• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Marnin's Article on Pressing

Started by FFB,

85 posts in this topic

THE_BEYONDER

THE_BEYONDER

Posted
Posted

i just can't get it through my thick Irish scull why pressing is restoration. i would rather have a non color breaking crease removed than not - even if it weren't going to be slabbed. IMO, the book would simply be more beautiful..........

 

 

There are those of us that prefer the book to be in it's natural state .

 

Removing a crease through pressing is Restoration. If it's not...then the term "restoration" has very little meaning at all.

 

Would you rather have a book that has had a non color-breaking crease removed, or one that never had a crease in the first place?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
drdonaldblake

drdonaldblake

Posted
Posted

beyonder is ABSOLUTELY correct- removing a crease thru pressing is resto

 

i would prefer a book in its natural state

 

i would add that the mile high and pac coast books were pressed but in a natural way (the owners not intending to restore their books)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FFB

FFB

Posted
  • Author
Posted

What if I sneeze and blow snots on a comic and then wipe it off with a napkin. Restoration?

 

beyonder is ABSOLUTELY correct- removing a crease thru pressing is resto

 

i would prefer a book in its natural state

 

i would add that the mile high and pac coast books were pressed but in a natural way (the owners not intending to restore their books)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timely

Timely

Posted
Posted

After readin this first post two things pop into mind.

 

1. I find it ironic that Marnin admits he's been pressing books for 15 years and only now finds it unacceptable. That does not bode well with me.

 

2. Marnin is correct about unprofessional pressing & cleaning. This should only be done by the pros who have years of knowledge under their belts. Why take the chance on doing it yourself and [!@#%^&^]'ing up an expensive book.

 

Let's be smart folks. Suppose you have a 7.0 that is a candidate for pressing. Let's say you do it yourself and it comes back an 8.0! I'll bet your all smiles! Well you shouldn't be. Odds are the professional presser would have done a much better job and would have gotten an 8.5 or 9.0 out of it for you.

 

BTW, unprofessional pressing CAN return to it's previous shape, or at the very least revert back to some degree. Watch in amazement as your book sits in a holder slowly turing into a pretzel from one year to the next. 893whatthe.gif

 

Timely

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timely

Timely

Posted
Posted
Wes,

 

A few months ago you mentionned that Metropolis bought a press machine on eBay, do you know for a fact that they clean and press their own books?

 

J.

 

Actually, I saw Metro bidding on two dry-press machines. I do not know if they won those presses, if they won other similar presses, or if they have since used any such items.

 

However one can assume Metro was bidding on them for a specific reason.

 

Timely

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sfilosa

sfilosa

Posted
Posted

Once again I say that some thing must be added to, or removed from the book to be considered restoration.

 

Adding WEIGHT does not count IMO, for a very simple reason.

 

THE WEIGHT (i.e. pressure) is NOT LEFT on the Book. Has it changed the structure of the book, sure, but no foreign matter was left on the book. The molecular structure is the same as the day it was printed (except for the grease from fingerprints, dirt from the air, oils from the plastic bag, etc.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lou_fine

lou_fine

Posted
Posted
sfilosa

imo, by pressing a book, u are ADDING something to the book, you are ADDING 200-400lbs of pressure or whatever force is pressed upon the comic

 

sure the mile highs were naturally and unintentionally pressed but those dealers, collectors doing it now are not doing it naturally

 

if CGC assigns a label to id pressed books, imo , this will have a simialr effect on pricing as the dreaded PLOD

 

can u imagine it a, PRESSED cgc 9.6, it many ways itll be like a qualified grade

 

will cgc add this new label- i really doubt it as there will be too many $$$ to be lost in future business

 

Hate to resurrect this topic again. No point having PLOD's, GLOD's, or OLOD's. CGC should simply adopt an universal label for everything and incorporate a formal restoration rating system to take into account all of the different types and degree of restoration.

 

Once again, R-0 would represent an unrestored book, R-1 would represent a lightly restored books such as pressing and cleaning for example, R-10 would represent extensive restoration such as trimming and major repairs.

 

If implemented properly, a restoration rating system could be the answer to all of this grading/restoration controversy which we are currently embroiled in. makepoint.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ze-man

Ze-man

Posted
Posted

Perhaps we should all just give up collecting comics.

 

And start collecting Pressing machines instead.

 

It is a fairly new niche market, but sales on Ebay are already jumping.

 

Zeman

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sfilosa

sfilosa

Posted
Posted

Your assuming that CGC could detect PRESSING only, ALL THE TIME.

 

I sure as heck wouldn't want to get a book back with PRESSED on the label if it had only been tightly packed in a box for many years.

 

Innocent until proven Guilty is the American way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimm94

jimm94

Posted
Posted

Hey kids!

 

I thought I'd de-lurk for a moment to echo a couple of points, and to add my own thoughts regarding this issue.

 

When the subject of cleaning and pressing came up on the board a few weeks ago, I thought, "Nah, as long as you're not disassembling the book or using wet (chemical) cleaning, it's all good." This is the same sentiment shared by CGC. Now, I'm not so sure how I feel.

 

The more I think about it, natural compression of a book as a result of its' storage method is different than purposely making your own little superhero pancakes. As far as dry cleaning is concerned, I haven't tried wonder bread, but I have experimented with a white eraser on a low grade silver age comic. It worked pretty well on the back cover around the perimeter of the book, but I definitely don't like it for the front cover. I think most comics are better off without it.

 

The question is - How do you consistently and reliably detect and document this, especially if you're a company like CGC? Also, how would the market financially respond to known, professionally pressed and/or cleaned books vs. "natural state" comics of the same apparent grade? I wish I had an answer...

 

Overall, I think dry cleaning and pressing are less undesirable than tear seals, spine reinforcement/rebuilding, color touch, and pieces added, but I prefer books that have endured the years without any "help". Having said that, however, restoration for the purpose of conservation is fine with me provided that it is fully disclosed.

 

So when is Bill Cole Enterprises coming out with their new high pressure, steel short boxes? tongue.gif

 

One final thought – Do you guys and gals realize that drdonaldblake used the phrase “bouncy, juicy, puffy virgin” earlier in this thread? Yikes!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PovertyRow

PovertyRow

Posted
Posted

What if I sneeze and blow snots on a comic and then wipe it off with a napkin. Restoration?

 

The problem with that question is the impact of the mucus on the book. It is wetness hitting a cover (assuming a cover sneeze). The immediate result will be a dulling of the surface due to the moisture. Now if you made an effort to remove the mucus while it was still wet, it will make things worse, as you will smear the moisture over more of the cover, increasing the damage. If you actually DID wait for the mucus to dry and "flicked" it off - the damage will still be there but over a lesser area than if you had wipe/smeared it. It is not the surface mucus so much as the impact of the mucus to the paper that should be considered. And any attempt to restore the gloss, etc would be restoration. With a sneeze - no matter how you look at it - you are essentially screwed! blush.gifgrin.gif

 

Now while this is a slightly tongue-in-cheek response, actually the ideas presented are serious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing