CBCA Sponsors Scientific Testing on the Effects of Pressing

[HighRadArt]

It has been depressing for me to read this thread and see how people are letting their emotional position on pressing blind them to the value of starting to collect objective data. The CBCA took the initiative to do a limitted pilot study on a topic of great interest to the hobby, and stated it had limitations and was just a pilot study, but instead of being reinforced for their efforts, they have been chided for not starting with the ultimate experiment. I have news for you. No sane scientist ever starts with the ultimate experiment. They do just what the CBCA is doing. They perform limited pilot studies to see if there might be anything worth pursuing. If there is, then they go another step. And even if they like their findings, they try and replicate them. I taught experimental design and analysis, and probablility and statistics, to doctoral students for most of my academic career, and I routinely published peer reviewed studies in leading journals. I was even accepted as an expert witness in statistics in Federal Court on several occassions. I mention this just to support my claim that they are starting off just fine. If the results are interesting, and if they want to pursue testing, I would be happy to assist. Power planning would let you determine the size of the sample, and a design could be established that had a minimum of confounding variables. But the first step is alays to do a very limited pilot study and try to determine if there is anything worth pursuing.

 

Thank you Rich!

 

+1

[fantastic_four]

How long will it be before we use an electron microscope to grade books at a molecular level?

 

You can use one today if you like, but defects not visible to the naked eye will never, ever be included in grading. We don't read comics through microscopes, so factoring defects into grade that are only visible through them would be insanity. That doesn't mean microscopes aren't useful for other reasons, such as to detect restoration.

[jools&jim]

 

How long will it be before we use an electron microscope to grade books at a molecular level?

 

You can use one today if you like, but defects not visible to the naked eye will never, ever be included in grading. We don't read comics through microscopes, so factoring defects into grade that are only visible through them would be insanity. That doesn't mean microscopes aren't useful for other reasons, such as to detect restoration.

 

I never was very good at reductio ad absurdum...

[cheetah]

It has been depressing for me to read this thread and see how people are letting their emotional position on pressing blind them to the value of starting to collect objective data. The CBCA took the initiative to do a limitted pilot study on a topic of great interest to the hobby, and stated it had limitations and was just a pilot study, but instead of being reinforced for their efforts, they have been chided for not starting with the ultimate experiment. I have news for you. No sane scientist ever starts with the ultimate experiment. They do just what the CBCA is doing. They perform limited pilot studies to see if there might be anything worth pursuing. If there is, then they go another step. And even if they like their findings, they try and replicate them. I taught experimental design and analysis, and probablility and statistics, to doctoral students for most of my academic career, and I routinely published peer reviewed studies in leading journals. I was even accepted as an expert witness in statistics in Federal Court on several occassions. I mention this just to support my claim that they are starting off just fine. If the results are interesting, and if they want to pursue testing, I would be happy to assist. Power planning would let you determine the size of the sample, and a design could be established that had a minimum of confounding variables. But the first step is alays to do a very limited pilot study and try to determine if there is anything worth pursuing.

 

I think you helping them with a design would be an excellent idea. Maybe even reviewing the data they have already collected and seeing if the results show any meaningful trends before they put them out for public consumption. You know as well as I do that preliminary results with a limited sample size do not usually give results that are meant for public consumption in an emotional and irrational argument. Someone will leap on these results as the definitive answer in the argument when, in reality, they are just preliminary and likely to change with a larger sample size.

[Theagenes]

It has been depressing for me to read this thread and see how people are letting their emotional position on pressing blind them to the value of starting to collect objective data. The CBCA took the initiative to do a limitted pilot study on a topic of great interest to the hobby, and stated it had limitations and was just a pilot study, but instead of being reinforced for their efforts, they have been chided for not starting with the ultimate experiment. I have news for you. No sane scientist ever starts with the ultimate experiment. They do just what the CBCA is doing. They perform limited pilot studies to see if there might be anything worth pursuing. If there is, then they go another step. And even if they like their findings, they try and replicate them. I taught experimental design and analysis, and probablility and statistics, to doctoral students for most of my academic career, and I routinely published peer reviewed studies in leading journals. I was even accepted as an expert witness in statistics in Federal Court on several occassions. I mention this just to support my claim that they are starting off just fine. If the results are interesting, and if they want to pursue testing, I would be happy to assist. Power planning would let you determine the size of the sample, and a design could be established that had a minimum of confounding variables. But the first step is alays to do a very limited pilot study and try to determine if there is anything worth pursuing.

