Clean, press, resubmit, flip...clean, press, resubmit, flip...

[PovertyRow]

Debatable

 

Well - I am gonna re-post my comparison between the Church flat books and a pressed book. I think the point is well taken (even if I did make it myself).

 

"There IS a distinct distinction between the Mile Highs being pressed and pressing a "regular" book. Those Mile Highs in their tall stacks basically never saw handling. Their condition was MAINTAINED due to storage conditions. "Regular" books, during the course of handling, will get bent, wrinkled, wavy etc. Their condition is ALTERED by pressing to more closely reflect their pre-handled days."

 

Does that make sense?

 

PS - I orginally felt the same - that pressing a book was like the Mile Highs in their tall stacks - until this "revelation" came to me.

[fantastic_four]

"There IS a distinct distinction between the Mile Highs being pressed and pressing a "regular" book. Those Mile Highs in their tall stacks basically never saw handling. Their condition was MAINTAINED due to storage conditions. "Regular" books, during the course of handling, will get bent, wrinkled, wavy etc. Their condition is ALTERED by pressing to more closely reflect their pre-handled days."

 

So if you stick a "regular" book that is bent, wrinkled, wavy, etc, at the bottom of a 6-foot Church pile...is the pressure restoration, or isn't it?

 

I don't think that it is because I don't think that 6-foot stack will do much for those bends, wrinkles, or waves. Isn't the most effective pressing applied to specific areas of a book? Ideally the cover is off and the pressure is applied directly to the interior and exterior sides of the cover. I'm not really sure of this because I haven't practiced pressing much...the most I've done so far is stick books with spine rolls under some really heavy books for a few days. The spine roll was minimized, but most of the creases stayed and I assumed the reason was because more localized, direct pressure was required to the cover only and not to the cover with the interior behind it.

[PovertyRow]

So if you stick a "regular" book that is bent, wrinkled, wavy, etc, at the bottom of a 6-foot Church pile...is the pressure restoration, or isn't it?

 

I would say it is for that one bit of text in my post - "Their condition is ALTERED by pressing to more closely reflect their pre-handled days."

 

A book press is part of a restorer's arsenal and the whole book will be subject to a controlled pressing, no heat, just presure. The idea of stacking books tightly in a box may be a grey area but I honestly do not believe it will do much. In fact, a really tight stacking may just as often cause more harm, because it is going to be impossible to detect exactly how each book is lying within the stack and spine shifting could easily result.

[PovertyRow]

Oh, and FF - I do want to add something to all this. The concept of pressing is probably the greatest controversy as regards restoration. But I believe the reason why is that the term "restoration" is, as I have said before, a hot button that sets a wheel clicking in the brain. So what is pressing is called "restoration"? It is what it is - the book has been subject to pressure or to heat and pressure to flatten it and make it look better. We can say it IS restoration or we can say it is NOT restoration. Either way, the book has been altered, with intent, to improve the appearance. It is the extreme views that the term "restoration" evokes that leads to these "it is a grey area" type of discussion.

 

I hope we are approaching the time that some folks will settle back and face the restoration issue without past memories of being ripped off by books that turned out to be restored. Just to simply examine what has been done to the book and make a determination of its desireability without having the term "restored" kick up the adrenalin.

[fantastic_four]

We can say it IS restoration or we can say it is NOT restoration. Either way, the book has been altered, with intent, to improve the appearance.

 

That's very Zen of you...it is what it is. However, for the sake of concise communication, "restoration" is more succinct than "altered with intent to improve the appearance." There's no need to avoid the term as a means of avoiding the controversy which surrounds it...the controversy will remain no matter what we call it. I'd agree to wipe the term out and leave its negativity behind us all if we could also wipe out at the same time the greedy people who color touch and trim and don't disclose it who gave restoration bad connotations to begin with.

[PovertyRow]

We can say it IS restoration or we can say it is NOT restoration. Either way, the book has been altered, with intent, to improve the appearance.

 

That's very Zen of you...it is what it is. However, for the sake of concise communication, "restoration" is more succinct than "altered with intent to improve the appearance." There's no need to avoid the term as a means of avoiding the controversy which surrounds it...the controversy will remain no matter what we call it.

