What You Really Dislike About Resto

[PovertyRow]

I arrived on these boards in September of 2002. I've heard a lot about the dislike of restoration but now I am wondering exactly WHAT it is about restoration you dislike. Also, what it is about restoration you feel has hurt the most.

 

I will start with my perceptions of things but really hope some of the knowledgeable folk here chime in too, even if they agree with my ideas. I am not looking for a variety of original ideas but more a poll (without the poll) of what you dislike about resto.

 

So for me, obviously amateur restoration - and by this I do not mean restoration by a non-professional but more retoration poorly performed.

 

What I like most about restoration is its ability to bring back the structural integrity of a book. Now that wouldn;t matter on a Hulk 181 or a Spotlight 5 or a Spdey 300. But on GA books especially, it can mean the diffeecne between saving a desireable issue and seeing it just deteriorate. And it also means that a hiterto unafforadble book may eek its way into my price range.

 

What I despise is undisclosed restoration. (See my Maker's Mark... thread). I think it has killed restoration in the eyes of many collectors, and especially newer (and I mean in the past 10 years or so) collectors who never had a chance to see the restored books being notated in auction catalogues etc. In its heyday, some collectors even had restorer preferences and sought books restored by Susan or Matt or Tracy etc., mainly because the aesthetic of their work felt "right" to those collectors.

 

I really feel there is a valid polace for restoration, especially in the GA and early SA books. Many of these are pretty scarce in decent condition and pretty pricey. To me, if it means not having an Eerie 1 or having an Eerie 1 retored the answer is obvious. I'll take the restored.

 

So would really love to hear other takes on this. I thank you.

 

 

 

[ninanina]

I had a choice to go after a VG FF 1, or an apparent restored VF. Both cost about the same....and more me it was no contest. The restored copy looked nicer, and that's the one I took. For many of the reasons you stated.

[fantastic_four]

There really isn't anything I dislike about restoration other than when it's not disclosed. I appreciate the skill of the art EXCEPT when it's done by the lowest slimeballs in the hobby.I also choose restored books when there are no other really nice copies available, or when they're just exceptionately hard to find or exceptionately expensive. I love my 9.2/9.4 restored Strange Tales 84 a lot more than any of the CGC copies I've ever seen. But would I buy a 9.2/9.4 for a decent multiple of guide if one surfaced? I'd give it a shot, yea, because something about the idea of a "pure" or "virgin" copy is somewhat more appealling.

Click for larger image

[PovertyRow]

Not to hijack my own thread, but you picked my 2nd favorite "prototype" issue. I felt good and bad for the poor guy's fate! Nice book there!

[Lantern]

First, I do not mind resto on GA books. Especially if that resto is improving the appearance of the book in a significant way. The older the book, the more rare, or the more valuable then the more resto I am comfortable with.

 

What I like about restoration is that it can save an otherwise unappealing, tattered, and worn out book from the scrap heap. When applied properly, resto can make an ugly book presentable and enjoyable to look at. Secondary to that, it can make books that are structurally unsound much easier and safer to handle.

 

The thing that I dislike most about resto is along the same lines as everyone else. I do not like that it gives dishonest dealers/sellers the opportunity to make more money by scamming buyers. Secondly, I too dislike when the resto has been applied improperly or by an unskilled individual. This is even more irritating when it is resto cannot be removed or improved upon.

 

To get specific, things I do not like:

- I do not like senseless color touch. For example, someone using a sharpie to cover one or two tiny spine stresses.

- I do not like trimming, especially minor trimming. Marvel chipping is a fact of life for some books, and to try and cover it up seems a bit awkward to me.

- I am not that big a fan of cover reglossing. I have little exposure to it, but the idea does not sit well with me.

 

Things that do not bother me:

- I do not mind when mending has been done to provide structural support to staples, spines, or other stress points.

- I do not mind cleaning (dry or chemical) when it is done properly.

- I do not mind pressing or spine roll removal when it is done properly.

 

Things I take on a case by case basis:

- Staple cleaning or replacement.

