CBCA Sponsors Scientific Testing on the Effects of Pressing

[Moondog]

My apologies in advance if this is a stupid question, but isn't the answer to this question already out there somewhere? Don't researchers, archivists and museums routinely press rare, valuable documents and ephemera most of which are far older and likely more fragile than your typical comic book in the interest of conserving and properly studying, storing or displaying the item? If the answer is yes, wouldn't the effects have been studied before being used on museum quality ephemera? I'm just very surprised that the the effects of pressing on old paper are not already known

 

I'm not aware that institutions routinely press documents as part of the conservation and archival storage process. Are you sure this is the case?

[Moondog]

Based on what Theagenes told me, to do the tests with 20 tests per test category and three different test being performed, the cost of my experiment is approximately $50,000. This includes doing the test again in 10 years. Each adjustment in a variable would cost another $50,000. Removing the time effects would cut the cost in half.

 

You could reduce the number of tests per category, however, this would significantly reduce the reliability of the results.

 

JUst some random thoughts:

 

One possible alternative to waiting 10 years is to artificially age the paper in those samples by baking it under controlled parameters. This is a technique that has a good deal of research behind it.

 

One advantage to using something like a warehouse find where you can be assured that the books were in the same storage conditions is that it eliminates the need to cut the book into pieces. That would leave more material available for the tests.

 

I really want to try again with the fold test. The problem this time was that the paper was breaking in the machine when tension was applied before the test could begin. There has to be a way to work around that.

 

The endurance fold test is the one result I was looking forward to the most, but it will still be interesting to see the other tests you performed. My biggest concern about pressing is the risk, which I perceive as small but not negligible, that we will see a huge amount of pressed high grade books with brittle and disintegrating spines in 20-50 years.

 

If the cost of finding the proper answer to this is $50K and a 10 year wait time as cheetah suggests, I'd consider that an absolute bargain considering what's at stake. Together, we are spending tens of millions on comics every year at the biggest auction houses alone. This is so important to me that I am willing to put my wallet where my mouth is, but I don't want to bear the cost alone. Given all the interest these discussions have attracted over the years, it really ought to be possible to fund a large scale study that would shed light on the effect of pressing. I very much hope that the pre-study will prove to be a decisive stepping stone towards this.

 

You have eloquently stated what many of us fear, tb. Getting this information is the heart of the matter. I hope I'm wrong about this sentiment, but I can't see those who are profiting the most right now agreeing to help fund this experiment.

 

 

 

 

[tth2]

Excellent news.

 

Definitely a case of walking the walk. Kudos to all concerned. (thumbs u

+1 (thumbs u

[tth2]

The purpose of this experiment is simply to try and determine whether or not there is a measurable adverse effect of pressing on comic book paper. It is also important to note that due to the limited nature of the experiment these should only be considered preliminary results. It is hoped that we will be able to conduct further testing in the future in order to add to our dataset and to better understand the nature of the pressing process.

 

We will have further announcements as more information becomes available.

 

 

 

why is it so hard for some to understand what was stated?

 

that has been my only concern with pressing, what if any are the long term effects. if they are doing a test on a limited number of books, and the testing is not biased, what is wrong with that?

Because there are a whole lot o' people who have a vested interest in the pressing money train continuing.

[DarkKnightReturns]

No matter what the results are the train will not stop.

 

Chugga chugga chugga chugga Choo Woo !

[EastEnd]

My apologies in advance if this is a stupid question, but isn't the answer to this question already out there somewhere? Don't researchers, archivists and museums routinely press rare, valuable documents and ephemera most of which are far older and likely more fragile than your typical comic book in the interest of conserving and properly studying, storing or displaying the item? If the answer is yes, wouldn't the effects have been studied before being used on museum quality ephemera? I'm just very surprised that the the effects of pressing on old paper are not already known

 

I'm not aware that institutions routinely press documents as part of the conservation and archival storage process. Are you sure this is the case?

