o/t...science fair project ideas

[Ted Knight]

 

Sorry, wasn't articulate enough.

 

The cover shrinks horizontally, and stretches vertically creating the overhang.

 

The interior pages do as well, depending on storage conditions but nowhere near what the cover does.

 

 

I don't want to get into a big thing here, but since this thread is about a science fair project, in the interest of science, I have to point out that this is incorrect.

 

Hygroscopic properties of newsprint are dramatic, documented and well understood. Water that is absorbed during printing (which causes hygroexpansion perpendicular to the direction of fibers, primarily) is still present when the book is cut. As the paper dries, it contracts back to some semblance of its original size and shape. The cover stock is far less absorptive and thus experiences far less expansion and contraction. Conceivably, the fibers are oriented in the opposite direction on the cover, causing it to contract in the opposite direction, but this of course, would not result in stretching of any kind. The reason the overhang is present on the top and bottom is due to the body contracting as the moisture content evaporates. There is no expansion due to drying. This is why if you look at the body of many books from the top, you'll notice a slight v-shape as the first wrap has contracted more relative to the centerfold.

 

Then again, I might not have learned anything in graduate school and this could all be wrong.

[VintageComics]

 

Sorry, wasn't articulate enough.

 

The cover shrinks horizontally, and stretches vertically creating the overhang.

 

The interior pages do as well, depending on storage conditions but nowhere near what the cover does.

 

 

I don't want to get into a big thing here, but since this thread is about a science fair project, in the interest of science, I have to point out that this is incorrect.

 

Hygroscopic properties of newsprint are dramatic, documented and well understood. Water that is absorbed during printing (which causes hygroexpansion perpendicular to the direction of fibers, primarily) is still present when the book is cut. As the paper dries, it contracts back to some semblance of its original size and shape. The cover stock is far less absorptive and thus experiences far less expansion and contraction. Conceivably, the fibers are oriented in the opposite direction on the cover, causing it to contract in the opposite direction, but this of course, would not result in stretching of any kind. The reason the overhang is present on the top and bottom is due to the body contracting as the moisture content evaporates. There is no expansion due to drying. This is why if you look at the body of many books from the top, you'll notice a slight v-shape as the first wrap has contracted more relative to the centerfold.

 

Then again, I might not have learned anything in graduate school and this could all be wrong.

 

Haven't used the term hygroscopic in years!

 

 

Interesting. I've learned what I wrote from several sources and just took them at their word.

 

So you're saying the interior contracts causing that overhang at the top and bottom?

 

Then why do the interior pages contract horizontally as well, causing a "V" across the open edge as well?

 

 

[Ted Knight]

 

Sorry, wasn't articulate enough.

 

The cover shrinks horizontally, and stretches vertically creating the overhang.

 

The interior pages do as well, depending on storage conditions but nowhere near what the cover does.

 

 

I don't want to get into a big thing here, but since this thread is about a science fair project, in the interest of science, I have to point out that this is incorrect.

 

Hygroscopic properties of newsprint are dramatic, documented and well understood. Water that is absorbed during printing (which causes hygroexpansion perpendicular to the direction of fibers, primarily) is still present when the book is cut. As the paper dries, it contracts back to some semblance of its original size and shape. The cover stock is far less absorptive and thus experiences far less expansion and contraction. Conceivably, the fibers are oriented in the opposite direction on the cover, causing it to contract in the opposite direction, but this of course, would not result in stretching of any kind. The reason the overhang is present on the top and bottom is due to the body contracting as the moisture content evaporates. There is no expansion due to drying. This is why if you look at the body of many books from the top, you'll notice a slight v-shape as the first wrap has contracted more relative to the centerfold.

 

Then again, I might not have learned anything in graduate school and this could all be wrong.

 

Haven't used the term hygroscopic in years!

 

 

Interesting. I've learned what I wrote from several sources and just took them at their word.

 

So you're saying the interior contracts causing that overhang at the top and bottom?

 

Then why do the interior pages contract horizontally as well, causing a "V" across the open edge as well?

 

 

The pulp that newsprint is made from comes from wood, but unlike the wood from which it comes, it is not dimensionally unstable along just one axis. As described above, It expands and contracts primarily perpendicular to the fibers but it is also hygroscopic parallel to the fibers due to the fact that the fibers are broken along their length in the making of paper pulp. Just less so. Here is a link to read further if you like.