- Tape removal.

- Missing piece replacement.

 

 

The virtues of resto are blatantly obvious to me when I thumb through the most recent OS grading guide. Everytime I see the before and after pictures of the Archie 1 on page 96, the Detective 28 on page 102, or the Batman 3 on page 109 I am shocked and impressed. Those are books that look exceptional after the resto process. In fact, I would gladly have any of them in my collection, and that is with all of the resto that has been done to them.

 

Lastly, I agree that there is a market for GA books that have been restored. Lets say that the GA market continues to hold value or increase at a sensible pace. With a market like that there will be books that I will never want to spend thousands of dollars on, but I still want to own a nice looking presentable copy. Quality resto makes this possible.

 

For quality control purposes, I do own a few resto books. On one or two of them I cannot even spot the resto that has been done.

 

[supapimp]

YEAH! what he said!

[PovertyRow]

Good stuff Lantern. To my mind, reglossing is an abomination. Why? Because the entire surface of the cover has been altered. I mean, the whole thing. Talk about extensive. But it is often just passed off as re-glossed without actually understanding that 1) gloss is something inherent to the paper and not a coating - at least in the pre-modern books which may well have had a gloss coating put on but not sure and 2) as I said - it is an extensive application of a foreign substance.

 

yah yah - a typo edit - sheesh!

[Mr. Zipper]

The only resto that really turns me off is piece replacements and extensive color.

 

IMO, with minor color touches, professional trimming and tear seals, it's still the original book... just cleaned up a bit.

 

I'm actually starting to think about buying restored stuff because the prices are so low, it just seems crazy to me. Recently a DD #1 CGC 7.0 went for $400 and all it had was a tear seal on the back cover!! Big deal....

 

DD 1 Restored

 

I'd buy 2 at that price if I could. Unfortunately, it was sold by the time I saw it.

[drbanner]

Dislikes:

 

1) Amateur work, which is what drags down the rep of restoration. If I can see it (like bad/heavy CT or poorly done piece replacement) from 2 feet away, I don't want it.

2) piece replacement

3) trimming

4) re-glossing

5) heavy CT that bleeds thru to the interior

6) moderate/heavy CT on books originally printed with that "matrix print" dot pattern (like SA Marvels) where the CT is painfully obvious because it's usually smooth/even compared to the adjoining "original" cover artwork, which is is pixellated (or whatever the correct term is)

 

Likes:

 

1) Preservation-focused restoration like tear seals and cover/centerfold reinforcement that give the book back it's structural integrity

 

I like being able to get nice looking copies with minor CT, tear seals, or reinforcement that may be the only copy I can either afford, or find.

[burntboy]

multi-million dollar pieces of artwork are routinely and carefully restored. i have no problem with restoring comics. of course, i like the most professional job to be done and want the book to grade reasonably high. in many instances the restoration is the only thing that preserves the book from deteriorating to a worthless mess.

 

and i have purchased some high end stuff like detective 33 (origin issue), flash 1, all-star 3, showcase 4 and all american 19 (atom origin), in 7.5 to 9.0, because that's the only way i could afford them.

 

and lastly, i abhor undisclosed resto. that's fraud in my book...........

[seank]

To me, disclosed restoration is ok, because it allows the buyer to make an informed decision. And I think CGC is on the right track by distinguishing amateur and professional restoration, and the extent of the restoration.

 

However, right now, I think people should think seriously about whether or not to restore a book. Most collectors are still against it, and for post-1965 books, it's probably entirely unnecessary.

 

Acceptance of restoration is going to start with GA collectors and burble its way down to others, IMHO.

[garthgantu]

I agree with Seank, and find it disheartening that restoration, particularly those aspects of it that are really *preservation* is so frowned upon in the comic book collecting community. If you think of comic books - particularly GA and to a lesser extent SA comics - as ultimately being either works of art or classic objects of Americana, it doesn't make sense to just let them crumble into dust eventually. In other areas of collectibles, antiques and art, restoration and preservation are much more accepted. At some point, older books have to be viewed in the same light, so I think that in the long run restored books will be accepted as having a value much closer to non-restored counterparts.

