Curator FF's!

[DiceX]

Let me throw something out there: what if pressing does damage a small percentage of books? How should one go about attempting to discuss the possibility without speculating?

 

Actually, I'm sure it does, in which case before and after would serve the purpose. Facts and proof, not speculation.

 

I'd speculate that most of the posters on theses boards have never seen a real naked woman before, but I can't prove it. Therefore, I don't go around insinuating it to be true and possibly damage anyone's reputation.

 

Define "real naked woman."

 

 

[COI]

Actually, I'm sure it does, in which case before and after would serve the purpose. Facts and proof, not speculation.

 

Sure that's ideal, but it doesn't help someone trying to decide on a major purchase since most of the time "facts and proof" won't be available.

 

Besides, most of what is done on these boards is speculation of one kind or another.

[MCMiles]

Let me throw something out there: what if pressing does damage a small percentage of books? How should one go about attempting to discuss the possibility without speculating?

 

Actually, I'm sure it does, in which case before and after would serve the purpose. Facts and proof, not speculation.

 

I'd speculate that most of the posters on theses boards have never seen a real naked woman before, but I can't prove it. Therefore, I don't go around insinuating it to be true and possibly damage anyone's reputation.

 

Define "real naked woman."

 

 

Three-diminsional and breathing.

 

...and with female parts only.

[Dick Pontoon]

Does my mom count?

[VintageComics]

Does my mom count?

 

Only if you were old enough to remember it.

 

[JiveTurkeyMoFo]

Let me throw something out there: what if pressing does damage a small percentage of books? How should one go about attempting to discuss the possibility without speculating?

 

Actually, I'm sure it does, in which case before and after would serve the purpose. Facts and proof, not speculation.

 

I'd speculate that most of the posters on theses boards have never seen a real naked woman before, but I can't prove it. Therefore, I don't go around insinuating it to be true and possibly damage anyone's reputation.

 

Define "real naked woman."

 

 

Three-diminsional and breathing.

 

...and with female parts only.

 

Proof positive, that Mike Miles is indeed a funny guy.

[Foolkiller]

I think that some speculation is fine, depends on what it is. People "speculated" on things with Ewert and other scandals, and discussion can be good. Stifling all conversation because it may impact the bottom line isn't a reason not to discuss.

 

With that said, I think there should be clear demarcation when we are literally "guessing" at something as opposed to actually making a simple observation. Also, speculation should be noted as just that -- as opposed to insight that comes with facts.

 

People are going to talk -- on these boards or any other -- I think it's more important to qualify your statements for what they are -- and be careful not to assert them as facts.

[supapimp]

i don't think speculation makes potential bidders worry, it's the "punishment bids" for the hell of it that would make them wary.

[VintageComics]

I think it's more important to qualify your statements for what they are -- and be careful not to assert them as facts.

 

Frigging lawyers. They think they know everything...IMHO.

 

 

 

[Transplant]

I don't think it's wrong to talk about something that's obvious or viewable on the book. The disconnect here is that the link was made right away that the impacted staple was/likely was from pressing. Who cares if it was pressing or a serial staple indenting fiend or poor storage or a production defect? Talking about the fact that it has an impacted staple shouldn't be a problem. It's no more than saying, "Wow. I can't believe that book graded a 7.0 with that huge crease."

[MCMiles]

Actually, I'm sure it does, in which case before and after would serve the purpose. Facts and proof, not speculation.

 

Sure that's ideal, but it doesn't help someone trying to decide on a major purchase since most of the time "facts and proof" won't be available.

 

Besides, most of what is done on these boards is speculation of one kind or another.

 

I agree. It's only speculation on my part that the recessed staples are production.

Thankfully, threads like this aren't left one sided, and serve to educate people by at least letting them examine all the angles.

 

This isn't a case of anyone intentionally trying to hurt auction sales or bad mouth pressing anyway. Some people just talk too much.

[chrisco37]

Let me throw something out there: what if pressing does damage a small percentage of books? How should one go about attempting to discuss the possibility without speculating?

 

Actually, I'm sure it does, in which case before and after would serve the purpose. Facts and proof, not speculation.