 

http://www.allbusiness.com/paper-packaging/paper-manufacturing-pulp-paper-paperboard/11434538-1.html

 

My understanding is that Martin Goodman was using the cheapest, lowest quality newsprint (and cover stock) he could get a hold of during the launch of Marvel comics in the 60s. DC used better paper that did not perform the same way. Hence, why the phenomenon is far less common (if present at all) in most other books of the time, before or since. Goodman was just cheap.

 

I believe the "V" is due to a combination of differential drying between the outer wrap and the centerfold and a relatively constant coefficient of friction between the pages. The outer wrap dries more quickly than the center of the book and as the paper contracts, the outer wrap slips more easily, than the second, etc. all the way to center of the book. But that's just my best guess.

 

Incidentally, I'm sure everyone knows this already, but I am now reasonably certain that Marvel chipping did occur at the press (as Jerry Weist stated) but that it was a combination of both a dull blade, poor cover stock and perhaps, positioning in the stack as they were cut. Try to cut a very thin piece of coated paper some time with a dull or broken-tipped x-acto blade. It catches along the way, creating the same phenomenon. Try to cut a stack of very thin papers and the bottom layers will be fine (as they are reinforced and supported by the top layers) while the top layers shred where the blade catches. It explains why not all copies of a given issue have Marvel Chipping. Just a substantial number of them.

[VintageComics]

 

Sorry, wasn't articulate enough.

 

The cover shrinks horizontally, and stretches vertically creating the overhang.

 

The interior pages do as well, depending on storage conditions but nowhere near what the cover does.

 

 

I don't want to get into a big thing here, but since this thread is about a science fair project, in the interest of science, I have to point out that this is incorrect.

 

Hygroscopic properties of newsprint are dramatic, documented and well understood. Water that is absorbed during printing (which causes hygroexpansion perpendicular to the direction of fibers, primarily) is still present when the book is cut. As the paper dries, it contracts back to some semblance of its original size and shape. The cover stock is far less absorptive and thus experiences far less expansion and contraction. Conceivably, the fibers are oriented in the opposite direction on the cover, causing it to contract in the opposite direction, but this of course, would not result in stretching of any kind. The reason the overhang is present on the top and bottom is due to the body contracting as the moisture content evaporates. There is no expansion due to drying. This is why if you look at the body of many books from the top, you'll notice a slight v-shape as the first wrap has contracted more relative to the centerfold.

 

Then again, I might not have learned anything in graduate school and this could all be wrong.

 

Haven't used the term hygroscopic in years!

 

 

Interesting. I've learned what I wrote from several sources and just took them at their word.

 

So you're saying the interior contracts causing that overhang at the top and bottom?

 

Then why do the interior pages contract horizontally as well, causing a "V" across the open edge as well?

 

 

The pulp that newsprint is made from comes from wood, but unlike the wood from which it comes, it is not dimensionally unstable along just one axis. As described above, It expands and contracts primarily perpendicular to the fibers but it is also hygroscopic parallel to the fibers due to the fact that the fibers are broken along their length in the making of paper pulp. Just less so. Here is a link to read further if you like.

 

http://www.allbusiness.com/paper-packaging/paper-manufacturing-pulp-paper-paperboard/11434538-1.html

 

My understanding is that Martin Goodman was using the cheapest, lowest quality newsprint (and cover stock) he could get a hold of during the launch of Marvel comics in the 60s. DC used better paper that did not perform the same way. Hence, why the phenomenon is far less common (if present at all) in most other books of the time, before or since. Goodman was just cheap.

 

I believe the "V" is due to a combination of differential drying between the outer wrap and the centerfold and a relatively constant coefficient of friction between the pages. The outer wrap dries more quickly than the center of the book and as the paper contracts, the outer wrap slips more easily, than the second, etc. all the way to center of the book. But that's just my best guess.

 

Incidentally, I'm sure everyone knows this already, but I am now reasonably certain that Marvel chipping did occur at the press (as Jerry Weist stated) but that it was a combination of both a dull blade, poor cover stock and perhaps, positioning in the stack as they were cut. Try to cut a very thin piece of coated paper some time with a dull or broken-tipped x-acto blade. It catches along the way, creating the same phenomenon. Try to cut a stack of very thin papers and the bottom layers will be fine (as they are reinforced and supported by the top layers) while the top layers shred where the blade catches. It explains why not all copies of a given issue have Marvel Chipping. Just a substantial number of them.

