Why do Anti-Pressers HATE pressing?

[paperheart]

Pressing isn't restoration because CGC (and other grading companies) says its not. They are the grading experts as recognized by the hobby and they make the rules. It really is as simple as that.

 

You want pressing to be restoration, convince them otherwise.

 

For 30-odd years, the industry bible (Overstreet) included pressing in their list of restorative processes.

 

They only changed their wording in around 2006 in the face of pressure from CGC and dealers who had a vested interest in the turnabout.

 

And CGC don't make THE rules. They make THEIR rules and they have taken the convenient route to discount pressing as restoration due to an inability to detect it with 100% accuracy. the almighty dollar

[1Cool]

So if time is a major core component to determine if restoration has happened what is the cut off time? 1 hour? a week? 3 years? what?

 

Kav - this is going nowhere. You are making absolutely no sense. What is this "cut off time for restoration" coming from? I have made the points I wanted to make. But at this point it is obvious you are just intentionally coming up with irrelevant scenarios for what? A protracted discussion going nowhere?

 

I think I can answer that for you. He joined these forums 2 months AFTER me, and has made nearly 34000 more posts than I.

It really is time he left the house

 

Just so I don't confuse what you are implying, are you suggesting that another board member not post anymore and leave the site?

 

[jsilverjanet]

Money it's a gas

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

Money it's a gas

 

 

Grab that press with both hands and make a stash

[BlowUpTheMoon]

That was this thread.

 

Here's the CBCA google doc

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-NJflbiZN6QYjJjYjY0NmYtYjI0Mi00NmY3LTg1ODEtYzNjNjVkNzMyZDdi/view

 

[Paul © ® ⚽️💙™]

So if time is a major core component to determine if restoration has happened what is the cut off time? 1 hour? a week? 3 years? what?

 

Kav - this is going nowhere. You are making absolutely no sense. What is this "cut off time for restoration" coming from? I have made the points I wanted to make. But at this point it is obvious you are just intentionally coming up with irrelevant scenarios for what? A protracted discussion going nowhere?

 

I think I can answer that for you. He joined these forums 2 months AFTER me, and has made nearly 34000 more posts than I.

It really is time he left the house

 

Just so I don't confuse what you are implying, are you suggesting that another board member not post anymore and leave the site?

 

 

[pickycollector]

Pressing isn't restoration because CGC (and other grading companies) says its not. They are the grading experts as recognized by the hobby and they make the rules. It really is as simple as that.

 

You want pressing to be restoration, convince them otherwise.

 

CGC does not consider pressing restoration because if it was considered restoration, they'd have to be able to detect it with accuracy.

 

Since pressing is technically 'invisible' and can't be accurately detected with any real accuracy, they opted to not include it under the restoration banner.

You could say the same with micro-trimming then: if it was considered restoration, they'd have to be able to detect it with accuracy. So micro-trimming is not restoration because they have failed to detect it with accuracy ?

 

Pressers want people to believe that pressing is undetectable but that is so untrue. I think pressing is much easier to detect than people think or at the very least is not as impossible as pressers want us to believe it is and IMHO less difficult to detect than micro-trimming.

 

Sure pressing may be difficult to detect if the book remains in a CGC holder but crack it or look at a raw pressed book and you will see that something is wrong. Book smashed like a pancake, cover so thin that it does not look natural, shrinked cover, "wet" look, etc. And there even examples of books that are still in CGC holders and look obviously pressed, read the old threads about the Costanza effect, for example.

 

I have seen raw pressed books by some considered as among the best pressers and I was able to see a difference. I bought raw books from you Roy and I was able to see that they were pressed. Nevertheless, I have little experience with pressing so how can I detect it then ?

 

The only books that I must confess that I was unable to see a difference before or after pressing are Giant-Size books or Square bound books (like Silver Surfer 1-7 for example) but maybe that is just me.

 

[SquareChaos]

Pressing isn't restoration because CGC (and other grading companies) says its not. They are the grading experts as recognized by the hobby and they make the rules. It really is as simple as that.

 

You want pressing to be restoration, convince them otherwise.

 

CGC does not consider pressing restoration because if it was considered restoration, they'd have to be able to detect it with accuracy.

 

Since pressing is technically 'invisible' and can't be accurately detected with any real accuracy, they opted to not include it under the restoration banner.

You could say the same with micro-trimming then: if it was considered restoration, they'd have to be able to detect it with accuracy. So micro-trimming is not restoration because they have failed to detect it with accuracy ?