 

I'd speculate that most of the posters on theses boards have never seen a real naked woman before, but I can't prove it. Therefore, I don't go around insinuating it to be true and possibly damage anyone's reputation.

 

Define "real naked woman."

 

 

Three-diminsional and breathing.

 

 

Sweet! I'm in!

 

...and with female parts only.

 

[MCMiles]

I think it's more important to qualify your statements for what they are -- and be careful not to assert them as facts.

 

That would be great. Maybe in the new Caltopian Collector's Society.

[bababooey]

I don't see how there's a difference in speculating whether a book's damage was caused by pressing or whether it was caused by the method of storage - both discussions have a similar impact on the seller's price.

 

Speculating on the origin of a defect is common here and even CGC does it when determining grade. I don't have a problem with someone stating their opinions on grade or speculating on defect origin on these boards.

 

 

I think there is a reasonable difference between speculating on how a book is damaged through handling and storage (something that everyone has much personal experience with) and damage through pressing (something very few people have experience with).

 

Speculating (especially in a negative sense..."that book looks poorly pressed" or whatever) on something that is shrouded in mystery always seems to have a negative effect on desirability because nobody wants to be left holding an unknown quantity (or quality).

 

Furthermore, it's pretty much impossible to tell

 

a) if a book was pressed from a 2D scan (unless you are comparing before and after scans)

b) if a book was damaged from pressing (unless you are comparing before and after scans)

 

..and finally, as others agree, I believe it's impossible to damage a book in this way by having a book pressed.

 

spine splits, water damage (through too much hydration), making a book too flat, etc are all possibilities. Pulling in staples is not in the realm of possibility as far as I know.

 

Anyhow, that's my

 

Whether anyone agrees or disagrees is another matter entirely.

 

Thanks Roy, I always appreciate your insight into the hobby.

 

All comments on grade are negative in relation to Dale's point about discretion & respect - if the distinction between the two comments is mystery and stigma then the only way to get beyond mystery is to encourage open discussion, a misinformed opinion is usually corrected here pretty quickly.

 

 

 

[Foolkiller]

I think it's more important to qualify your statements for what they are -- and be careful not to assert them as facts.

 

That would be great. Maybe in the new Caltopian Collector's Society.

 

Fair. But I think the idea that people shouldn't talk is over stepping the remedy as well.

[MCMiles]

I think it's more important to qualify your statements for what they are -- and be careful not to assert them as facts.

 

That would be great. Maybe in the new Caltopian Collector's Society.

 

Fair. But I think the idea that people shouldn't talk is over stepping the remedy as well.

 

Agreed.

[Ghost Town]

I think that some speculation is fine, depends on what it is. People "speculated" on things with Ewert and other scandals, and discussion can be good. Stifling all conversation because it may impact the bottom line isn't a reason not to discuss.

 

With that said, I think there should be clear demarcation when we are literally "guessing" at something as opposed to actually making a simple observation. Also, speculation should be noted as just that -- as opposed to insight that comes with facts.

 

People are going to talk -- on these boards or any other -- I think it's more important to qualify your statements for what they are -- and be careful not to assert them as facts.

Yes. Thanks for saying it.

 

There was thread a number of months ago where many posters were claiming that a Marvel Mystery was trimmed based on two different scans of a book. The book had been upgraded by .2 or .4 and the later scan seemed to show that the book was a little shorter on the top edge. People were definitive with their claims. The villagers grabbed their torches.

 

It turned out that the scan of the regraded book was much lower resolution. And when a higher quality scan was easily retrieved from the Heritage archives, everybody could see that the book wasn't missing anything. It was just a lousy scan with a weird artifact.

 

Of course, discussion is a good thing. The Jason Ewert story is a great example of that. But rushes to judgement and grand proclamations can do a lot of harm to people that own the books in question. I wish some folks were a bit more restrained and thoughtful about it.

[VintageComics]

I think that some speculation is fine, depends on what it is. People "speculated" on things with Ewert and other scandals, and discussion can be good. Stifling all conversation because it may impact the bottom line isn't a reason not to discuss.