 

OK, I'm with you on all of that...especially the formation of the "v" on the outside edge of the interior pages. I've always theorized the same (that the centrefold ages the slowest and for that reason retains is size the longest).

 

As far as the Marvel chipping, makes completely perfect sense and I never thought otherwise.

 

So what you are saying is that the inner pages shrank on both axis'

(vertical and horizontal) but only created that "V" on the open edge and that the cover did not shrink at all?

 

Just trying to clarify as I'm a bit confused.

 

This is all interesting stuff.

[adamstrange]

I believe the effects of shrinkage are exaggerated with respect to the cause of size differences in comics and / other newsprint items. Some comics came off the printer with with cover & comic trimmed to same size but many didn't. Sometimes you had an overhanging cover at the top like on early SA Marvels and often you had the v-shape on the right. I have verified this with guys who grew up buying SA off the newstand.

 

The v-shape is easy to explain and can be proven by simply grabbing 30 sheets of typing paper, folder them in half as a group and seeing the v-form on the edge opposite to the fold.

 

Nor do I believe GA comics that have a v to be affected by shrinkage. You find square cut pulps entirely unaffected by shrinkage (or of spontaneously forming v's) even though they are from the same time as the comics and made from the same cheap paper.

[Ted Knight]

 

Sorry, wasn't articulate enough.

 

The cover shrinks horizontally, and stretches vertically creating the overhang.

 

The interior pages do as well, depending on storage conditions but nowhere near what the cover does.

 

 

I don't want to get into a big thing here, but since this thread is about a science fair project, in the interest of science, I have to point out that this is incorrect.

 

Hygroscopic properties of newsprint are dramatic, documented and well understood. Water that is absorbed during printing (which causes hygroexpansion perpendicular to the direction of fibers, primarily) is still present when the book is cut. As the paper dries, it contracts back to some semblance of its original size and shape. The cover stock is far less absorptive and thus experiences far less expansion and contraction. Conceivably, the fibers are oriented in the opposite direction on the cover, causing it to contract in the opposite direction, but this of course, would not result in stretching of any kind. The reason the overhang is present on the top and bottom is due to the body contracting as the moisture content evaporates. There is no expansion due to drying. This is why if you look at the body of many books from the top, you'll notice a slight v-shape as the first wrap has contracted more relative to the centerfold.

 

Then again, I might not have learned anything in graduate school and this could all be wrong.

 

Haven't used the term hygroscopic in years!

 

 

Interesting. I've learned what I wrote from several sources and just took them at their word.

 

So you're saying the interior contracts causing that overhang at the top and bottom?

 

Then why do the interior pages contract horizontally as well, causing a "V" across the open edge as well?

 

 

The pulp that newsprint is made from comes from wood, but unlike the wood from which it comes, it is not dimensionally unstable along just one axis. As described above, It expands and contracts primarily perpendicular to the fibers but it is also hygroscopic parallel to the fibers due to the fact that the fibers are broken along their length in the making of paper pulp. Just less so. Here is a link to read further if you like.

 

http://www.allbusiness.com/paper-packaging/paper-manufacturing-pulp-paper-paperboard/11434538-1.html

 

My understanding is that Martin Goodman was using the cheapest, lowest quality newsprint (and cover stock) he could get a hold of during the launch of Marvel comics in the 60s. DC used better paper that did not perform the same way. Hence, why the phenomenon is far less common (if present at all) in most other books of the time, before or since. Goodman was just cheap.

 

I believe the "V" is due to a combination of differential drying between the outer wrap and the centerfold and a relatively constant coefficient of friction between the pages. The outer wrap dries more quickly than the center of the book and as the paper contracts, the outer wrap slips more easily, than the second, etc. all the way to center of the book. But that's just my best guess.

 

Incidentally, I'm sure everyone knows this already, but I am now reasonably certain that Marvel chipping did occur at the press (as Jerry Weist stated) but that it was a combination of both a dull blade, poor cover stock and perhaps, positioning in the stack as they were cut. Try to cut a very thin piece of coated paper some time with a dull or broken-tipped x-acto blade. It catches along the way, creating the same phenomenon. Try to cut a stack of very thin papers and the bottom layers will be fine (as they are reinforced and supported by the top layers) while the top layers shred where the blade catches. It explains why not all copies of a given issue have Marvel Chipping. Just a substantial number of them.

