Why do Anti-Pressers HATE pressing?

[Doc Joe]

2 drop dead gorgeous 9's walk into a bar. One is a virgin, one has been pressed manipulated and otherwise defiled. Do you not prefer the virgin?

 

The defiled one could be a lot more fun.

 

+1 everytime

[40sJohn]

I've seen a lot of stong opinions by people for and against pressing.

 

I am just wondering what is the driving force/forces AGAINST pressing?

 

Is it:

 

A) Pressing could potentially harm the comic

B) Pressing floods the market with "High Grade" comics

C) Pressign is really the same thing as Undisclosed Restoration

D) I dont like seeing books I've sold pressed & flipped for more $ than I sold it for

E) Other...(please elaborate)

 

I think it's Other. I think anti-pressers have a visceral reaction to pressing. They just simply want their books unmanipulated in any way. They want a virgin book.

 

I think it's no different than preferring chocolate to vanilla, or blondes over brunettes. A-D listed above might be the rational arguments that they use to validate their stance, but in the end, the truth is that on a visceral level they just want an unmanipulated book.

 

 

Wish I knew enough about pressing to know how much heat, how much time, how much pressure and what amount of humidity or water is involved. But not knowing these facts, it feels like resto. So I would agree with your description of me as a mostly anti-presser - it feels wrong. Option A would also be my answer to be suspicious of pressing, not necessary a validation, but a pure reason to not like pressing. If I could be convinced the process is not harmful to the comic in the long term, then I might become more neutral to it, but I would still prefer the virgin copy.

 

However, I would also like to think that we would all (pressers and non pressers) prefer a virgin copy of a book as opposed to a pressed copy with all other physical appearance attributes being the same. It just feels (and reason would say it's) more special to know that a comic did not have to be manipulated to be a high grade comic. This would be part of the allure of Pedigree collections, right?

 

As I said earlier, I am mostly an anti-presser. Where do I think pressing would be OK? Spine rolls - I hate them! Press the out of spine rolls I say (if it doesn't severely shorten the life)!

 

 

 

 

 

[kc120us]

Why do Anti-Pressers (like myself) HATE pressing?

 

1. I do not accept that a book that has withstood the ravages of time and ownership and earned its grade through its unrestored and natural state is equivalent to a book that was not in that state for some/much/all of its natural life but was restored to that condition through pressing. Does anybody really believe the latter is as good as the former? If not, aren't you just a slave to the CGC label?

 

2. I do not accept that disclosure is sufficient. First, every book that is pressed is a book that I and many others do not want to own, period. That pool of books which I deem undesirable has gone from very few to probably thousands by now in just a few short years. While I respect the profit motive, a byproduct of the crack-press-resub game is that it leaves the books irrevocably tainted in my eyes - what's done in the name of profit cannot be undone.

 

Second, all these thousands of books have and will change hands many times in the coming years - reliable identification and segregation of pressed books is a fantasy. Pandora's Box has been opened.

 

3. I do think pressing has amplified the greed into the hobby to an unacceptable level. Yes, greed has always been prevalent and so has pressing, but the monetary rewards have never been so great. Never have so many people in this hobby been able to make so much for doing so little and crossing the line a little further has never been more tolerated or profitable as well. I feel the practice has contributed to a dramatic downward slide in ethics in this hobby. Anyone who is clued in these days knows some of the shenanigans that are going on both in plain sight and behind the scenes.

 

Unfortiunately I have to agree with delekkerste.

 

Great post

 

The reason pressing has become increasingly prevalent is CGC's opinion that it iis not restoration and the huge differential in value between the CGC 9.2/9.4/9.6/9.8 grades.

 

Pressing will over time destroy the differential as perceived rarity in CGC blue label grades . High grade collectors who spent substantial amounts on highly graded comics in the past due to rarity in grade will become disillusioned. There are many examples here.

 

I sold by SA collection in 2007 for the above reasons and focused on rare GA mid grade comics (unrestored and restored).

 

 

To this I ask, what about all the uncertified raw books out there? I think we'd agree that they VASTLY outnumber slabbed books. What about them? As time goes on, more and more of them will be certified, swelling the census ranks and diluting the "perceived" rarity. Shouldn't we also rail against everyone who buys HG raw books and certifies them? Where is the outcry there? Surely they do more damage to the illusion of rarity?

[esquirecomics]

Why do Anti-Pressers (like myself) HATE pressing?

 

1. I do not accept that a book that has withstood the ravages of time and ownership and earned its grade through its unrestored and natural state is equivalent to a book that was not in that state for some/much/all of its natural life but was restored to that condition through pressing. Does anybody really believe the latter is as good as the former? If not, aren't you just a slave to the CGC label?

 

2. I do not accept that disclosure is sufficient. First, every book that is pressed is a book that I and many others do not want to own, period. That pool of books which I deem undesirable has gone from very few to probably thousands by now in just a few short years. While I respect the profit motive, a byproduct of the crack-press-resub game is that it leaves the books irrevocably tainted in my eyes - what's done in the name of profit cannot be undone.