 

I'm certainly not saying to ditch the term. I'm saying to not make it a knee-jerk. And to just understand what that particular restoration is, without the ghosts of restorations past gloaming - glooming - whatever. Basically, when I said "it is what it is" I meant that some people prefer to not call it restoration - but it is what it is - restoration.

[fantastic_four]

Hey do you still use your stereoscope? Ever used it at maximum magnification to look at a pressed-out bend to see if any evidence of the bend remains?

 

What's the max of your scope again--40x? I still haven't gotten around to getting one yet...still thinking about the zoom/boom ones with a lens to go up to 80x or even 120x. Doesn't that small, raised stage get on your nerves with comics since you have to keep moving them back and forth under the lens, taking too much care that the book doesn't bend inappropriately on the stage?

[PovertyRow]

I have used it on occasion but not so much as the books I've been getting have been few and far between now - waiting for Wondercon.

 

Yes, it is 20x and 40x. Use the overhead light and lat the book on a backing board first to avoid bending.

 

I will eventually remove the head from the arm and get one of those "swing arms" that clamp to the table. Then I can move the scope over the book rather than the book under the scope!

 

As far as looking for a pressed out bend - haven't done that yet. It IS fun to look at spines though! And staples.

[Timely]

So if you stick a "regular" book that is bent, wrinkled, wavy, etc, at the bottom of a 6-foot Church pile...is the pressure restoration, or isn't it?

 

I would say it is for that one bit of text in my post - "Their condition is ALTERED by pressing to more closely reflect their pre-handled days."

 

If a book that was VF due to a wave in the book and it's pressed out (like the 6 foot MH stacks were) and now it is NM, how would you ever know? If it is done correctly it cannot be seen.

 

You would not know.

 

Like I said in another thread. If you leave a comic on the table for months and it collects dirt, dust and other things on the cover and you dust off your comic, is it restored? After all..it's just been cleaned!

 

Again, you would not know.

 

Timely

[PovertyRow]

If a book that was VF due to a wave in the book and it's pressed out (like the 6 foot MH stacks were) and now it is NM, how would you ever know? If it is done correctly it cannot be seen.

 

I don't understand how the concept of "how would you ever know" could make something NOT restoration. Are you saying any process that is applied to the book and is not detectable (at least by current detection standards) would not fall under restoration? That is a reflection of how restoration got such a bad rep in the first place.

 

And the Mile High books were NOT "pressed out. They never had waves in the first place to reverse.

 

Like I said in another thread. If you leave a comic on the table for months and it collects dirt, dust and other things on the cover and you dust off your comic, is it restored? After all..it's just been cleaned!

 

You obviously didn't see my response to that. "Simply blowing off the dust is only going to remove any items that have not integrated themselves with the book. Hence it is NOT restoration to blow off dust, as the dust has not actually impacted the book, unlike erasing a pencil mark, where the pencil's graphite actually HAS impacted the paper."

 

 

[sfilosa]

don't understand how the concept of "how would you ever know" could make something NOT restoration. Are you saying any process that is applied to the book and is not detectable (at least by current detection standards) would not fall under restoration? That is a reflection of how restoration got such a bad rep in the first place.

 

Wrong!!!!

 

The reason RESTORATION has such a bad reputation is that everyone acknowledges that a VF book restored is not worth as much as a VF unrestored. Yet, many buyers have been sold restored books without any knowledge of the restoration. Therefore they have in most cases GROSSLY OVERPAID for the book.

 

Said another way, would RESTORATION have such a bad reputation if dealers stated that they would pay 90% of full market value for a Restore book? The answer would be NO.

 

 

[PovertyRow]

don't understand how the concept of "how would you ever know" could make something NOT restoration. Are you saying any process that is applied to the book and is not detectable (at least by current detection standards) would not fall under restoration? That is a reflection of how restoration got such a bad rep in the first place.

 

Wrong!!!!

 

The reason RESTORATION has such a bad reputation is that everyone acknowledges that a VF book restored is not worth as much as a VF unrestored. Yet, many buyers have been sold restored books without any knowledge of the restoration. Therefore they have in most cases GROSSLY OVERPAID for the book.

 

Said another way, would RESTORATION have such a bad reputation if dealers stated that they would pay 90% of full market value for a Restore book? The answer would be NO.

 

 

It is you who are wrong, my friend.