 

OK, I'm with you on all of that...especially the formation of the "v" on the outside edge of the interior pages. I've always theorized the same (that the centrefold ages the slowest and for that reason retains is size the longest).

 

As far as the Marvel chipping, makes completely perfect sense and I never thought otherwise.

 

So what you are saying is that the inner pages shrank on both axis'

(vertical and horizontal) but only created that "V" on the open edge and that the cover did not shrink at all?

 

Just trying to clarify as I'm a bit confused.

 

This is all interesting stuff.

 

I got pretty heavily into materials science and the interaction with water when I was in school as it was fascinating to me also. The elasticity of organic materials has always been incredibly impressive and yet completely understandable once you look at how they form and function.

 

The cover stock is so much less hygroscopic than newsprint that it's not even worth comparing. I would be surprised if it changed dimensionally in any measurable way on either axis (less than 1/64"/ft.). Newsprint pulp is like a sponge in how much water it can hold. Even the paper in standard hardcover books holds and releases a surprising amount of water on an annual basis in climates that change dramatically throughout the year. Both are extremely elastic due to relatively large quantity of lignin in their makeup. Here is another link that describes the process of making pulp versus chemically treated paper used for cover stock

 

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2231/how-is-paper-made

 

So yes, I would be very surprised if the cover stock expanded or shrank much at all from the printing process. It's an entirely different kind of paper.

[Ted Knight]

I believe the effects of shrinkage are exaggerated with respect to the cause of size differences in comics and / other newsprint items. Some comics came off the printer with with cover & comic trimmed to same size but many didn't. Sometimes you had an overhanging cover at the top like on early SA Marvels and often you had the v-shape on the right. I have verified this with guys who grew up buying SA off the newstand.

 

The v-shape is easy to explain and can be proven by simply grabbing 30 sheets of typing paper, folder them in half as a group and seeing the v-form on the edge opposite to the fold.

 

Nor do I believe GA comics that have a v to be affected by shrinkage. You find square cut pulps entirely unaffected by shrinkage (or of spontaneously forming v's) even though they are from the same time as the comics and made from the same cheap paper.

 

I understood the process to be that the cover and the book are cut together as one. I've never heard anyone describe them as being stitched together separately after they were cut. In terms of time, the expansion / contraction takes place over the first few hours and days, not so much years, so it would make sense that they were like that on the stands. I've heard similar reports and didn't disagree. I'm pretty sure the book was trimmed to size at the printer as one thing.

 

Square cut pulps are put together entirely differently. They aren't stitched together and folded like comics so it's kind of apples and oranges, isn't it? It makes sense that all pages would stay the same size relative to each other based upon it's assembly. And of course, Marvel Annuals don't exhibit any of these characteristics for the same reason.

 

This is fun talking with you guys. (thumbs u

 

 

[Ted Knight]

Also, why do you think almost all pulps have such a large overhang on all three sides? Some don't but those are few and far between. The vast majority do.

[adamstrange]

I believe the effects of shrinkage are exaggerated with respect to the cause of size differences in comics and / other newsprint items. Some comics came off the printer with with cover & comic trimmed to same size but many didn't. Sometimes you had an overhanging cover at the top like on early SA Marvels and often you had the v-shape on the right. I have verified this with guys who grew up buying SA off the newstand.

 

The v-shape is easy to explain and can be proven by simply grabbing 30 sheets of typing paper, folder them in half as a group and seeing the v-form on the edge opposite to the fold.

 

Nor do I believe GA comics that have a v to be affected by shrinkage. You find square cut pulps entirely unaffected by shrinkage (or of spontaneously forming v's) even though they are from the same time as the comics and made from the same cheap paper.

 

I understood the process to be that the cover and the book are cut together as one. I've never heard anyone describe them as being stitched together separately after they were cut. In terms of time, the expansion / contraction takes place over the first few hours and days, not so much years, so it would make sense that they were like that on the stands. I've heard similar reports and didn't disagree. I'm pretty sure the book was trimmed to size at the printer as one thing.

 

Square cut pulps are put together entirely differently. They aren't stitched together and folded like comics so it's kind of apples and oranges, isn't it? It makes sense that all pages would stay the same size relative to each other base upon it's assembly. And of course, Marvel Annuals don't exhibit any of these characteristics for the same reason.