 

Second, all these thousands of books have and will change hands many times in the coming years - reliable identification and segregation of pressed books is a fantasy. Pandora's Box has been opened.

 

3. I do think pressing has amplified the greed into the hobby to an unacceptable level. Yes, greed has always been prevalent and so has pressing, but the monetary rewards have never been so great. Never have so many people in this hobby been able to make so much for doing so little and crossing the line a little further has never been more tolerated or profitable as well. I feel the practice has contributed to a dramatic downward slide in ethics in this hobby. Anyone who is clued in these days knows some of the shenanigans that are going on both in plain sight and behind the scenes.

 

#3 really hit it on the head for me. I believe there is a lot of truth in each of Gene's comments, although I don't feel nearly as strongly against the practice itself.

 

I don't hate pressing but I certainly don't favor it either. Nor do I hate pressers though I truly dislike the motives often behind the deed (hence, my agreement with #3). I particularly despise the fact that some people feel the need to press pedigree or otherwise gorgeous vintage GA books, say 9.0 and above, that are 60+ years old and risk damaging, and possibly destroying the book, simply for their own monetary gain.

 

Indeed, because I believe pressing is restoration, though minimal that it is, and I have no objections to restoration I have no objections to pressing per se. In the old days, pre-CGC primarily, pressing was an accepted form of restoration utilized as part of a larger process. That is where I wished it had stayed.

 

Some of those forumites who haven't been on the boards as long as others may find these earlier articles of mine on the topic of interest:

 

The Restoration of the Overstreet Comic Book Price Guide's Definition of Restoration

 

Making The Grade - The Responses Keep Rolling

[trmoore54]

Why do Anti-Pressers (like myself) HATE pressing?

 

1. I do not accept that a book that has withstood the ravages of time and ownership and earned its grade through its unrestored and natural state is equivalent to a book that was not in that state for some/much/all of its natural life but was restored to that condition through pressing. Does anybody really believe the latter is as good as the former? If not, aren't you just a slave to the CGC label?

 

2. I do not accept that disclosure is sufficient. First, every book that is pressed is a book that I and many others do not want to own, period. That pool of books which I deem undesirable has gone from very few to probably thousands by now in just a few short years. While I respect the profit motive, a byproduct of the crack-press-resub game is that it leaves the books irrevocably tainted in my eyes - what's done in the name of profit cannot be undone.

 

Second, all these thousands of books have and will change hands many times in the coming years - reliable identification and segregation of pressed books is a fantasy. Pandora's Box has been opened.

 

3. I do think pressing has amplified the greed into the hobby to an unacceptable level. Yes, greed has always been prevalent and so has pressing, but the monetary rewards have never been so great. Never have so many people in this hobby been able to make so much for doing so little and crossing the line a little further has never been more tolerated or profitable as well. I feel the practice has contributed to a dramatic downward slide in ethics in this hobby. Anyone who is clued in these days knows some of the shenanigans that are going on both in plain sight and behind the scenes.

 

#3 really hit it on the head for me. I believe there is a lot of truth in each of Gene's comments, although I don't feel nearly as strongly against the practice itself.

 

I don't hate pressing but I certainly don't favor it either. Nor do I hate pressers though I truly dislike the motives often behind the deed (hence, my agreement with #3). I particularly despise the fact that some people feel the need to press pedigree or otherwise gorgeous vintage GA books, say 9.0 and above, that are 60+ years old and risk damaging, and possibly destroying the book, simply for their own monetary gain.

 

Indeed, because I believe pressing is restoration, though minimal that it is, and I have no objections to restoration I have no objections to pressing per se. In the old days, pre-CGC primarily, pressing was an accepted form of restoration utilized as part of a larger process. That is where I wished it had stayed.

 

Some of those forumites who haven't been on the boards as long as others may find these earlier articles of mine on the topic of interest:

 

The Restoration of the Overstreet Comic Book Price Guide's Definition of Restoration

 

Making The Grade - The Responses Keep Rolling

 

I wrote this opinion to you when you solicited opinions at the time...never saw my essay included in your follow-up or related articles I guess because I wasn't a known dealer but my opinion remains the same...

 

Pressing (NDP) Debate: Restoration or Not?

 

Is pressing restoration? Pressing, or NDP, that alters (i.e., enhances a comic’s appearance or grade) a comic book by removing detrimental aspects of wear, or mishandling, such as indentations and creasing not breaking color, spine-roll, and other similar deleterious effects, must be considered restoration. If moisture, chemicals or heat are used in the process to chemically alter the nature of the paper to more readily receive the pressing process’ enhancing effects, then by all definition of the terms, this would have be considered restoration and most probably, more severe restoration than if only subjected to a pressing technique. While the long-term effects of pressing appear to be unknown, it could very well be expected that the full NDP process, inclusive of moisture and/or chemical agents and/or heat would increase the ultimate deterioration of the comic book paper.