 

Don't know for sure... I'm asking the question really to those that have looked into this a bit. But I would think that a lot of old documents are found in a condition that would lend itself to pressing... say they were folded, or rippled from humidity or water damage, or just crumpled up in an old box. If a newly discovered original but folded or crumpled copy of say the Gettysburg Address was brought to the National Archives, would they press it?

[tth2]

How will you deal with the internet beat-downs and suppression of evidence by the pro-pressing crowd?

What will it ultimately matter? The majority of pressed books end up in slabs or Mylar with a backing board anyway. If I had to bet, I would say more books are damaged in the long term by SCS as opposed to correct, professional pressing.

Nice straw man argument, as usual.

 

That's like saying because we're all going to die eventually, we shouldn't worry about murder until we"ve figured out how to become immortal.

 

Just because SCS damages books doesn't mean that pressing, if it is found to damage books, shouldn't also be stopped.

[comicdonna]

The endurance fold test is the one result I was looking forward to the most, but it will still be interesting to see the other tests you performed.

The schopper fold test is difficult to perform on a comic. I believe the comic paper was too weak. At least that was what the lab told me. Perhaps with a whole book and a large number of samples, the lab would have a better chance to perform this test. It's my feeling that their was just not enough material for them to work with.

[Calidream'n]

The results won't matter. Anti-pressers are already poo-pooing it. Pro-pressers are already showing their reservations. Either way the data comes out, the sides have already been chosen.

[comicdonna]

My apologies in advance if this is a stupid question, but isn't the answer to this question already out there somewhere? Don't researchers, archivists and museums routinely press rare, valuable documents and ephemera most of which are far older and likely more fragile than your typical comic book in the interest of conserving and properly studying, storing or displaying the item? If the answer is yes, wouldn't the effects have been studied before being used on museum quality ephemera? I'm just very surprised that the the effects of pressing on old paper are not already known

 

I'm not aware that institutions routinely press documents as part of the conservation and archival storage process. Are you sure this is the case?

 

Don't know for sure... I'm asking the question really to those that have looked into this a bit. But I would think that a lot of old documents are found in a condition that would lend itself to pressing... say they were folded, or rippled from humidity or water damage, or just crumpled up in an old box. If a newly discovered original but folded or crumpled copy of say the Gettysburg Address was brought to the National Archives, would they press it?

The tests in question is about comic books, not old documents. I don't see how any of this is relevent. The paper, printing process is different.

[comix4fun]

The results won't matter. Anti-pressers are already poo-pooing it. Pro-pressers are already showing their reservations. Either way the data comes out, the sides have already been chosen.

 

 

You forgot "The people doing the test realize the sample size is small and have already given the caveat that it's more for discussion purposes than a scientific certainty".

 

 

Once you have that everyone can relax, because no one is claiming that any of this proves anything to anyone else at any time.

[comicdonna]

The results won't matter. Anti-pressers are already poo-pooing it. Pro-pressers are already showing their reservations. Either way the data comes out, the sides have already been chosen.

 

 

You forgot "The people doing the test realize the sample size is small and have already given the caveat that it's more for discussion purposes than a scientific certainty".

 

 

Once you have that everyone can relax, because no one is claiming that any of this proves anything to anyone else at any time.

Yep! (thumbs u I realize this is a sensitive subject but, this thread isn't about crack, press, resub greed ect.... It's the beginning of a long process to try to determine what affects if any pressing has to the paper fibers in a comic.

[EastEnd]

My apologies in advance if this is a stupid question, but isn't the answer to this question already out there somewhere? Don't researchers, archivists and museums routinely press rare, valuable documents and ephemera most of which are far older and likely more fragile than your typical comic book in the interest of conserving and properly studying, storing or displaying the item? If the answer is yes, wouldn't the effects have been studied before being used on museum quality ephemera? I'm just very surprised that the the effects of pressing on old paper are not already known

 

I'm not aware that institutions routinely press documents as part of the conservation and archival storage process. Are you sure this is the case?

