Reholdering old label books

[Theagenes]

You've seen it, but I don't mind showing it off.

 

 

[Ze-man]

Looks pressed, was it in a big stack or something?

 

[Theagenes]

[mintcollector]

Another quandry is I hate to leave a 9.8 church book in an old well that has SCS potential (which is why I want to get it reholdered), but at the same time I don't want mail it to CGC and risk the SCS damage that that I was afraid of to start with. And they don't do on-site reholders!

 

About this.

 

 

I imagine a 9.8 Church book would not be very prone to SCS, I bet that thing is about as tight a book out there. Not much overhang to get dinged, let alone the cover is thick enough to withstand a bump or three. So I was curious as to why you said it had, "SCS potential"

 

Is it floating around in too big an inner well?

 

Makes me curious though, out of all the cases of SCS we have seen, how many were GA books?

 

I can't seem to recall many, if any out of all the cases of SA overhang, or outer edges getting dinged.

 

 

Well, I've heard all these horror stories about the old wells, but i didn't realize SCS wasn't a problem for GA. That does make me feel better. I just don't really have many old label books left.

 

If you are that worried over this book, can I ask how you bought it (off the rack, already slabbed, etc.)? My main point is; at some point was it mailed? CGC will not regrade a book to my knowledge that arrives intact in its holder with no visible damage (when sent in for reholder). Have you heard instances of books being regraded (when sent in for a reholder) due to SCS? I have not; personally.

 

To answer the other question; I can also tell you that as someone who is involved in conservation of antiques and related collectibles, the microchamber paper should be changed as noted. While I do not agree that every seven years is the rule, at least every ten to fifteen. If I reslab books when I buy them (in lots of ten usually); I now know when they have been reholdered. I also get a nice shiny new holder to boot! That is well worth it to me. Matter of personal choice. I do however, reholder ALL of my collectibles upon taking ownership; usually as stated in groups of ten (and/or depending on value).

 

PS: Don't all collectors suffer from some sort of OCD-!

 

Kind Regards,

 

'mint'

[Theagenes]

Another quandry is I hate to leave a 9.8 church book in an old well that has SCS potential (which is why I want to get it reholdered), but at the same time I don't want mail it to CGC and risk the SCS damage that that I was afraid of to start with. And they don't do on-site reholders!

 

About this.

 

 

I imagine a 9.8 Church book would not be very prone to SCS, I bet that thing is about as tight a book out there. Not much overhang to get dinged, let alone the cover is thick enough to withstand a bump or three. So I was curious as to why you said it had, "SCS potential"

 

Is it floating around in too big an inner well?

 

Makes me curious though, out of all the cases of SCS we have seen, how many were GA books?

 

I can't seem to recall many, if any out of all the cases of SA overhang, or outer edges getting dinged.

 

 

Well, I've heard all these horror stories about the old wells, but i didn't realize SCS wasn't a problem for GA. That does make me feel better. I just don't really have many old label books left.

 

If you are that worried over this book, can I ask how you bought it (off the rack, already slabbed, etc.)? My main point is; at some point was it mailed? CGC will not regrade a book to my knowledge that arrives intact in its holder with no visible damage (when sent in for reholder). Have you heard instances of books being regraded (when sent in for a reholder) due to SCS? I have not; personally.

 

To answer the other question; I can also tell you that as someone who is involved in conservation of antiques and related collectibles, the microchamber paper should be changed as noted. While I do not agree that every seven years is the rule, at least every ten to fifteen. If I reslab books when I buy them (in lots of ten usually); I now know when they have been reholdered. I also get a nice shiny new holder to boot! That is well worth it to me. Matter of personal choice. I do however, reholder ALL of my collectibles upon taking ownership; usually as stated in groups of ten (and/or depending on value).

 

PS: Don't all collectors suffer from some sort of OCD-!

 

Kind Regards,

 

'mint'

 

To be honest, having it in an old label when all the surrounding books are in new labels does drive my OCD crazy!

[mschmidt]

To answer the other question; I can also tell you that as someone who is involved in conservation of antiques and related collectibles, the microchamber paper should be changed as noted. While I do not agree that every seven years is the rule, at least every ten to fifteen.

 

Please don't perpetuate this myth - there's no scientific evidence to support the theory that micro-chamber paper looses its effectiveness within 7-10 years.