 

While it can be argued that many forms of storage constitute pressing techniques, I would argue that standard vertical storage (whereby the book housed in a mylar, or similar material, bag with a backing board stands vertically in an archival-type box), under most normal conditions, and no matter how “tightly” the books are pressing together, does not readily improve the book’s appearance by removing, or pressing out, the aforementioned deleterious conditions; more accurately it should be stated that excellent storage protocol will prevent the book(s) from developing additional similar aspects of wear, and maintain their present condition, whatever that might be.

 

I could be wrong, but without the introduction of a moisture or chemical agent and/or heat along with a pressing technique, normal storage will not remove “point-load” type indentations or severe (non-color breaking) bends and dings. Perhaps the most minor non-color breaking bends, such as a rack stress for example, could be flattened out and, in effect, “removed” by the most stringent of storage methods, but again I believe this only applies to the lightest of creasing/depressions.

 

The proposed tier grading of restoration I believe is an excellent movement in the hobby/industry and will ultimately be well-received. For purposes of this aspect of the discussion, I will refer to CGC graded books as the benchmark that has been established in the hobby/industry. It makes sense that, for example, a high grade 9.0 or better book with a 1/32” diameter dot of color touch on the cover being the only detectable aspect of restoration should not share what basically is the same “purple label of death” of a heavily restored book…sure the CGC notes may comment on trimming, tear-seals, pieces added, re-glossing, staples replaced, etc. etc. but until a tiered system comes along we have two, and only two, distinct categories: restored and unrestored.

 

Bottom line, and which has so eloquently been stated in M. X’s article (as well as all others that have contributed), disclosure is the foundation of the hobby/industry. If a book is pressed with, of course, the express intent of improving its condition and that is not disclosed, that is fraudulent by all definitions of the term…regardless of whether or not you believe NDP to be restoration or not. This is more and more critical with the advance and proliferation of internet sales whereby the purchaser does not have the opportunity to peruse the book before purchase…even more critical when it has been encased in a CGC case! Ultimately it is no different than disclosing any other aspect of the comic’s condition that is contributing to its grade, such as a 1/4-inch tear at the bottom edge of page 17 for example. That same proliferation has also obscured the ownership and history of any given book. I as well as other fellow collectors know of proven examples where books have been purchased as restored and resold as unrestored. While this is straying from the point a bit, I merely wish to reinforce the importance of integrity and disclosure as the fundamental necessity in the buying and selling of investment-level collectibles, be they antique furniture or comic books or you name it.

 

Restoration.

 

Most examples of restoration are well-defined and outside general debate. I would like to contribute thoughts regarding the more marginal aspects of restoration

 

I would hold up for examination what I think are some pretty debatable aspects of restoration. The first is removal of deleterious effects as an amateur/owner of the book. I will admit there is a fine line, but I will use a couple of examples to fuel the discussion. The first one is something I’m sure we’ve all experienced, which I will refer to as “added material removal.” Let’s say I was reading a book and the next day I see something, let’s use some type of food as an example, has been imparted onto the cover of the book from one of my fingers. I see that the food is not overly oily, has not created in my opinion an absorbed stain all the way through the cover telegraphing on the interior cover, and that it appears that if I use a method such as a slightly dampened paper towel, I can brush off the food matter. I proceed to do so and lo and behold, I cannot detect any evidence that the food was ever there. I wait a few days and re-check the book and can still see no evidence of stain or otherwise. I would have a tendency to argue that no restoration has occurred. I certainly didn’t add anything to the book. Perhaps this is an issue of timing… should it matter that I set out to immediately remove the material or would it be different if I discovered it 3 years later, remembered it (or not), and removed it successfully?

 

For that matter, I have many books that have moisture-type stains that I have no idea the nature of the cause. These are classified by CGC and by me as well as I think most everybody as an aspect of wear, not restoration. I would argue that the aforementioned example is in the same category (especially if one could detect any hint of a stain or ghost-stain).

 

Another example that I have first-hand experience with is an example of removing, or at least setting out to remove, something that someone has added (i.e., not a part of the original comic) and in this case a grease pencil resale mark, or re-pricing in a used comic book store. When I would first buy these books, I found the grease pencil mark to be very annoying, and I would set out to either scrape it off or erase it. Depending on many circumstances, the removal would be almost unknown to the naked eye, or would leave clear evidence of an erasure mark, and that some type of marking had been removed. Again, I would argue that this is not even amateur restoration but an example of wear…just another example that this is a copy long fallen from the highest grade rankings and has this particular feature contributing to an accumulative level of wear that is relegating a lower grade. In this case, however, I would always disclose this and inform potential buyers for them to decide for themselves whether this should move the book out of the un-restored category and into the restored or qualified category.

 

 

Tom Moore

 

[esquirecomics]

Why do Anti-Pressers (like myself) HATE pressing?

 

1. I do not accept that a book that has withstood the ravages of time and ownership and earned its grade through its unrestored and natural state is equivalent to a book that was not in that state for some/much/all of its natural life but was restored to that condition through pressing. Does anybody really believe the latter is as good as the former? If not, aren't you just a slave to the CGC label?

 

2. I do not accept that disclosure is sufficient. First, every book that is pressed is a book that I and many others do not want to own, period. That pool of books which I deem undesirable has gone from very few to probably thousands by now in just a few short years. While I respect the profit motive, a byproduct of the crack-press-resub game is that it leaves the books irrevocably tainted in my eyes - what's done in the name of profit cannot be undone.

 

Second, all these thousands of books have and will change hands many times in the coming years - reliable identification and segregation of pressed books is a fantasy. Pandora's Box has been opened.

 

3. I do think pressing has amplified the greed into the hobby to an unacceptable level. Yes, greed has always been prevalent and so has pressing, but the monetary rewards have never been so great. Never have so many people in this hobby been able to make so much for doing so little and crossing the line a little further has never been more tolerated or profitable as well. I feel the practice has contributed to a dramatic downward slide in ethics in this hobby. Anyone who is clued in these days knows some of the shenanigans that are going on both in plain sight and behind the scenes.

 

#3 really hit it on the head for me. I believe there is a lot of truth in each of Gene's comments, although I don't feel nearly as strongly against the practice itself.

 

I don't hate pressing but I certainly don't favor it either. Nor do I hate pressers though I truly dislike the motives often behind the deed (hence, my agreement with #3). I particularly despise the fact that some people feel the need to press pedigree or otherwise gorgeous vintage GA books, say 9.0 and above, that are 60+ years old and risk damaging, and possibly destroying the book, simply for their own monetary gain.

 

Indeed, because I believe pressing is restoration, though minimal that it is, and I have no objections to restoration I have no objections to pressing per se. In the old days, pre-CGC primarily, pressing was an accepted form of restoration utilized as part of a larger process. That is where I wished it had stayed.

 

Some of those forumites who haven't been on the boards as long as others may find these earlier articles of mine on the topic of interest:

 

The Restoration of the Overstreet Comic Book Price Guide's Definition of Restoration

 

Making The Grade - The Responses Keep Rolling

 

I wrote this opinion to you when you solicited opinions at the time...never saw my essay included in your follow-up or related articles I guess because I wasn't a known dealer but my opinion remains the same...

 

Pressing (NDP) Debate: Restoration or Not?

 

Is pressing restoration? Pressing, or NDP, that alters (i.e., enhances a comic’s appearance or grade) a comic book by removing detrimental aspects of wear, or mishandling, such as indentations and creasing not breaking color, spine-roll, and other similar deleterious effects, must be considered restoration. If moisture, chemicals or heat are used in the process to chemically alter the nature of the paper to more readily receive the pressing process’ enhancing effects, then by all definition of the terms, this would have be considered restoration and most probably, more severe restoration than if only subjected to a pressing technique. While the long-term effects of pressing appear to be unknown, it could very well be expected that the full NDP process, inclusive of moisture and/or chemical agents and/or heat would increase the ultimate deterioration of the comic book paper.

 

While it can be argued that many forms of storage constitute pressing techniques, I would argue that standard vertical storage (whereby the book housed in a mylar, or similar material, bag with a backing board stands vertically in an archival-type box), under most normal conditions, and no matter how “tightly” the books are pressing together, does not readily improve the book’s appearance by removing, or pressing out, the aforementioned deleterious conditions; more accurately it should be stated that excellent storage protocol will prevent the book(s) from developing additional similar aspects of wear, and maintain their present condition, whatever that might be.

 

I could be wrong, but without the introduction of a moisture or chemical agent and/or heat along with a pressing technique, normal storage will not remove “point-load” type indentations or severe (non-color breaking) bends and dings. Perhaps the most minor non-color breaking bends, such as a rack stress for example, could be flattened out and, in effect, “removed” by the most stringent of storage methods, but again I believe this only applies to the lightest of creasing/depressions.

 

The proposed tier grading of restoration I believe is an excellent movement in the hobby/industry and will ultimately be well-received. For purposes of this aspect of the discussion, I will refer to CGC graded books as the benchmark that has been established in the hobby/industry. It makes sense that, for example, a high grade 9.0 or better book with a 1/32” diameter dot of color touch on the cover being the only detectable aspect of restoration should not share what basically is the same “purple label of death” of a heavily restored book…sure the CGC notes may comment on trimming, tear-seals, pieces added, re-glossing, staples replaced, etc. etc. but until a tiered system comes along we have two, and only two, distinct categories: restored and unrestored.