 

This is fun talking with you guys. (thumbs u

 

If the cover and the pages were cut at the same time and then the pages shrunk forming a "v," how come the v sticks out beyond the edges of the cover?

 

With respect to pulps, I don't see how the manufacturing differed enough that you don't get shrinkage.

[adamstrange]

Also, why do you think almost all pulps have such a large overhang on all three sides? Some don't but those are few and far between. The vast majority do.

Pulps vary considerably on their overhang. Large number of pulps have virtually no overhang -- most of Gernsback's didn't. Weird Tales started with large overhang but are square cut on two sides starting in the early 30s.

[Ted Knight]

If the cover and the pages were cut at the same time and then the pages shrunk forming a "v," how come the v sticks out beyond the edges of the cover?

 

It was trimmed a few years later...

 

Just kidding. That's a good question. Let me think about that one.

 

With respect to pulps, I don't see how the manufacturing differed enough that you don't get shrinkage.

 

See post above. It also explains why the bindings of pulps look all wrinkled. The cover is attached, book is cut to size, body shrinks, glue at spine wrinkles.

[adamstrange]

If the cover and the pages were cut at the same time and then the pages shrunk forming a "v," how come the v sticks out beyond the edges of the cover?

 

It was trimmed a few years later...

 

Just kidding. That's a good question. Let me think about that one.

 

With respect to pulps, I don't see how the manufacturing differed enough that you don't get shrinkage.

 

See post above. It also explains why the bindings of pulps look all wrinkled. The cover is attached, book is cut to size, body shrinks, glue at spine wrinkles.

See my post above addressing your post above.

 

The cover overhang on some pulps can be a quarter inch+ at both top and bottom. Comics giants were often produced in the same manner as pulps (pages stapled then glued to the cover) and yet you never seen an overhang anywhere near as big. The wrinkling of the cover in both pulps and comics is due to the contraction of cheap glue as it dries. Note that you get very inconsistent results with that drying.

 

Also, it would be a remarkable coincidence that the shrinkage producing the v would result in the exact same v as produced when folding the pages in half mechanically. Would the precision and straightness of right edge be so consistent throughout the year when heat and humidity varied consistently?

 

The mechanical explanation for the v and cover/interior size difference seems to be much more likely.

[Ted Knight]

Well, there's no question that the newsprint used for pulps was of incredibly low quality and that would explain the difference in hygroexpansion. You do see some overhang on some comic giants but I agree that it's not much. Perhaps it was better quality pulp for that reason.

 

I find it very hard to fathom that consistent results could be gotten in regard to parallel edges if they were put together after trimming. DiceX used to work at a printing press, IIRC and here is what he had to say:

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=4204386#Post4204386

 

Here is a reproduction of the Lithographers Manual on printing and binding

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2626280#Post2626280

 

There used to be an image on page 22 of the same thread that showed the most messed up double cover I've ever seen. It was an Amazing Spider-Man 6 with the interior cover very badly rotated around the body. It was cut square with the rest so I think it had to be cut as one.

[adamstrange]

The pages and the cover can be cut as one and still have the "v" if the cut is made before the book is folded in half. I've never seen a v on the top or bottom edge of the book -- only on the right edge where you would mechanically expect it to occur. Also, I would not expect a straight edge on the right if shrinkage occurs but would expect a bow shape. The middle part of the book should get the least shrinkage.

 

I've read many of Dice's posts and he certainly is an expert on printing where he worked but I have also seen him extrapolate that back to how everyone must have printed comics. Charlton adapted a press for cereal boxes to print comics. My recollection also was that he posited the shrinkage to take place over the course of years. That could be me mis-remembering or mis-reading a post of his so if you know different feel free to correct me.

 

Pulp paper varies considerably with some nicer than others and similar to comic books in quality. I've just seen too many pulps and comics that were poorly printed and never seen anything other than straight edges to come up with anything other than a mechanical explanation for difference in cover & interior pages.

[Ted Knight]

I just want to say, this is one of the best discussions that I've had on these boards in many months. It's really nice talking with others that are equally interested in this stuff. Alan and Roy- thanks for making my night on a very challenging day.

 

I need to do more research and thinking to answer the question of the cover stock relative to the "v" shaped right edge. Sometimes, the cover overhangs on the right side, sometimes it doesn't. I can't explain the difference just now. I don't have all the answers which is why this is so much fun to talk about and try to sort out. I know there is a grain to pulp paper and that could / should explain why it doesn't swell and shrink in a radial fashion as you posit. Or it could be due to the nature of the wetting of pulp during printing. I just don't know.