 

I think you helping them with a design would be an excellent idea. Maybe even reviewing the data they have already collected and seeing if the results show any meaningful trends before they put them out for public consumption. You know as well as I do that preliminary results with a limited sample size do not usually give results that are meant for public consumption in an emotional and irrational argument. Someone will leap on these results as the definitive answer in the argument when, in reality, they are just preliminary and likely to change with a larger sample size.

 

We would very much appreciate assistance from both of you. (thumbs u

[seanfingh]

If any more proof is needed by straight society that what was once an amusing and agreeable pastime for emotionally stunted people like me has over the years been transformed by various factors and individuals into a colossal (and colossally silly) waste of time, this sort of thing (i.e., the scientific testing of comic book paper) just might be it.

 

How long will it be before we use an electron microscope to grade books at a molecular level? Or, given that future generations bedecked in their shiny silver suits may be admiring their collections on other planets or in outer space, maybe we should book time aboard the International Space Station now to study the effects of Zero-G on comic books? Speaking of the future, is there a future for the cryogenic preservation of comics? Suspended animation? And has anyone talked to the superstring guys? Maybe the vibrations which create reality itself could be tweaked in such a way as to render comic books impervious to all known forms of aging and degeneration. And if a Ginsu knife can cut a beer can in half, but still remain sharp enough to slice through paper like a razor blade...why can't a comic book??? So many powerful intellects...so many silly ideas.

 

I suppose I understand why some feel that there is a need for all this, and as MacMan pointed out, I guess it's only relevant to HG collectors anyway, so I should probably just STFU. But it also suggests to me that Superman, Stan Lee, and Jack Kirby didn't really make a damn bit of difference in the end...and that no matter how smart or clever we get, there's still one born every minute...

 

 

This post should not be glossed over.

[DrWatson]

If any more proof is needed by straight society that what was once an amusing and agreeable pastime for emotionally stunted people like me has over the years been transformed by various factors and individuals into a colossal (and colossally silly) waste of time, this sort of thing (i.e., the scientific testing of comic book paper) just might be it.

 

How long will it be before we use an electron microscope to grade books at a molecular level? Or, given that future generations bedecked in their shiny silver suits may be admiring their collections on other planets or in outer space, maybe we should book time aboard the International Space Station now to study the effects of Zero-G on comic books? Speaking of the future, is there a future for the cryogenic preservation of comics? Suspended animation? And has anyone talked to the superstring guys? Maybe the vibrations which create reality itself could be tweaked in such a way as to render comic books impervious to all known forms of aging and degeneration. And if a Ginsu knife can cut a beer can in half, but still remain sharp enough to slice through paper like a razor blade...why can't a comic book??? So many powerful intellects...so many silly ideas.

 

I suppose I understand why some feel that there is a need for all this, and as MacMan pointed out, I guess it's only relevant to HG collectors anyway, so I should probably just STFU. But it also suggests to me that Superman, Stan Lee, and Jack Kirby didn't really make a damn bit of difference in the end...and that no matter how smart or clever we get, there's still one born every minute...

 

 

This post should not be glossed over.

Are you saying we are moving into an area of overkill?

[seanfingh]

If any more proof is needed by straight society that what was once an amusing and agreeable pastime for emotionally stunted people like me has over the years been transformed by various factors and individuals into a colossal (and colossally silly) waste of time, this sort of thing (i.e., the scientific testing of comic book paper) just might be it.

 

How long will it be before we use an electron microscope to grade books at a molecular level? Or, given that future generations bedecked in their shiny silver suits may be admiring their collections on other planets or in outer space, maybe we should book time aboard the International Space Station now to study the effects of Zero-G on comic books? Speaking of the future, is there a future for the cryogenic preservation of comics? Suspended animation? And has anyone talked to the superstring guys? Maybe the vibrations which create reality itself could be tweaked in such a way as to render comic books impervious to all known forms of aging and degeneration. And if a Ginsu knife can cut a beer can in half, but still remain sharp enough to slice through paper like a razor blade...why can't a comic book??? So many powerful intellects...so many silly ideas.

 

I suppose I understand why some feel that there is a need for all this, and as MacMan pointed out, I guess it's only relevant to HG collectors anyway, so I should probably just STFU. But it also suggests to me that Superman, Stan Lee, and Jack Kirby didn't really make a damn bit of difference in the end...and that no matter how smart or clever we get, there's still one born every minute...