 

Bottom line, and which has so eloquently been stated in M. X’s article (as well as all others that have contributed), disclosure is the foundation of the hobby/industry. If a book is pressed with, of course, the express intent of improving its condition and that is not disclosed, that is fraudulent by all definitions of the term…regardless of whether or not you believe NDP to be restoration or not. This is more and more critical with the advance and proliferation of internet sales whereby the purchaser does not have the opportunity to peruse the book before purchase…even more critical when it has been encased in a CGC case! Ultimately it is no different than disclosing any other aspect of the comic’s condition that is contributing to its grade, such as a 1/4-inch tear at the bottom edge of page 17 for example. That same proliferation has also obscured the ownership and history of any given book. I as well as other fellow collectors know of proven examples where books have been purchased as restored and resold as unrestored. While this is straying from the point a bit, I merely wish to reinforce the importance of integrity and disclosure as the fundamental necessity in the buying and selling of investment-level collectibles, be they antique furniture or comic books or you name it.

 

Restoration.

 

Most examples of restoration are well-defined and outside general debate. I would like to contribute thoughts regarding the more marginal aspects of restoration

 

I would hold up for examination what I think are some pretty debatable aspects of restoration. The first is removal of deleterious effects as an amateur/owner of the book. I will admit there is a fine line, but I will use a couple of examples to fuel the discussion. The first one is something I’m sure we’ve all experienced, which I will refer to as “added material removal.” Let’s say I was reading a book and the next day I see something, let’s use some type of food as an example, has been imparted onto the cover of the book from one of my fingers. I see that the food is not overly oily, has not created in my opinion an absorbed stain all the way through the cover telegraphing on the interior cover, and that it appears that if I use a method such as a slightly dampened paper towel, I can brush off the food matter. I proceed to do so and lo and behold, I cannot detect any evidence that the food was ever there. I wait a few days and re-check the book and can still see no evidence of stain or otherwise. I would have a tendency to argue that no restoration has occurred. I certainly didn’t add anything to the book. Perhaps this is an issue of timing… should it matter that I set out to immediately remove the material or would it be different if I discovered it 3 years later, remembered it (or not), and removed it successfully?

 

For that matter, I have many books that have moisture-type stains that I have no idea the nature of the cause. These are classified by CGC and by me as well as I think most everybody as an aspect of wear, not restoration. I would argue that the aforementioned example is in the same category (especially if one could detect any hint of a stain or ghost-stain).

 

Another example that I have first-hand experience with is an example of removing, or at least setting out to remove, something that someone has added (i.e., not a part of the original comic) and in this case a grease pencil resale mark, or re-pricing in a used comic book store. When I would first buy these books, I found the grease pencil mark to be very annoying, and I would set out to either scrape it off or erase it. Depending on many circumstances, the removal would be almost unknown to the naked eye, or would leave clear evidence of an erasure mark, and that some type of marking had been removed. Again, I would argue that this is not even amateur restoration but an example of wear…just another example that this is a copy long fallen from the highest grade rankings and has this particular feature contributing to an accumulative level of wear that is relegating a lower grade. In this case, however, I would always disclose this and inform potential buyers for them to decide for themselves whether this should move the book out of the un-restored category and into the restored or qualified category.

 

 

Tom Moore

 

Tom, your comments are a nice contributory piece to the discussion. While I don't recall at what point in time you might have sent me your comments, i.e., before or after I had written my articles (it was 3 years ago), I assure you that I took your comments seriously then as I do now, and the fact that you may not be a dealer, could be a dealer, may one day be a dealer, may be a novice collector or experienced one, is not something that I would have taken into account.

 

Your comments would then, and do now, stand on their strength as written. I do hope I did not offend you at the time, and if I did I do apologize.

[trmoore54]

Why do Anti-Pressers (like myself) HATE pressing?

 

1. I do not accept that a book that has withstood the ravages of time and ownership and earned its grade through its unrestored and natural state is equivalent to a book that was not in that state for some/much/all of its natural life but was restored to that condition through pressing. Does anybody really believe the latter is as good as the former? If not, aren't you just a slave to the CGC label?

 

2. I do not accept that disclosure is sufficient. First, every book that is pressed is a book that I and many others do not want to own, period. That pool of books which I deem undesirable has gone from very few to probably thousands by now in just a few short years. While I respect the profit motive, a byproduct of the crack-press-resub game is that it leaves the books irrevocably tainted in my eyes - what's done in the name of profit cannot be undone.

 

Second, all these thousands of books have and will change hands many times in the coming years - reliable identification and segregation of pressed books is a fantasy. Pandora's Box has been opened.

 

3. I do think pressing has amplified the greed into the hobby to an unacceptable level. Yes, greed has always been prevalent and so has pressing, but the monetary rewards have never been so great. Never have so many people in this hobby been able to make so much for doing so little and crossing the line a little further has never been more tolerated or profitable as well. I feel the practice has contributed to a dramatic downward slide in ethics in this hobby. Anyone who is clued in these days knows some of the shenanigans that are going on both in plain sight and behind the scenes.