 

Pressers want people to believe that pressing is undetectable but that is so untrue. I think pressing is much easier to detect than people think or at the very least is not as impossible as pressers want us to believe it is and IMHO less difficult to detect than micro-trimming.

 

Sure pressing may be difficult to detect if the book remains in a CGC holder but crack it or look at a raw pressed book and you will see that something is wrong. Book smashed like a pancake, cover so thin that it does not look natural, shrinked cover, "wet" look, etc. And there even examples of books that are still in CGC holders and look obviously pressed, read the old threads about the Costanza effect, for example.

 

I have seen raw pressed books by some considered as among the best pressers and I was able to see a difference. I bought raw books from you Roy and I was able to see that they were pressed. Nevertheless, I have little experience with pressing so how can I detect it then ?

 

The only books that I must confess that I was unable to see a difference before or after pressing are Giant-Size books or Square bound books (like Silver Surfer 1-7 for example) but maybe that is just me.

 

I've had a few books out of a slab that I knew were pressed, and the examples you give were just not visible to me. If an amateur presses a book I think we can all tell.

 

 

And in general, people seem to just want to argue with each other in this thread. No one is going to convince anyone else to change their stance on anything on this one.

[pickycollector]

It is interesting to see also how CGC stance about pressing and cleaning has changed over the years. See the book in this old post:

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=278715&Number=6174711#Post6174711

 

Clean and pressed and .... restored ?

[joeypost]

It is interesting to see also how CGC stance about pressing and cleaning has changed over the years. See the book in this old post:

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=278715&Number=6174711#Post6174711

 

Clean and pressed and .... restored ?

 

The cover cleaning is what garnered the restored label. The pressing was not the cause, but was noted since a water or solvent washed book needs a pressing afterwards.

[jsilverjanet]

It is interesting to see also how CGC stance about pressing and cleaning has changed over the years. See the book in this old post:

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=278715&Number=6174711#Post6174711

 

Clean and pressed and .... restored ?

 

Did you read the entire thread?

 

 

It's interesting to see the same people on the same sides and those with an ax to grind with Cgc still doing their thing.

 

For as much as things change a lot still stays the same

[pickycollector]

And in general, people seem to just want to argue with each other in this thread. No one is going to convince anyone else to change their stance on anything on this one.

I agree with you on this.

 

It has been a while since we had a pressing thread and it seems that people missed the action (including me )

 

However, when you re-read the old threads, you realize nothing new has been added and that the same arguments from both sides are used and re-used again and again and that most stances have not changed ... Yes, it also includes me, and I just realized that when I read what I did post years ago...

[VintageComics]

Pressing isn't restoration because CGC (and other grading companies) says its not. They are the grading experts as recognized by the hobby and they make the rules. It really is as simple as that.

 

You want pressing to be restoration, convince them otherwise.

 

For 30-odd years, the industry bible (Overstreet) included pressing in their list of restorative processes.

 

They only changed their wording in around 2006 in the face of pressure from CGC and dealers who had a vested interest in the turnabout.

 

And CGC don't make THE rules. They make THEIR rules and they have taken the convenient route to discount pressing as restoration due to an inability to detect it with 100% accuracy.

 

You may very well be correct about Overstreet, but that too is immaterial. Using semantics of "THE" or "THEIR" in reference to the rules doesn't change the simple fact that grading company standards are what the industry uses to judge restoration. If that wasn't the case, this argument (in this very thread) would't exist.

 

How, why, when or whatever about the detection process or the restoration itself is also immaterial. All of the arguments against pressing are only good if someone can convince the "powers that be" to change their policy. Yes, it may be complicated and include technology or an approach that doesn't exist en masse yet (or something else) - but it doesn't change the simple truth...

 

Pressing is not restoration because the grading companies at current say so.

 

If you don't like it, take it up with them.

 

You are speaking from the position of the digital world, mainly driven by younger collectors (and dealers). In the digital world, the 'powers that be' look to be CGC.

 

But there is a much larger component of people who have been collecting since before the digital / CGC / encapsulation world every came to be, and they also have a set of standards that often contradict what CGC wants.

 

It's just that as CGC (and pressing) have grown in popularity they have quieted out those older voices over the years. It's change.

 

I agree with F_T that it didn't used to be this way. It was about 10 years ago that the 'new paradigm' began to form and has grown into being the new norm or the 'popular view' ever since.