 

 

This post should not be glossed over.

Are you saying we are moving into an area of overkill?

 

No just recognizing that, despite the sarcasm and reductio ad absurdum, there is a thesis that is worth thinking about.

[cheetah]

I think you're just annoyed that a potential pressing thread hasn't devolved into name calling and flame throwing, even after 15 pages.

[arexcrooke]

I think you're just annoyed that a potential pressing thread hasn't devolved into name calling and flame throwing, even after 15 pages.

For some yes, for Sean, no

[fantastic_four]

No just recognizing that, despite the sarcasm and reductio ad absurdum, there is a thesis that is worth thinking about.

 

What, that free markets are evil? Demand exceeding supply drives up prices, and once money is involved, the microscopes come out. All hobbies go in this direction, this isn't surprising nor is it as bad as Marxist idealists tend to opine. Remaining in the hobby just because money is involved doesn't necessarily make you a sucker, nor does it lessen the value of the characters or their creators.

[seanfingh]

I think you're just annoyed that a potential pressing thread hasn't devolved into name calling and flame throwing, even after 15 pages.

For some yes, for Sean, no

 

cheetah's just giving me the friendly because he knows I love a trainwreck thread so much.

[comix4fun]

I think you're just annoyed that a potential pressing thread hasn't devolved into name calling and flame throwing, even after 15 pages.

For some yes, for Sean, no

 

 

If Sean were a super powered being he'd be the High-De-Evolutionary.

[tth2]

It has been depressing for me to read this thread and see how people are letting their emotional position on pressing blind them to the value of starting to collect objective data. The CBCA took the initiative to do a limitted pilot study on a topic of great interest to the hobby, and stated it had limitations and was just a pilot study, but instead of being reinforced for their efforts, they have been chided for not starting with the ultimate experiment. I have news for you. No sane scientist ever starts with the ultimate experiment. They do just what the CBCA is doing. They perform limited pilot studies to see if there might be anything worth pursuing. If there is, then they go another step. And even if they like their findings, they try and replicate them. I taught experimental design and analysis, and probablility and statistics, to doctoral students for most of my academic career, and I routinely published peer reviewed studies in leading journals. I was even accepted as an expert witness in statistics in Federal Court on several occassions. I mention this just to support my claim that they are starting off just fine. If the results are interesting, and if they want to pursue testing, I would be happy to assist. Power planning would let you determine the size of the sample, and a design could be established that had a minimum of confounding variables. But the first step is alays to do a very limited pilot study and try to determine if there is anything worth pursuing.

[seanfingh]

No just recognizing that, despite the sarcasm and reductio ad absurdum, there is a thesis that is worth thinking about.

 

What, that free markets are evil? Demand exceeding supply drives up prices, and once money is involved, the microscopes come out. All hobbies go in this direction, this isn't surprising nor is it as bad as Marxist idealists tend to opine. Remaining in the hobby just because money is involved doesn't necessarily make you a sucker, nor does it lessen the value of the characters or their creators.

 

I was thinking more along the lines of something like this: The desire to collect comics usually resonates from a desire to re-capture or continue to experience the good feeling that one associates with those books (or those characters) that you enjoyed in youth. Slabbing, CPR, 200-1 spreads in values between Fine and 9.8 books are so far afield from how we all came into the hobby.

 

I am not saying it is good, bad or indifferent. It merely is. I think Mikey's point was that some of our heroes would probably wag their fingers at us over the businessification of what used to be a joy. Again, I am not passing judgment, merely saying that it is interesting food for thought. At least it was for me.

[seanfingh]

I think you're just annoyed that a potential pressing thread hasn't devolved into name calling and flame throwing, even after 15 pages.

For some yes, for Sean, no

 

 

If Sean were a super powered being he'd be the High-De-Evolutionary.

 

Able to devolve any discussion with hip-hop lyrics, poor computer skills, and tomfoolery.

[OldGuy]

Have the results been posted yet or is this still just a circlejerk?

[october]

businessification of what used to be a joy

 

The business part is as much a joy as any other part of the hobby for me. I love it all. Buying, selling, trading, grading, auctioning, discussing, reading, researching....every bit of it. In fact, without the "businessification" of the hobby, my involvement would be greatly reduced.

