Washtone / Greytone Covers -- All of them in one place. . .time to weigh in

[thirdgreenham]

Maybe I don't know the criteria being used to determine greytone / not greytone because many of those covers being questioned are greytones to me.

 

To be honest, I'm no expert, either, I'm just going by look and gut feeling.

 

Andy

[JohnT]

Maybe I don't know the criteria being used to determine greytone / not greytone because many of those covers being questioned are greytones to me.

 

I agree that there are many legit greytones on the questionable list. That's why I think we have to have a standard that is less that unanimous. But it doesn't hurt to look at any cover that someone questioned, even if it was just one person.

[JohnT]

As we had 7 people choose questionable covers, we may consider taking off the ones that had 4 or more votes against immediately. Just a suggestion, as that would be over 50% of the judges. Then we could review the ones that had 3, 2 and 1 votes against. Actually, as I'm typing this, I may also want to have a discussion about the 4-vote ones as well. Ah, I don't know.....fellas?

 

Four sounds like a good cutoff.

 

How do you want to organize the review process?

[JohnT]

Maybe I don't know the criteria being used to determine greytone / not greytone because many of those covers being questioned are greytones to me.

 

To be honest, I'm no expert, either, I'm just going by look and gut feeling.

 

Andy

 

Does anyone know of anyone on the board that could be considered an expert, (who hasn't already participated)? It would be a good idea to contact them if there is.

[thirdgreenham]

...

 

Wow Jack, I'm interested to see what your criteria are for a washtone. You rejected so many of the "canonical" washtones.

 

 

Gut feeling, mostly. I'll see whether I can put it into words for some of the covers where I'm at odds with common wisdom. I'm probably wrong about some.

 

For sure, a cover that happens so have some shaded colors (airbrush maybe) or charcoal shading on the blacks is not necessarily a washtone. A painted cover is not necessarily a washtone. A cover printed before Adler invented the process is not a washtone.

 

Jack

 

I feel this post needs to get bumped. Jack had a couple of good points, most importantly, I'd say, is the last one; a cover printed before Adler invented the process is not a washtone.

 

That is absolutely true, IMO, and we should research which ones came before Adler created the washtone process and eliminate them.

 

Andy

[thirdgreenham]

This thread needs a

 

 

[pickycollector]

[Dale Roberts]

Hey guys, going to be listing some 1950s DCs in the sales forum in the next day or so. Mostly high grade, mostly Sci-fi with some wash tones. Just wanted to give you a heads up.

[telerites]

 

That is such a great cover - nice copy - colors really pop, pc.

[Dale Roberts]

 

 

and not high grade, but so cool..

 

[buttock]

Hey guys, going to be listing some 1950s DCs in the sales forum in the next day or so. Mostly high grade, mostly Sci-fi with some wash tones. Just wanted to give you a heads up.

 

You should list them in a PM to me first...

[OV]

This is a great thread! I've been wondering how many grey tones/washtones exist for a while now. Is there a list of the ones we are sure of? Sorry if I missed that in this thread.

[comick1]

Hi folks,

Friday night, stress at work, need for catharsis. Maybe it's time to revive this thread.

 

I had some thoughts as I was reviewing so many of the posts.

 

What do you think of this:

 

We vote them INTO or OUT OF 3 categories:

 

1. Calling it a washtone (if it has the wash tone non-inked-line EFFECT regardless of era, method, or process including wash, watercolor, gouache, charcoal, color blends or gradation, etc.) if it's more than 50% of the cover.

 

2. Calling it a partial washtone (using the above criteria--pivotal word being EFFECT) if it's less than 50% of the cover.

 

3. NOT calling it a washtone if it doesn't have the washtone EFFECT.

 

 

Using the criteria above, I can easily see us going with a majority vote for the following that would have a washtone EFFECT (thus qualifying as "washtone" even if it's not technically achieved by that method). These are just EXAMPLES of how I'm imagining the vote would go:

 

A. Washtones: GIC 69, 75, 83, HOM 92, Three Mouseketeers 6, Sea Devils 10, My Greatest Adventure 17, Peter Panda 30

 

 

B. Partial washtones: Secret Hearts 59, Date with Judy , Challengers of the Unknown 30

 

 

C. NOT wash tones: House of Secrets 1, My Greatest Adventure 18 and 20, House of Mystery 70, Star Spangled War Stories 80

 

Again, those are just examples. I think if we vote on those three categories, we don't need to have such a narrow definition of washtone and WE (that's us, baby) get to decide what's in and what's out by the vote.

[Inaflash]

What do you think of this one?

 

[comick1]

That's a good question. Going by the criteria I listed above, I'd say it has a washtone effect, therefore it qualifies as a washtone (even if the comic predates the first official washtone--SSWS 45, m'thinks). Adventure 42 falls under that same category. But I'd defer to the vote once we get our act together to make that happen.

 

Nice copy by the way.

[Jeffro.]

Hi folks,

Friday night, stress at work, need for catharsis. Maybe it's time to revive this thread.

 

I had some thoughts as I was reviewing so many of the posts.

 

What do you think of this:

 

We vote them INTO or OUT OF 3 categories:

 

1. Calling it a washtone (if it has the wash tone non-inked-line EFFECT regardless of era, method, or process including wash, watercolor, gouache, charcoal, color blends or gradation, etc.) if it's more than 50% of the cover.

 

2. Calling it a partial washtone (using the above criteria--pivotal word being EFFECT) if it's less than 50% of the cover.

 

3. NOT calling it a washtone if it doesn't have the washtone EFFECT.

 

 

Using the criteria above, I can easily see us going with a majority vote for the following that would have a washtone EFFECT (thus qualifying as "washtone" even if it's not technically achieved by that method). These are just EXAMPLES of how I'm imagining the vote would go:

 

A. Washtones: GIC 69, 75, 83, HOM 92, Three Mouseketeers 6, Sea Devils 10, My Greatest Adventure 17, Peter Panda 30

 

 

B. Partial washtones: Secret Hearts 59, Date with Judy , Challengers of the Unknown 30

 

 

C. NOT wash tones: House of Secrets 1, My Greatest Adventure 18 and 20, House of Mystery 70, Star Spangled War Stories 80

 

Again, those are just examples. I think if we vote on those three categories, we don't need to have such a narrow definition of washtone and WE (that's us, baby) get to decide what's in and what's out by the vote.

 

Sounds like a good way of doing it Mick

[Stevenrams]

I just saw this thread now. How would you classify this book?

 

[Inaflash]

That's a grey tone cover all the way and one of the best at that. Nice book!

 

Ken

[comick1]

I just saw this thread now. How would you classify this book?

 

 

Regardless of method, it definitely has the EFFECT of a washtone, so I'd vote for it as a washtone. . .but again, I'd defer to a vote based on the criteria above. BTW Ken's right. That's one of the best washtones EVER!! I love that book!

[frozentundraguy]

I just saw this thread now. How would you classify this book?

 

 

Regardless of method, it definitely has the EFFECT of a washtone, so I'd vote for it as a washtone. . .but again, I'd defer to a vote based on the criteria above. BTW Ken's right. That's one of the best washtones EVER!! I love that book!

 

Great book and one of my favorite books of the entire series.

I have a washtone book or two, but nothing that compares to that book!