 

As far as 'hate' from either side, 10 years ago this was a pretty heated topic from both sides. People would argue, fight, threaten each other, get strikes, troll each other. Sides were made and people became entrenched. At one point it was a constant war zone on here. Thankfully things have cooled.

 

I don't have any hate. I personally do feel for those who only want unpressed books as they are free to collect what they like, but the reality is that if a book grades out as a 9.2 unpressed, and it comes to market and people know it's going to grade as a 9.4/9.6 after pressing, then that book is going to sell for more than 9.2 money.

 

Part of changes in rules and new paradigms is that everyone needs to adapt to them.

 

For example, if you see a book go for a record price on GPA, and it sits as an outlier, you need to factor in that it could be a potentially upgradeable book and not an actual new 'GPA high' for that grade. That particular sale should not be setting a trend for lesser copies. And yet I've seen that multiple times where a book I feel has a shot at upgrade (or even worse, I know it actually has upgraded and come back to market) sell for a new all time high, and the general public takes that new high as an actual high for the grade and it starts a new price movement.

 

Another facet of adapting to the new paradigm is if collectors want to win unpressed books at auction, since it will likely sell at a premium, they may have to adjust their spending to pay the 'unpressed premium' to own that particular book. In my opinion, it should be no different than paying extra to own a Pedigree or a copy that is nicer than the assigned grade, or just a copy that looks too good for the grade. In both of those instances, those books sell for more money than the average copy.

 

Sure it's going to sound different and unorthodox compared to how things were done in the past, but so also was paying 5 times guide for Church copies back when they came out 40 years ago. And yet now it's become the norm that a Church copy (or something comparable) will generally fetch a multiple of whatever it's contemporary surrounding issues go for. It's become the new paradigm.

 

I would look at an unpressed bok the way I might look at a comic that comes from a desirable Pedigree but it's not readily apparent from the auction description that there is something special about the book. And yet, for those who do their homework, or know how to detect those hidden qualities, some bidders will recognize something special about the book. In this case, the item just happens to be a comic book that is likely going to press into the next assigned grade (or two - you get the picture).

 

If you find hidden value in it, and others do as well, it's going to draw the price of the item up but that is the way it's always been in comics. The nicer the book, the more people will drive the price up.

 

Sorry that was long winded but I hope it makes sense.

[namisgr]

But some things have changed since this thread was started.

 

The proportion of high grade vintage comics that have been pressed has increased markedly (and will continue to do so going forward even more), whereas the proportion of unpressed and unmanipulated high grade has declined. This makes it much harder today to find unpressed high grade vintage books, for those collectors like me who prefer them, than when this thread was started, and even more so since CGC opened for business.

 

The second change is in the marketplace. At least a few deep-pocketed collectors who prefer their comics unpressed have left the hobby altogether or scaled back dramatically. The census has become overgrown with pressed books. Issues that are not scarce to find in nice shape have, for the most part, declined in value, owing partly to the increased supply emanating from the effects of pressing.

 

The third change is the exponential increase in the number of books that have now been pressed multiple times. The more times a comic is pressed, the less likely it is to still be indistinguishable from an unpressed copy and more likely it is to have features not commonly found in unpressed books in 'nature'. This will only increase going forward, as more examples emerge of books receiving higher grades the second time they've been pressed compared with after the first time. Just one example with which I'm familiar is my old copy of JIM #93, which I bought in the days before CGC, and had slabbed as a 9.2 grade. After I sold it (as part of a liquidation of high grade slabbed SA), it showed up on the website of a dealer known to press anything and everything as a 9.4. Later, it made its way into a 9.6 slab, but was badly distorted from its original state by some nasty cover shrinkage and twisting (the 'Costanza effect'). Unnatural defects are happening all too often these days with multiple pressings, despite CGC's misguided policy of ignoring these pressing-induced defects.

[MustEatBrains]

Kudos to the noob who resurrected this thread. We took the bait hook line and sinker.

[VintageComics]

Pressing isn't restoration because CGC (and other grading companies) says its not. They are the grading experts as recognized by the hobby and they make the rules. It really is as simple as that.

 

You want pressing to be restoration, convince them otherwise.

 

CGC does not consider pressing restoration because if it was considered restoration, they'd have to be able to detect it with accuracy.

 

Since pressing is technically 'invisible' and can't be accurately detected with any real accuracy, they opted to not include it under the restoration banner.