 

Great discussion, though. (thumbs u

 

Gator- maybe there's something in here for your daughter's science project after all.

 

 

[VintageComics]

Keep in mind that in this discussion, I am primarily talking about SA Marvels from the early 1960's where Marvel chipping and over hang are common. I understand the references to pulps, Charlton's etc for supporting evidence though.

 

Anyway, in regards to those early 60's Marvels, somewhere around the mid 1960's something changed, greatly reducing the incidence of Marvel chipping and also the formation of that overhang at the top and bottom edges.

 

I'll add the one main reason why I think that the comics were trimmed after they were folded over and why I believed that the interiors shrink through the years:

 

There is a direct correlation between the freshness of the book and how pronounced that "V" is at the right edge as well as the overhang at the top edge.

 

That freshness seems to be the one common denominator.

 

The more "fresh" a book is (ie. the whiter the pages, the more moist and supple the newsprint) the less pronounced the "V" is on the right edge and the smaller the overhang at the top edge.

 

In fact, some fresh copies have such a small "v" formation and so little overhang that the book looks as though it was trimmed post production. Perfectly square, sharp edges with little to no "V" formation.

 

Now let's hear the rebuttals.

 

[adamstrange]

I'm a white paged fanatic and pedigree collector, having seen thousands of the best peds. There is no difference in the v that I can detect, whether we are discussing books from the 30s, 40s, 50s or 60s.

[Ted Knight]

I'm a white paged fanatic and pedigree collector, having seen thousands of the best peds. There is no difference in the v that I can detect, whether we are discussing books from the 30s, 40s, 50s or 60s.

 

+1. I agree with every part of this post.

[VintageComics]

I'm a white paged fanatic and pedigree collector, having seen thousands of the best peds. There is no difference in the v that I can detect, whether we are discussing books from the 30s, 40s, 50s or 60s.

 

+1. I agree with every part of this post.

 

I am specifically talking about Marvel comics from about mid 1962 to 1965 or so.

 

If I remember your collecting interests, they are thin on this era. Not that you don't have any expertise in them, I know you're much more knowledgeable than me but I am 100% sure I've seen the difference that I am talking about so there must be some explanation for it.

 

 

[Ze-man]

The v-shape is easy to explain and can be proven by simply grabbing 30 sheets of typing paper, folder them in half as a group and seeing the v-form on the edge opposite to the fold.

 

 

Well, yes and no.

 

Unlike when you take 30 sheets of paper and fold them, a SA Marvel never has a consistent V effect running along the entire outer edge. It always becomes more pronounced the closer it gets to the top.

 

If you grab a stack of random SA Marvels, and look at the outer edges on all of them, you will see the "V-Effect" does not follow the same constant that your folded 30 sheets of paper displays.

 

But with SA Marvels, it's never present on the bottom outer edge like it is at the top. It always starts around the middle of the outer edge, and gets progressively worse as it nears the top.

 

Most SA comics that I know of were cut/trimmed after the parts were assembled and stapled. You can often see identical landmarks the cutting blade left behind on both the interior and cover alike, and why a cover will have the same terrible miscut as the interior.

 

So the interior did not start out with a pronounced V effect, it happened(somehow) over time. How much time, or why I don't know. Nor why it is consistently selective in forming on only the top half of the outer edge. Is it as was suggested earlier?, residual moisture inherit from the printing process drying at different rates with the properties and makeup of newsprint itself magnifying this phenomenon?

 

After countless hours of conversation with Dice, we were left with the idea that somehow, over the decades of comics being stored in long boxes the top of the books aged dramatically faster then the bottom half. Making overhang and V effect more pronounced then the bottom half due to covers aging differently vs interior, and the outer wraps aging more then the centerfold.

 

Leaving those books stored under ideal conditions with less of a V effect, or overhang, if any.

 

We were not happy with this overly simplified rational, but could not come up with a much better hypothesis that would explain it away.

 

And don't get me started on GA books, my head already hurts revisiting this topic.

 

 

 

Edit: I forgot to add that we often discussed when the books were chop cut. After the pressure was released by the trimming plate, did the comics puff back out creating a new V effect? But if so, again. Why is it only present on the top half half of the book? And not really present at all on some uber HG examples?

 

It baffles me