 

The reason Restoration has such a low price is that everyone acknowledges that a restored VF is not worth as much as an untrestored VF. The same is true in almost all collectible areas - a restored item is not worth as much as unrestored in similar condition. The reason restoration has a bad reputation is that, as you say, many buyers have been sold restored books without any knowledge of the restoration. My words that you cited above were intended to convey that the idea of "if you cannot detect it it should not be considered restoration" is morally wrong and reminds me of dealers etc making slight resto changes that, in their mind, the customer could not detect.

 

[garthgantu]

[

The reason restoration has a bad reputation is that, as you say, many buyers have been sold restored books without any knowledge of the restoration.

 

Hate to split hairs here, but I'm on the receiving end of this kind of "enlightenment" every day on these boards, so here goes:

If someone buys a restored book advertised as unrestored, shouldn't the DEALER who sold him/her the book be the one who's reputation suffers? The book itself didn't do anything wrong. And if restored books sold for 90% of unrestored guide, dealers wouldn't have to pass them off as unrestored in the first place. So the problem is rooted deeper than you suggest. I suspect that restoration is viewed negatively by comic book collectors primarily because they don't understand it, and certainly don't understand the fine points and gradations of restoration. That's why a book with "single drop of color touch on back cover" in a PLOD will sell for a fraction of the same book in a Blue label. People don't even bother to discern between levels of resto in most cases.

 

Restoration has a bad rep because of ignorance on the part of the buyer/collector/dealer community. If restoration was better understood, and perhaps divided more clearly into sub-categories (Amateur vs. Pro, resto vs. preservation, etc.), the stigma would be reduced, at least in some areas. As it is, 99.9% of potential buyers see a book with a Purple label and walk right by - they don't even bother to ascertain the quality or extent of the restoration!

[PovertyRow]

[

The reason restoration has a bad reputation is that, as you say, many buyers have been sold restored books without any knowledge of the restoration.

 

Hate to split hairs here, but I'm on the receiving end of this kind of "enlightenment" every day on these boards, so here goes:

If someone buys a restored book advertised as unrestored, shouldn't the DEALER who sold him/her the book be the one who's reputation suffers? The book itself didn't do anything wrong. And if restored books sold for 90% of unrestored guide, dealers wouldn't have to pass them off as unrestored in the first place. So the problem is rooted deeper than you suggest. I suspect that restoration is viewed negatively by comic book collectors primarily because they don't understand it, and certainly don't understand the fine points and gradations of restoration. That's why a book with "single drop of color touch on back cover" in a PLOD will sell for a fraction of the same book in a Blue label. People don't even bother to discern between levels of resto in most cases.

 

Restoration has a bad rep because of ignorance on the part of the buyer/collector/dealer community. If restoration was better understood, and perhaps divided more clearly into sub-categories (Amateur vs. Pro, resto vs. preservation, etc.), the stigma would be reduced, at least in some areas. As it is, 99.9% of potential buyers see a book with a Purple label and walk right by - they don't even bother to ascertain the quality or extent of the restoration!

 

Garth - I agree 100%. You said in that one post a lot of what I have been saying across different posts and threads.

[bitman2]

If you follow though on some of LOGIC around here, there are Virtually NO unrestored books. Putting a book in a Mylar flattens the book. Not to the same extent but IT DOES flatten the book. OR should only degrees of "flattening" count.

[fantastic_four]

If you follow though on some of LOGIC around here, there are Virtually NO unrestored books. Putting a book in a Mylar flattens the book. Not to the same extent but IT DOES flatten the book. OR should only degrees of "flattening" count.

 

How about nothing more than 100 psi (pounds per square inch) pressure for more than 1 minute? Or is that too imprecise?

[goldust40]

Ad absurdum.

[fantastic_four]

I guess that means that you're not going to run out and buy a PSI measurement device to stick in the middle of your comic boxes and onto the bottom of your tallest comic stacks to make sure you aren't accidentally pressing your comics too much? For SHAME!!

[PovertyRow]

If you follow though on some of LOGIC around here, there are Virtually NO unrestored books. Putting a book in a Mylar flattens the book. Not to the same extent but IT DOES flatten the book. OR should only degrees of "flattening" count.

 

How about nothing more than 100 psi (pounds per square inch) pressure for more than 1 minute? Or is that too imprecise?

 

Actually, a minimum of 87 psi over a period of 220 or more minutes (continuously) conforms to PRA's standards for pressing.

[fantastic_four]

What's PRA?