You could say the same with micro-trimming then: if it was considered restoration, they'd have to be able to detect it with accuracy. So micro-trimming is not restoration because they have failed to detect it with accuracy ?

 

Patrick. the microtimming argument is not comparable IMO. This also has been discussed in circular arguments for over a decade, ever since the Ewert fiasco.

 

First off, I don't think anyone equates trimming a page to applying pressure.

 

Second, nearly everyone agrees that they want all trimming detected.

 

Third, making an example of a mistake that CGC made in missing some trim jobs (which were well executed with the intention of slipping them through CGC) is entirely different than a benign process that is undetectable on most books. Yes, you might be able to detect it on some books but it can't be detected with accuracy on the majority of books and therein is the main problem.

 

a) Nobody would continue to pay for a service whereby CGC can only detect something a portion of the time. It would destroy their credibility.

b) They did eventually figure out micro trimming and they do detect it the majority of the time.

 

I just don't see the micro trim argument as a valid one, whether it's about it being able to be detected or about it being a slippery slope and eventually being accepted the way some people have argued in the past.

 

Pressers want people to believe that pressing is undetectable but that is so untrue. I think pressing is much easier to detect than people think or at the very least is not as impossible as pressers want us to believe it is and IMHO less difficult to detect than micro-trimming.

 

Sure pressing may be difficult to detect if the book remains in a CGC holder but crack it or look at a raw pressed book and you will see that something is wrong. Book smashed like a pancake, cover so thin that it does not look natural, shrinked cover, "wet" look, etc. And there even examples of books that are still in CGC holders and look obviously pressed, read the old threads about the Costanza effect, for example.

 

I have seen raw pressed books by some considered as among the best pressers and I was able to see a difference. I bought raw books from you Roy and I was able to see that they were pressed. Nevertheless, I have little experience with pressing so how can I detect it then ?

 

The only books that I must confess that I was unable to see a difference before or after pressing are Giant-Size books or Square bound books (like Silver Surfer 1-7 for example) but maybe that is just me.

 

The main point is how accurately it can be detected. Sure, some books can be detected some of the time, but If it can't be consistently detected with a large degree of accuracy all the time, nobody is going to commit to trying to detect it. Not CGC, not Voldemart, not even PGX. It would be business suicide.

 

And the larger the grade on the top right corner, the tougher it would be to detect as they have less over all defects removed to detect.

 

And while CGC is in the business of making us feel better about our collections by providing grading and restoration reassurance, they can only do so on topics that they are able to be consistent with. It's just not a realistic business position for them to put themselves in IMO.

 

[Jeffro.]

 

I've had a few books out of a slab that I knew were pressed, and the examples you give were just not visible to me. If an amateur presses a book I think we can all tell.

 

 

How did you know? Was their visible evidence, such as waffling?

[SquareChaos]

 

I've had a few books out of a slab that I knew were pressed, and the examples you give were just not visible to me. If an amateur presses a book I think we can all tell.

 

 

How did you know? Was their visible evidence, such as waffling?

 

I poorly phrased that - what I mean is I've had a few raw books (not cracked books) that I assume were poorly pressed. You can never know with any certainty unless you were there when whatever was done was done, but these books were pancaked and the pages of many were brittle with an odd texture.

 

[Sqeggs]

 

I've had a few books out of a slab that I knew were pressed, and the examples you give were just not visible to me. If an amateur presses a book I think we can all tell.

 

 

How did you know? Was their visible evidence, such as waffling?

 

I poorly phrased that - what I mean is I've had a few raw books (not cracked books) that I assume were poorly pressed. You can never know with any certainty unless you were there when whatever was done was done, but these books were pancaked and the pages of many were brittle with an odd texture.

 

That ain't good!

[SquareChaos]

 

I've had a few books out of a slab that I knew were pressed, and the examples you give were just not visible to me. If an amateur presses a book I think we can all tell.

 

 

How did you know? Was their visible evidence, such as waffling?

 

I poorly phrased that - what I mean is I've had a few raw books (not cracked books) that I assume were poorly pressed. You can never know with any certainty unless you were there when whatever was done was done, but these books were pancaked and the pages of many were brittle with an odd texture.

 

That ain't good!

 

Agreed.

 

And I think it's the point that proves the rule - for me personally. When an amateur does it, they can ruin the book, when a pro does it I can't tell it happened. Until that changes there isn't much to talk about here. If something is restoration and you can't detect it, is it restoration? That's the core of it.