 

Don't know for sure... I'm asking the question really to those that have looked into this a bit. But I would think that a lot of old documents are found in a condition that would lend itself to pressing... say they were folded, or rippled from humidity or water damage, or just crumpled up in an old box. If a newly discovered original but folded or crumpled copy of say the Gettysburg Address was brought to the National Archives, would they press it?

The tests in question is about comic books, not old documents. I don't see how any of this is relevent. The paper, printing process is different.

 

Well besides the fact that you'll be able to find items that are comparable in their paper construction and printing process to comic books in plenty of archives (old newspapers for instance), much of the stuff they deal with is OLDER and MORE FRAGILE than comic books. Seems to me that if they press these things then you can conclude that comics won't suffer either from a pressing... on the other hand, if they don't press these things because it damages them or shortens their preservable life, then maybe comics shouldn't be pressed. If you can press a folded copy of the Gettyburg Address written on an old piece of looseleaf paper from a 150 years ago, seems to me we have our answer.

[Theagenes]

My apologies in advance if this is a stupid question, but isn't the answer to this question already out there somewhere? Don't researchers, archivists and museums routinely press rare, valuable documents and ephemera most of which are far older and likely more fragile than your typical comic book in the interest of conserving and properly studying, storing or displaying the item? If the answer is yes, wouldn't the effects have been studied before being used on museum quality ephemera? I'm just very surprised that the the effects of pressing on old paper are not already known

 

I'm not aware that institutions routinely press documents as part of the conservation and archival storage process. Are you sure this is the case?

 

Don't know for sure... I'm asking the question really to those that have looked into this a bit. But I would think that a lot of old documents are found in a condition that would lend itself to pressing... say they were folded, or rippled from humidity or water damage, or just crumpled up in an old box. If a newly discovered original but folded or crumpled copy of say the Gettysburg Address was brought to the National Archives, would they press it?

The tests in question is about comic books, not old documents. I don't see how any of this is relevent. The paper, printing process is different.

 

Well besides the fact that you'll be able to find items that are comparable in their paper construction and printing process to comic books in plenty of archives (old newspapers for instance), much of the stuff they deal with is OLDER and MORE FRAGILE than comic books. Seems to me that if they press these things then you can conclude that comics won't suffer either from a pressing... on the other hand, if they don't press these things because it damages them or shortens their preservable life, then maybe comics shouldn't be pressed. If you can press a folded copy of the Gettyburg Address written on an old piece of looseleaf paper from a 150 years ago, seems to me we have our answer.

 

I have read about older documents (often maps) being pressed by libraries and other institutions using similar methods to those used by comic book pressers. But often that is higher quality paper than comic book pulp paper, even if it is older. No one to my knowledge has ever done a test like this on pulp paper, and I have looked. Kenny, Scott, or some of the others that are more knowledgeable than me on paper conservation could probably give you a better answer.

[EastEnd]

My apologies in advance if this is a stupid question, but isn't the answer to this question already out there somewhere? Don't researchers, archivists and museums routinely press rare, valuable documents and ephemera most of which are far older and likely more fragile than your typical comic book in the interest of conserving and properly studying, storing or displaying the item? If the answer is yes, wouldn't the effects have been studied before being used on museum quality ephemera? I'm just very surprised that the the effects of pressing on old paper are not already known

 

I'm not aware that institutions routinely press documents as part of the conservation and archival storage process. Are you sure this is the case?

 

Don't know for sure... I'm asking the question really to those that have looked into this a bit. But I would think that a lot of old documents are found in a condition that would lend itself to pressing... say they were folded, or rippled from humidity or water damage, or just crumpled up in an old box. If a newly discovered original but folded or crumpled copy of say the Gettysburg Address was brought to the National Archives, would they press it?

The tests in question is about comic books, not old documents. I don't see how any of this is relevent. The paper, printing process is different.