[Theagenes]

To answer the other question; I can also tell you that as someone who is involved in conservation of antiques and related collectibles, the microchamber paper should be changed as noted. While I do not agree that every seven years is the rule, at least every ten to fifteen.

 

Please don't perpetuate this myth - there's no scientific evidence to support the theory that micro-chamber paper looses its effectiveness within 7-10 years.

 

Well, to be fair microchamber paper will eventually lose it's effectiveness once it's absorbed all the acids and polluntants it can hold, but how long this takes when stored in a comic book is anyone's guess. I would imagine it is much longer than 7-10 years given that it is used by archivists for much longer periods for old maps and documents, but I'm not aware of study that has tested this with pulp paper. I do remember someone posting that they had discussed CGC's 7-10 year policy with someone from CRI and that person just laughed at that. Of course someone from CRI isn't exactly unbiased.

[mschmidt]

To answer the other question; I can also tell you that as someone who is involved in conservation of antiques and related collectibles, the microchamber paper should be changed as noted. While I do not agree that every seven years is the rule, at least every ten to fifteen.

 

Please don't perpetuate this myth - there's no scientific evidence to support the theory that micro-chamber paper looses its effectiveness within 7-10 years.

 

Well, to be fair microchamber paper will eventually lose it's effectiveness once it's absorbed all the acids and polluntants it can hold, but how long this takes when stored in a comic book is anyone's guess. I would imagine it is much longer than 7-10 years given that it is used by archivists for much longer periods for old maps and documents, but I'm not aware of study that has tested this with pulp paper. I do remember someone posting that they had discussed CGC's 7-10 year policy with someone from CRI and that person just laughed at that. Of course someone from CRI isn't exactly unbiased.

 

Certainly - there's no doubt that at some point the mcp will become inert. It just irks me that CGC randomly picked 7 years as the active lifespan and that some people actually get suckered into reholdering their books due to this - it's a money grab, pure & simple.

[mintcollector]

To answer the other question; I can also tell you that as someone who is involved in conservation of antiques and related collectibles, the microchamber paper should be changed as noted. While I do not agree that every seven years is the rule, at least every ten to fifteen.

 

Please don't perpetuate this myth - there's no scientific evidence to support the theory that micro-chamber paper looses its effectiveness within 7-10 years.

 

Well, to be fair microchamber paper will eventually lose it's effectiveness once it's absorbed all the acids and polluntants it can hold, but how long this takes when stored in a comic book is anyone's guess. I would imagine it is much longer than 7-10 years given that it is used by archivists for much longer periods for old maps and documents, but I'm not aware of study that has tested this with pulp paper. I do remember someone posting that they had discussed CGC's 7-10 year policy with someone from CRI and that person just laughed at that. Of course someone from CRI isn't exactly unbiased.

 

Certainly - there's no doubt that at some point the mcp will become inert. It just irks me that CGC randomly picked 7 years as the active lifespan and that some people actually get suckered into reholdering their books due to this - it's a money grab, pure & simple.

 

With all due respect and as previously stated, I am also involved with conservation of antiques and collectibles. It is part of what dealers and collectors do on a regular basis. I never stated in my original post that seven years is the 'rule.' I simply stated the proven truth that within ten to fifteen all books should have their microchamber changed (some will say longer; some less so). If you think that after this time this paper will still be as effective as when it was first placed in the original holder, you are mistaken. Therefore, I am not helping to fathom any such 'myth.' I am merely providing basic facts to those that want to properly conserve their books.

 

In conclusion, as CGC gets older and older I have started to ask questions for those sellers that tell me they held the book for years, or pulled it right off the rack and had it graded. Some of those questions involve (assuming they were the original owner of the book); how long has it been in the slab. I would not be comfortable buying a book that was slabbed ten years ago and is still in its original slab. I also do NOT like older holders; personally.

 

There is an excellent book and even a product catalog that talks about the effectiveness of microchamber paper, as well as humidity and temperature control and the like. The effects of these environmental factors in regards to paper base materials is extreme.

 

Respectfully yours,

 

'mint'

[Theagenes]

To answer the other question; I can also tell you that as someone who is involved in conservation of antiques and related collectibles, the microchamber paper should be changed as noted. While I do not agree that every seven years is the rule, at least every ten to fifteen.

 

Please don't perpetuate this myth - there's no scientific evidence to support the theory that micro-chamber paper looses its effectiveness within 7-10 years.