[Lantern]

With regard to restoration, I do not think that it is a fair comparison to put classic artworks and comics in the same category.

 

When it comes to artwork their is only one piece, and that piece was done by the artists hand. Thus, restoration for the sake of conservation or preservation is a necessity. Further, most classic pieces of art are accepted the world over as being valuable monetarily, historically, or culturally. Unfortunatley, comics are seen as more nostalgic with a scant few having world wide acceptance as historical or cultural icons.

 

In comics, with the exception of a handful of GA's or ashcans, there are generally dozens of issues of a book out there. Sure, we do not see them on eBay or at the local shows but they are out there. Until there is a way to know positively that there are no more known copies of a book then restoration will always have a stigma. Think of it this way, when you buy a book that has restoration done to it, there is always the chance that a better non-restored book will come along. Thus, it would make a restored copy less valuable and less desireable. This will never happen in the fine arts.

 

Just my .02

[ft88]

It is the magic of the book itself. If all you want is the artwork or the story they go out and buy a reprint. If you must have an original then buy a solid G or G/VG. The reason we pay big money for old books is the nostalgia. We place ourselves back in time and read the book as it was originally read. The closer to perfection the book is, the closer we feel that we are to that time travel.

 

Any restoration is like dragging a needle across a record player. It damages the attachment to the magic of old comics. Restored comics have an image of the sleazy dealer taking an exacto knife or pen in order to take advantage of the collector who pays crazy money. For the fantasy world of comics this is metal on chalkboard

 

What gives comics such crazy value is almost absolutely taken away by resoration. How much it takes away has shown itself in prices paid, especially on major key books.

[PovertyRow]

Restored comics have an image of the sleazy dealer taking an exacto knife or pen in order to take advantage of the collector who pays crazy money. For the fantasy world of comics this is metal on chalkboard

 

First off, ff, I understand your own view on this and can appreciate such a stance. The piece I italicized above kind of gets to the core of what made me start this thread in the first place. Restored comics DO have a sleazy image, but it is that image I basically wanted to address. While a lot of comics were sleazed by unscrupulous dealers, a lot were restored by professionals with full disclosure and no intent to scam. Unfortunately, the sleaze aspects tends to override the pro aspect and all restored books are seen as being hacked by a sleazeball.

 

One thing I do disagree with, however, is your saying to buy a reprint. I will take an orignal book with some restoration anyday over a reprint, because, even though there IS some restoration, the vast majority of the book is still original and a reprint still does not look, feel or smell like the original.

 

But one thing I really like about restoration, and it is why I stress structural restoration over adding pieces, inpainting etc. is that a book that would otherwise end up in the dump at least can find a home.

 

Not trying to persuade you to a new way of thinking. Just carrying on the thread.

[garthgantu]

With regard to restoration, I do not think that it is a fair comparison to put classic artworks and comics in the same category.

 

When it comes to artwork their is only one piece, and that piece was done by the artists hand. Thus, restoration for the sake of conservation or preservation is a necessity. Further, most classic pieces of art are accepted the world over as being valuable monetarily, historically, or culturally. Unfortunatley, comics are seen as more nostalgic with a scant few having world wide acceptance as historical or cultural icons.

 

Very fair points, Lantern. However, if you consider that restoration on say, The Mona Lisa is actually replacing/covering up (in many instances) the original artist's work, that could be regarded as at least as negative as comic book resto, in a sense. If you're buying a unique piece of artwork, and it's been restored, you're in the same boat as a buyer of a restored GA comic book, at least from the standpoint of "how much of this is original?" Granted, you'll have the only original copy of said artwork - but how much of your original is original?

 

Someday classic early comic books will hang in museums, the way an original 1st edition of Poor Richard's Almanac or "Canterbury Tales" might today. At that point, I expect restoration - on those early books, at least - to be more accepted. Think about how you'd view a first edition of Canterbury Tales - you'd be looking at it mostly from the standpoint of historical significance. If it's missing a corner of the front cover, or a corner appears to have been re-attached, would that be off-putting? Not to most people.