 

#3 really hit it on the head for me. I believe there is a lot of truth in each of Gene's comments, although I don't feel nearly as strongly against the practice itself.

 

I don't hate pressing but I certainly don't favor it either. Nor do I hate pressers though I truly dislike the motives often behind the deed (hence, my agreement with #3). I particularly despise the fact that some people feel the need to press pedigree or otherwise gorgeous vintage GA books, say 9.0 and above, that are 60+ years old and risk damaging, and possibly destroying the book, simply for their own monetary gain.

 

Indeed, because I believe pressing is restoration, though minimal that it is, and I have no objections to restoration I have no objections to pressing per se. In the old days, pre-CGC primarily, pressing was an accepted form of restoration utilized as part of a larger process. That is where I wished it had stayed.

 

Some of those forumites who haven't been on the boards as long as others may find these earlier articles of mine on the topic of interest:

 

The Restoration of the Overstreet Comic Book Price Guide's Definition of Restoration

 

Making The Grade - The Responses Keep Rolling

 

I wrote this opinion to you when you solicited opinions at the time...never saw my essay included in your follow-up or related articles I guess because I wasn't a known dealer but my opinion remains the same...

 

Pressing (NDP) Debate: Restoration or Not?

 

Is pressing restoration? Pressing, or NDP, that alters (i.e., enhances a comic’s appearance or grade) a comic book by removing detrimental aspects of wear, or mishandling, such as indentations and creasing not breaking color, spine-roll, and other similar deleterious effects, must be considered restoration. If moisture, chemicals or heat are used in the process to chemically alter the nature of the paper to more readily receive the pressing process’ enhancing effects, then by all definition of the terms, this would have be considered restoration and most probably, more severe restoration than if only subjected to a pressing technique. While the long-term effects of pressing appear to be unknown, it could very well be expected that the full NDP process, inclusive of moisture and/or chemical agents and/or heat would increase the ultimate deterioration of the comic book paper.

 

While it can be argued that many forms of storage constitute pressing techniques, I would argue that standard vertical storage (whereby the book housed in a mylar, or similar material, bag with a backing board stands vertically in an archival-type box), under most normal conditions, and no matter how “tightly” the books are pressing together, does not readily improve the book’s appearance by removing, or pressing out, the aforementioned deleterious conditions; more accurately it should be stated that excellent storage protocol will prevent the book(s) from developing additional similar aspects of wear, and maintain their present condition, whatever that might be.

 

I could be wrong, but without the introduction of a moisture or chemical agent and/or heat along with a pressing technique, normal storage will not remove “point-load” type indentations or severe (non-color breaking) bends and dings. Perhaps the most minor non-color breaking bends, such as a rack stress for example, could be flattened out and, in effect, “removed” by the most stringent of storage methods, but again I believe this only applies to the lightest of creasing/depressions.

 

The proposed tier grading of restoration I believe is an excellent movement in the hobby/industry and will ultimately be well-received. For purposes of this aspect of the discussion, I will refer to CGC graded books as the benchmark that has been established in the hobby/industry. It makes sense that, for example, a high grade 9.0 or better book with a 1/32” diameter dot of color touch on the cover being the only detectable aspect of restoration should not share what basically is the same “purple label of death” of a heavily restored book…sure the CGC notes may comment on trimming, tear-seals, pieces added, re-glossing, staples replaced, etc. etc. but until a tiered system comes along we have two, and only two, distinct categories: restored and unrestored.

 

Bottom line, and which has so eloquently been stated in M. X’s article (as well as all others that have contributed), disclosure is the foundation of the hobby/industry. If a book is pressed with, of course, the express intent of improving its condition and that is not disclosed, that is fraudulent by all definitions of the term…regardless of whether or not you believe NDP to be restoration or not. This is more and more critical with the advance and proliferation of internet sales whereby the purchaser does not have the opportunity to peruse the book before purchase…even more critical when it has been encased in a CGC case! Ultimately it is no different than disclosing any other aspect of the comic’s condition that is contributing to its grade, such as a 1/4-inch tear at the bottom edge of page 17 for example. That same proliferation has also obscured the ownership and history of any given book. I as well as other fellow collectors know of proven examples where books have been purchased as restored and resold as unrestored. While this is straying from the point a bit, I merely wish to reinforce the importance of integrity and disclosure as the fundamental necessity in the buying and selling of investment-level collectibles, be they antique furniture or comic books or you name it.

 

Restoration.