 

With that said, I think there should be clear demarcation when we are literally "guessing" at something as opposed to actually making a simple observation. Also, speculation should be noted as just that -- as opposed to insight that comes with facts.

 

People are going to talk -- on these boards or any other -- I think it's more important to qualify your statements for what they are -- and be careful not to assert them as facts.

Yes. Thanks for saying it.

 

There was thread a number of months ago where many posters were claiming that a Marvel Mystery was trimmed based on two different scans of a book. The book had been upgraded by .2 or .4 and the later scan seemed to show that the book was a little shorter on the top edge. People were definitive with their claims. The villagers grabbed their torches.

 

It turned out that the scan of the regraded book was much lower resolution. And when a higher quality scan was easily retrieved from the Heritage archives, everybody could see that the book wasn't missing anything. It was just a lousy scan with a weird artifact.

 

If it's the thread I remember, that was the time I won on the internet.

 

 

Of course, discussion is a good thing. The Jason Ewert story is a great example of that. But rushes to judgement and grand proclamations can do a lot of harm to people that own the books in question. I wish some folks were a bit more restrained and thoughtful about it.

 

I think that is all I was trying to get across as well... (thumbs u

[tth2]

Dale, I understand your point of view, but consider the following:

1. This heritage auction will set a record for comics of around 7 million dollars. My personal feelings about a small handful of lots will have no impact whatsoever to either consignor or auction house.

2. This is a comics chat board, making it an ideal place to discuss ongoing comic sales and auctions.

 

More from the auction in abit

 

I don't think that matters at all.

 

As Roy said, it is about being respectful of other people. Maybe the comments make a 5 - 10K difference in the price. Maybe it is 1 - 2K. Maybe not at all, but it certainly can't help.

 

And let me be clear about this. I don't care one cent about how it affects Heritage. They have more money than they know what to do with. I do however care about the individual consignor. The money might mean something to him.

 

Its not even about this one book. It is about idle speculation on all books. There is simply no reason to do it. If there is concrete proof, it is one thing. If there is not, then everyone should be more careful.

 

Bob is reporting damage on the book. I'm not sure how speculating on the cause of that damage really matters all that much; the damage is there either way, and CGC's grade is what it is either way.

And anyways, as the pro-pressing lobby keep telling us, no one cares about pressing. So damage is damage, and it doesn't matter whether it was caused by poor handling or pressing and therefore people can freely speculate all they want on these public boards in a non-sales thread.

 

If the consignor or Heritage want to come on to refute any speculation that they know is incorrect, they are free to do so.

[namisgr]

Lots of speculation here from people who haven't seen the books in person. I'm one of two board members that did for certain.

 

At least 3 of the books have small vertical stress lines running parallel to the spine that begin at one of the staples. To the two board members who saw the comics, this wear appeared pressure related and not reading wear. It potentially could have been caused from stacking, and so I wondered in an earlier post if it may instead have been caused by pressing. I also mentioned in the same post that several of the Curators were stunning examples, a view strengthened by this mornings' look at the entire slabbed run. The dialog about pressure related wear was helpful, in that Joeypost was able to confirm that the issues with indented staples could not have gotten that way from a professional pressing. I haven't seen anybody address the origin of the vertical stress lines.

 

The example of an impacted staple I posted is from the FF#4, which I did not consider to be pressure related, but instead a type of production defect that to me detracts from the eye appeal of the comic, and should also be factored into the numerical grade as is done for other serious production defects. Others who saw the books in person can post their own opinions about the grades assigned to the run overall and to the issues with indented staples in particular - needless to say, it was a major topic of conversation today.

 

As for suppressing discussion that might influence auction results, that's a big can of worms. Is it only negative opinions that ought to be suppressed, or should the laudatory ones like the kinds that started this thread off be suppressed too, since after all both types could potentially influence an opinion of a potential buyer? It's hard to see how this type of censorship helps the hobby or promotes free exchange on the boards.

 

The Curator books did very well at auction today (about three quarters of a million in sales), and it's quite likely that this particular thread had only a positive effect on the results.

 

Finally, the auction overall was amazing: the Billy Wright books fetched for his heirs over $3.5 million alone, and by 6 pm the overall haul was around $7 million.