 

I'm actually surprised that restored comics haven't dropped even more in value over the past few years, as the high grade mania has spread... with so many comic book collectors focused on "highest graded copy" and "true NM" you'd expect restored books to be even more shunned. I guess this has happened to a degree.

[ft88]

For those who only want the artwork or story, reprints are the way to go.

 

For those who want to read the actual comic but could care less about condition can generally buy almost all comics out there with the exception of some rare books and extremely valuable comics in high demand.

 

Once a collector wants a little more than that, while there are a variety of reasons, most are the nostalgia or the magic and fantasy of having as close to an original as possible. Thus NM is better than F.

 

This is the only reason the greater fool theorey on comic book prices still holds. Flippers, Dealers (who don't collect), BSD who like to own the best (but could care less about the nostalgia) are survive because of the nostalgia / magic / fantasy of the true collector and the value he puts on the collectible.

 

Restoration certainly hurts the BSD and the value he places on comics which makes for that less demand and liquidity for the flippers and dealers. That leaves the collector. As I stated last post, the magic comes from having the original and the closer to original you get the more magic the comic gives you. Restoration hurts that.

 

As far as restoring a book for reconstruction. I can't imagine it really matters a whole lot in terms of the magic it gives a colletor. Comparing a Fair unrestored to a restored Fine, they both have major problems in offering the collector what he is truly after and values. Restoring a comic to stop the deterioration makes sense but it is hard to think of flaws that truly need restoration yet the post restoration and pre restoration provide any differences.

 

Spine splits: If the paper is fresh careful reading is required only.

Spine splits with weak paper: Probably a G anyway and it won't matter restored or not as far as value.

Pieces missing: No deterioration

Brittle paper: Restoration will not help and if even if it does, the book is generally a Fair to Good anyway so it won't matter

Tape removal: Not restoration IMO

Centerfold loose: No need to restore.

 

My point in all this is that restoring a book for structural reasons means that the book is in really bad shape. Given that, the magic I have mentioned is mostly missing anyway that restoration or not won't matter, the value is going to be low (relatively). Value in terms of $$$ and in terms of magic. So that is why I do not like restoration but a F ® vs a Fa/G makes very little difference

 

 

[Zonker]

The only valid reason to do resto imho is to keep a low-grade book from falling apart. Repairing spine splits, re-attaching covers, even replacing pieces are a-ok in my book, provided full disclosure of course.

 

What drives me nuts is the idea that some perfectly acceptable VF/NM book was bastardized by trimming an edge or color-touching a spine in order to get it all tricked out as a faux 9.4/9.6/9.8. No collector in his right mind would do that for any valid aesthetic reason, so the motive is pure profit incentive, with deceit thrown in!

[Doug014-migration]

I don't really don't have any problem with restoration as long as it's professionally done. If I could have a blue label VG book or a purple label VF book with slight/moderate restoration at the same price, I would most likely go for the restored book.

[PovertyRow]

Once a collector wants a little more than that, while there are a variety of reasons, most are the nostalgia or the magic and fantasy of having as close to an original as possible. Thus NM is better than F.

 

This is where you keep losing me. I understand full well how it feels to hold a GA book in my hands, but the Magic and Fantasy, for me, have absolutely nothing to do with the book being "as original as possible". Having a HG book in as close to original grade as possible is a factor I place fairly down the list of motivations for collecting my precode horror. While I can appreciate the beauty of a HG GA book, and while I have some in my collection, I get no more joy or sense of magic or fantasy from my NM- Voodoo 8 NM- than I do from two of the lowest grade books in my collection, a Menace 13 and a Startling terror Tales #11 (spider cover).

 

I do disagree with your short list of why books are structurally restored. There are other reasons besides the ones you list, and the solutions for the ones you list I tend to disagree with. But that is IMO.

 

PS - tape removal can be a quite invasive process and should certainly fall under restoration.