 

Most examples of restoration are well-defined and outside general debate. I would like to contribute thoughts regarding the more marginal aspects of restoration

 

I would hold up for examination what I think are some pretty debatable aspects of restoration. The first is removal of deleterious effects as an amateur/owner of the book. I will admit there is a fine line, but I will use a couple of examples to fuel the discussion. The first one is something I’m sure we’ve all experienced, which I will refer to as “added material removal.” Let’s say I was reading a book and the next day I see something, let’s use some type of food as an example, has been imparted onto the cover of the book from one of my fingers. I see that the food is not overly oily, has not created in my opinion an absorbed stain all the way through the cover telegraphing on the interior cover, and that it appears that if I use a method such as a slightly dampened paper towel, I can brush off the food matter. I proceed to do so and lo and behold, I cannot detect any evidence that the food was ever there. I wait a few days and re-check the book and can still see no evidence of stain or otherwise. I would have a tendency to argue that no restoration has occurred. I certainly didn’t add anything to the book. Perhaps this is an issue of timing… should it matter that I set out to immediately remove the material or would it be different if I discovered it 3 years later, remembered it (or not), and removed it successfully?

 

For that matter, I have many books that have moisture-type stains that I have no idea the nature of the cause. These are classified by CGC and by me as well as I think most everybody as an aspect of wear, not restoration. I would argue that the aforementioned example is in the same category (especially if one could detect any hint of a stain or ghost-stain).

 

Another example that I have first-hand experience with is an example of removing, or at least setting out to remove, something that someone has added (i.e., not a part of the original comic) and in this case a grease pencil resale mark, or re-pricing in a used comic book store. When I would first buy these books, I found the grease pencil mark to be very annoying, and I would set out to either scrape it off or erase it. Depending on many circumstances, the removal would be almost unknown to the naked eye, or would leave clear evidence of an erasure mark, and that some type of marking had been removed. Again, I would argue that this is not even amateur restoration but an example of wear…just another example that this is a copy long fallen from the highest grade rankings and has this particular feature contributing to an accumulative level of wear that is relegating a lower grade. In this case, however, I would always disclose this and inform potential buyers for them to decide for themselves whether this should move the book out of the un-restored category and into the restored or qualified category.

 

 

Tom Moore

 

Tom, your comments are a nice contributory piece to the discussion. While I don't recall at what point in time you might have sent me your comments, i.e., before or after I had written my articles (it was 3 years ago), I assure you that I took your comments seriously then as I do now, and the fact that you may not be a dealer, could be a dealer, may one day be a dealer, may be a novice collector or experienced one, is not something that I would have taken into account.

 

Your comments would then, and do now, stand on their strength as written. I do hope I did not offend you at the time, and if I did I do apologize.

 

Yep...3 years ago is when I wrote and sent this...appreciate the response! (thumbs u

 

t

[slym2none]

 

There is a legitimate argument as to whether pressing is resto. But has anyone ever claimed that trimming isn't?

 

Trimming is NOT restoration.

 

It is destruction.

 

 

 

-slym

[awe4one]

Having said all of that. I still believe that the damage from a well done professional pressing, is nothing to worry about. The pressed book will outlive all of us, if nothing else damages it except the pressing. The professional and well done pressing damage is negligible..

 

I disagree. Regardless whether pressing harms the comic, and it pretty clear it does, then why the dissent concerning the opposition to the practice?

 

We in this hobby are very anal about protecting our comics. We put boards behind them. We place them in bags. We even spend the cash for mylars. Hell...some people even put them in climate controlled rooms. All in the pursuit to preserve our comics.

 

Yet when you discuss pressing it's OK to add heat and moisture to the comics. Things that we were protecting comics against because we knew that heat and moisture were BAD for comics. That's a conundrum and hard to comprehend when talking about pressing comics....

 

You can talk about "no damage", "little damage", whatever, but the fact is the comics are being artifically manipulated. The comics are not what they were before.

 

And to imply collectors are on the hook to ask if this procedure has been been done is disingenuous . They didn't manipulated the comic. The seller did or they know it happened...

[pickycollector]

I've seen a lot of stong opinions by people for and against pressing.

 

I am just wondering what is the driving force/forces AGAINST pressing?

 

Is it:

 

A) Pressing could potentially harm the comic

B) Pressing floods the market with "High Grade" comics

C) Pressign is really the same thing as Undisclosed Restoration

D) I dont like seeing books I've sold pressed & flipped for more $ than I sold it for

E) Other...(please elaborate)

 

I think the reverse question would be also very interesting to ask:

 

I am just wondering what is the driving force/forces FOR pressing?

 

Is it:

 

A) Pressing can potentially lenghten the lifetime of a comic

B) Pressing can remove some defects on a comic

C) Pressing is not considered as restoration by CGC and pressed books receive a blue label

D) Pressing allow the seller to make a quick and huge profit on the altered book

E) Other...(please elaborate)

 

Some sub-questions should arise like:

 

Would D) be possible without C) ?

 

As a matter of fact, I should rather ask:

 

Would pressing be as popular as it is today without C) ?

 

Also:

 

What is the percentage of the pressed books that are kept raw (for the collector) vs the pressed books that are slabbed and immediately re-sold (for the speculator) ?

 

 

[kc120us]

What is the percentage of the pressed books that are kept raw (for the collector) vs the pressed books that are slabbed and immediately re-sold (for the speculator) ?

