&id2=515&startat=1&--woSECTIONSdatarq=515&--SECTIONSword=ww&ran=80 >

Metal Edge miscellaneous and collector storage

 

< http://www.metaledgeinc.com/Products.tpl?cart=yzvppxzzjo&id1=19&id2=973&startat=1&--woSECTIONSdatarq=973&--SECTIONSword=ww&ran=7150 >

Metal Edge see-through comic storage envelope

 

< http://www.lightimpressionsdirect.com/item.action?itemId=1943 >

Light Impressions polyethylene storage bag

 

< http://www.gaylordmart.com/adblock.asp?abid=527&sid=2A8DAC03DB4449C2B5143882BA2D8C >

Gaylord polyethylene storage bag

 

I would like to add that using a rigid, acid-free board within a polyethylene bag would add strength to the enclosure. Please note that the Library of Congress does not specifically endorse any one product or vendor; I have supplied just a few examples of housing that are generally available for web purchase.

[slym2none]

Great post! Thanks for going so far as to contact the LoC!!!

 

 

 

-slym

[fantastic_four]

I can't decide whether or not the conservator was focusing on her response, which makes me wonder how much to trust it. The entire second half of it focuses on the best way to store comics, which isn't something I asked about. I'm sure she was just trying to be helpful, throwing out as much conservation info as she thought of that could be useful to me. But it seems weird for her to have taken the time to include all those links to bags and boards, as if perhaps she had no reference to offer on the danger of heat and moisture pressing so she decided to offer some storage references instead.

 

A pertinent and probing followup into the nature of the danger she's describing with regards to heat and moisture could be useful. You know that some library or company has done pressing-related experiments similar to or the same as the ones people have been proposing in this thread--maybe a LoC conservator would dig some of that up if specifically prodded to.

[stagedoorjohnny]

 

Using heat to reduce creases, wrinkles, or other planar distortions is not recommended by professional paper conservators. Many studies have shown that increased heat accelerates paper aging, especially papers made from groundwood pulp. Groundwood pulp ages faster than other papers because many of the naturally-occurring constituents remain in the sheet after processing, including lignin (in contrast to chemical pulp papers which have been bleached or otherwise chemically processed to remove/reduce harmful elements such as lignin). Groundwood papers, as seen in newspapers, were originally made for temporary use and even tend to yellow in sunlight.

 

 

Nice work, FF. (thumbs u

 

This paragraph above pretty much sums up the simple facts that have always been out there... but seem to be ignored. It's not that complicated and the LoC's response is some affirmation.

 

 

Many conservators elect to accept minor wrinkling and creasing as part of the artifact's history of use, rather then subject the work to what may begin or cause premature aging and discoloration.

 

 

 

If only more collectors had this mindset. Nothing worse than squishing all the history out of these older books, especially pedigrees. What a shame, IMHO.

 

And sorry for going off on a tangent with the last comment. I just find a little irony in the LoC's statement. You'd think it would be a collector that would appreciate and accept the specific history of a book, not a conservator.

[capt_comics]

 

 

[Hero Restoration]

[comics-rock]

Wow what an awsome read. I am new here and I just wanted to say Hi.

 

[ComicConnoisseur]

I am about to embark on reading this thread over the next few days, What was the general consensus of the thread?

Edited August 13, 2010 by ComicConnoisseur