 

Well besides the fact that you'll be able to find items that are comparable in their paper construction and printing process to comic books in plenty of archives (old newspapers for instance), much of the stuff they deal with is OLDER and MORE FRAGILE than comic books. Seems to me that if they press these things then you can conclude that comics won't suffer either from a pressing... on the other hand, if they don't press these things because it damages them or shortens their preservable life, then maybe comics shouldn't be pressed. If you can press a folded copy of the Gettyburg Address written on an old piece of looseleaf paper from a 150 years ago, seems to me we have our answer.

 

I have read about older documents (often maps) being pressed by libraries and other institutions using similar methods to those used by comic book pressers. But often that is higher quality paper than comic book pulp paper, even if it is older. No one to my knowledge has ever done a test like this on pulp paper, and I have looked. Kenny, Scott, or some of the others that are more knowledgeable than me on paper conservation could probably give you a better answer.

 

The Newseum in Washington DC (as an example) has a lot of old newspapers, magazines, and pamphlets (i.e., pulp/newsprint) on display and probably more in their archives going back to the founding of the country. They might be able to steer folks in the right direction. Worth a shot (and could save you $50k!).

[B3AST]

We will have further announcements as more information becomes available.

 

Thanks for your support.

The CBCA Leadership Team

 

Tease

[cheetah]

I looked at some of the testing machines used for this type of work and I'm reasonably confident that they use a sample of the comic that you submit and not an entire page. Strips look they run about 4 inches in length. That would likely reduce the number of copies you would need since a single page could be used for multiple tests.

 

They can also run multiple samples simultaneously on some types of machines.

[tth2]

Isn't the most relevant paper the cover stock? Most of the grade of a comic is in the cover, and I'm sure much of the pressers' attention is focused on the covers, so it seems to me that the focus of this project should be on the impact of pressing on cover stock.

[mikenyc]

Does anyone believe that if Cheetah's $50,000 experiment was carried out over the ten year period, and at the end it was found to weaken the paper, that everyone would then never press or more importantly buy a pressed book, or inversely, if pressing is found to have zero effect on a book, that everyone who was against pressing will start believing in the process?

 

For a novice like myself it seems that the results would be good fodder for one side or the other in the form of an "I told you so", but would ultimately have little to no usefulness. The people who don't like pressing will continue not to buy pressed books, and the pro pressing buyers clearly don't have an issue either way and will not care that a book will disintegrate faster than an unpressed book, as they will have sold the book or will be long dead before they see it crumble in their hands.

 

Unless of course a smoking gun is revealed that these pressed books will self destruct in 10 years. Then Im pretty sure that lots of people will be pretty pissed off.

 

[lizards2]

Does anyone believe that if Cheetah's $50,000 experiment was carried out over the ten year period, and at the end it was found to weaken the paper, that everyone would then never press or more importantly buy a pressed book, or inversely, if pressing is found to have zero effect on a book, that everyone who was against pressing will start believing in the process?

 

For a novice like myself it seems that the results would be good fodder for one side or the other in the form of an "I told you so", but would ultimately have little to no usefulness. The people who don't like pressing will continue not to buy pressed books, and the pro pressing buyers clearly don't have an issue either way and will not care that a book will disintegrate faster than an unpressed book, as they will have sold the book or will be long dead before they see it crumble in their hands.

 

Unless of course a smoking gun is revealed that these pressed books will self destruct in 10 years. Then Im pretty sure that lots of people will be pretty pissed off.

 

the end result would be the pressers would continue not to disclose, and they would keep doing it anyway.

 

 

[font:Comic Sans MS]$ [/font][font:Comic Sans MS]$ [/font][font:Comic Sans MS]$ [/font][font:Comic Sans MS]$ [/font] [font:Comic Sans MS]$ [/font][font:Comic Sans MS]$ [/font][font:Comic Sans MS]$ [/font][font:Comic Sans MS]$ [/font]