 

 

This is an interesting question. Are there HG books that are bought raw, pressed and then kept raw? If so, then what is the percentage of pressed raw books? I would guess it would be a small percentage. If not, then what is the big deal? If you detest pressed books, stick with raw since they vastly outnumber slabbed books and are less likely to be pressed.

[joe_collector]

This is an interesting question. Are there HG books that are bought raw, pressed and then kept raw?

 

These days, I sincerely doubt it. In the past, pressing was used on select high-value books with easily improvable defects, but today, it's purely a CGC game.

 

The only raw & pressed books I would imagine seeing are the mistakes.

[kc120us]

This is an interesting question. Are there HG books that are bought raw, pressed and then kept raw?

 

These days, I sincerely doubt it. In the past, pressing was used on select high-value books with easily improvable defects, but today, it's purely a CGC game.

 

The only raw & pressed books I would imagine seeing are the mistakes.

And that is why I don't get the hysteria. If you so strongly hate pressing, stick to raw books. Leave the "CGC game" to those that enjoy it. There are plenty of books for everyone to play with.

[herc2000]

I can understand why someone might want their vg Superman which has a rolled spine.

 

I can now understand why someone would want to get their NM Spider-man pressed to a 9.6, firstly big price increase and secondly that little corner on the slab where it says 9.6 is just so much more prettier than that of a 9.4!

 

Money is all that it is, and if you say that it's not then go and buy a real 9.6 instead on manipulating the 9.4 comic to look better than what it has been for the past 30 years or so of it's existence!

 

The only problem you have now is, if you don't press it then somebody else will :-(

 

herc

[ChasingKingKirby]

I'm not a huge advocate of pressing, but I've learned to accept that it is part of our hobby, for better or worse, were stuck with it. I do have serious misgivings about the high-grade market, but there is absolutely nothing I can do about it. I do think it's petty to resort to name calling of the guys who do press and DISCLOSE, but again, not a helluva a lot I can do about that either. So I guess if I had to choose one, it would be the effect on the high-grade market, that could turn out very poorly for the hobby. As to the rest, I'll get rolled spines on my books pressed out every time, nor do I care if someone else does the same.

[joe_collector]

And that is why I don't get the hysteria. If you so strongly hate pressing, stick to raw books.

 

I get the hysteria and I buy mostly raw comics.

 

FACT: As pressing increases the high-grade CGC Census count, values will drop on the majority of books.

 

FACT: A lot of speculators and collectors will lose a lot of money, and this has already been happening on the majority of CGC comics out there right now.

 

FACT: Pressers will continue to mine the raw fields, as it makes them money, without any regard to the health of the hobby or the funny book portfolios of many CGC forum members.

 

I've come to regard pressing as a necessary evil, and although my personal collection will take a serious financial hit, I never bought these for resale anyway and I will welcome the inevitable.

[kc120us]

And that is why I don't get the hysteria. If you so strongly hate pressing, stick to raw books.

 

I get the hysteria and I buy mostly raw comics.

 

FACT: As pressing increases the high-grade CGC Census count, values will drop on the majority of books.

 

FACT: A lot of speculators and collectors will lose a lot of money, and this has already been happening on the majority of CGC comics out there right now.

 

FACT: Pressers will continue to mine the raw fields, as it makes them money, without any regard to the health of the hobby or the funny book portfolios of many CGC forum members.

 

I've come to regard pressing as a necessary evil, and although my personal collection will take a serious financial hit, I never bought these for resale anyway and I will welcome the inevitable.

 

You could also argue that the continued ceritification of HG raw books without pressing will swell the Census ranks and diminish individual value. Yet no one is rallying against this. Even if pressing were to stop completely, the raw submissions would continue and the financial ruin you speak of will still be possible. IMO, the only true solution to this problem is to increase the demand side of the equation. Yet that is not talked about nearly as much as pressing.

[Flash105]

Why- Because it runs their post count up in all the pressing threads discussing this sh-t ad nasuem for the 1000th time.

 

For the love of God, if I see one more pressing thread on these boards I am going to put a gun to my head.

[joe_collector]

You could also argue that the continued ceritification of HG raw books without pressing will swell the Census ranks and diminish individual value. Yet no one is rallying against this.

 

That's because the hobby was humming along just fine long before CGC was even a inkling in the dealer coalition's eye. OS assigned prices based on existing supplies, and since there was no CGC to assign higher-than NM micro-grades, pressing was not rampant.

 

Under today's scenario, the available supply of high-grade books has been artificially increased from pre-CGC levels, and there seems to be no end to Census growth. Certainly it would grow anyway, but pressing has increased this at an artificially high level.

 

On CGC's side, they have caused the resto-dealers to halt much of their work, at least where CGC books are concerned, but this is not enough to counteract the rampant pressers.

 

 

[kc120us]

Do you think the values of these books were more natural prior to CGC, inflated artifically due to a "perceived" rarity after CGC came into business, and are now returning to a more natural equilibrium?