 

I understand that some people lament the loss of purity in the hobby, and I suppose I could just as easily swap soybean futures, but I am personally grateful that I get to make money AND do it by selling something that I love. Then again, this isn't a new development. At the age of eight when my friends were sticking baseball cards into the spokes of their bikes I was running a baseball card "shop" out of my closet complete with labelled prices.

[Bookery]

I am not saying it is good, bad or indifferent. It merely is. I think Mikey's point was that some of our heroes would probably wag their fingers at us over the businessification of what used to be a joy. Again, I am not passing judgment, merely saying that it is interesting food for thought. At least it was for me.

 

The problem as I see it isn't businessification so much as the overwhelming trend toward bad businessification of the hobby. And I'm not talking about pressers (disclosed or otherwise), crooked dealers, bad eBayers, etc. I'm talking about the collapse in sound business sense from the collecting base itself.

 

I came onto these boards last Fall in an attempt to get a sense of the collecting community beyond the rather narrow focus of the regulars who come into my shop. I figured this was the realm where the world's top and most knowledgeable collectors hung out, and perspectives on everything from collecting to investing to speculation to observing trends would be enlightening. And there has been some of that to be sure.

 

However, what I wasn't previously aware of locked in my own local market (I haven't done shows for several years) was just how paranoid, often illogical, panicky, and frankly-- devoid of enjoyment-- so much of the hobby has become! Worrying about things that are worth worrying about... hidden restoration, crooked sellers, etc., makes sense. Worrying (endlessly) about things that cannot be changed is illogical.

 

Now as a fan of all scientific knowledge, I actually applaud the research being conducted here. But as a collecting community, surely you realize that it is now irrelevent beyond the general goal of advancing known data? If something were to happen at noon tomorrow that convinced everyone on the plant-- professional or amateur-- to never press another comic... it wouldn't make any difference. Maybe 10 years ago... but not now.

 

The estimate I've heard is that there are currently millions of pressed comics out there. Virtually every big mega-book bringing mega-dollars out there has been pressed. Every one of you who regularly buys collectibles has a collection loaded with pressed comics. Good or bad-- it doesn't matter. It's too late.

 

And if something can't be changed, or is past changing, it is illogical to continue to get upset about it... it's like losing sleep every night over all of the nitrate-based silent films that have been lost.

 

Frankly, unless everyone who worries about such things is handling every single comic they own with cotton gloves, it's rather hypocritical anyway, as by far and away the most damage that can happen to aged paper simply occurs through the acids and oils (and clumsiness) of human handling.

 

And that's what I mean by bad-businessification-- the constant anguish and gnashing and accusations and bitterness over things that can't possibly be changed at this point is terrible for any hobby-- it drives people away, it makes those collectors who stay in the hobby paranoid and unhappy, and it makes dealers like myself conclude that maybe, after 27 years, the hobby doesn't contain enough sanity to make it a viable business model anymore.

 

 

[comicwiz]

By the nature of the work I do, I see, read and hear numerous types of studies, reports and scientific information on practically every industry requiring compulsory monitoring. Using the energy industry as an example, risk mitigation aspects of these studies assess everything from the nautical risks of tankers, pipeline pressure safety, spill/contamination cleanup, evacuation drills and land reclamation just to name a few.

 

The second these studies are released for public review, you can almost predict aspects of the studies which will be cherry-picked for news headlines, taken out of context by advocacy groups, or put on a pedestal by industry lapdogs. If we were talking about a professional sport, the predictability of events unfolding could be so exacting that you could do a beat-down on Vegas odds - everything from which parts of these studies would be taken out of context right through to which study contributor will be made the target of a smear campaign, dragging everything from past transgressions in marriage, work or all of the above, simply as a ploy to distract everyone from the importance of the report or study findings.

 

I would be remiss to claim that this is exclusive to certain media channels known to perpetuate this type of injustice and interference of truth. However, the climate of our culture is one which thrives on shock and sensationalism, and the behavioural tendencies on topics discussed and parsed on these boards are no different. It is one of many channels where viewpoints and opinions are parked and unparked online, and the choice to debate and discuss is elective, not compulsory. Your views, opinions, and beliefs will likely be heard, and influence mileage varies. But on certain topics, the predictability and inevitability aspects as I explained above become counter-productive to progressing at a collective level or to arrive at any wholesale agreement.

 

In all the above cases, there are options, but unfortunately they all involve tuning out the noise from these channels whenever it gets obnoxiously loud, pointless or unoriginal.