 

Well, to be fair microchamber paper will eventually lose it's effectiveness once it's absorbed all the acids and polluntants it can hold, but how long this takes when stored in a comic book is anyone's guess. I would imagine it is much longer than 7-10 years given that it is used by archivists for much longer periods for old maps and documents, but I'm not aware of study that has tested this with pulp paper. I do remember someone posting that they had discussed CGC's 7-10 year policy with someone from CRI and that person just laughed at that. Of course someone from CRI isn't exactly unbiased.

 

Certainly - there's no doubt that at some point the mcp will become inert. It just irks me that CGC randomly picked 7 years as the active lifespan and that some people actually get suckered into reholdering their books due to this - it's a money grab, pure & simple.

 

With all due respect and as previously stated, I am also involved with conservation of antiques and collectibles. It is part of what dealers and collectors do on a regular basis. I never stated in my original post that seven years is the 'rule.' I simply stated the proven truth that within ten to fifteen all books should have their microchamber changed (some will say longer; some less so). If you think that after this time this paper will still be as effective as when it was first placed in the original holder, you are mistaken. Therefore, I am not helping to fathom any such 'myth.' I am merely providing basic facts to those that want to properly conserve their books.

 

In conclusion, as CGC gets older and older I have started to ask questions for those sellers that tell me they held the book for years, or pulled it right off the rack and had it graded. Some of those questions involve (assuming they were the original owner of the book); how long has it been in the slab. I would not be comfortable buying a book that was slabbed ten years ago and is still in its original slab. I also do NOT like older holders; personally.

 

There is an excellent book and even a product catalog that talks about the effectiveness of microchamber paper, as well as humidity and temperature control and the like. The effects of these environmental factors in regards to paper base materials is extreme.

 

Respectfully yours,

 

'mint'

 

With all due respect, you throw your "antique collector" credentials around quite a bit on these boards as though they actually mean something. You have no idea of the background and experience of many of the people on these boards. Didn't I just see you lecturing Gary Colabuono (Moondog) of all people on comics the other day? Look, I don't doubt you mean well and have a lot to offer, but if you try to be a little less patronizing it would help the discourse.

 

Now on the topic at hand, what exactly are your qualifications with regards to the highly specialized field of paper conservation? You state that it is "proven truth" that all books should have their microchamber paper changed. Please cite your source for this as I would very much like to read any study on the subject. What is this excellent book on microchamber paper you mention (and a product catalog? ).

 

I don't disagree with your basic premise. As I said I think everyone understands that MCP has a finite lifespan with regard to effectiveness, but how long the period is anyone's guess without actual data. Again, if you have those data I would love to see them.

[themoe-migration]

Please, Please, Your comic that has been graded can stay in it's original holder for at least 20 years if not longer without a problem. I personally had my SA comics in a safe deposit box since the year 1990. These were stored in comic bags with backing boards and were never touched. After taking them out of the bank, the bags had yellowed and the boards were discolored. I sent in all the comics (approx 70 books) and received many 9.6 grades with white pages. My Giant size X-men came back a 9.8 with white pages (thrilled to say the least) so no breakdown just sitting in a regular comic bag for 22 years. Sounds like bull to me that we should send them in again and by the way, what a risk doing that anyway based on many things that can happen.

[mintcollector]

To answer the other question; I can also tell you that as someone who is involved in conservation of antiques and related collectibles, the microchamber paper should be changed as noted. While I do not agree that every seven years is the rule, at least every ten to fifteen.

 

Please don't perpetuate this myth - there's no scientific evidence to support the theory that micro-chamber paper looses its effectiveness within 7-10 years.

 

Well, to be fair microchamber paper will eventually lose it's effectiveness once it's absorbed all the acids and polluntants it can hold, but how long this takes when stored in a comic book is anyone's guess. I would imagine it is much longer than 7-10 years given that it is used by archivists for much longer periods for old maps and documents, but I'm not aware of study that has tested this with pulp paper. I do remember someone posting that they had discussed CGC's 7-10 year policy with someone from CRI and that person just laughed at that. Of course someone from CRI isn't exactly unbiased.

 

Certainly - there's no doubt that at some point the mcp will become inert. It just irks me that CGC randomly picked 7 years as the active lifespan and that some people actually get suckered into reholdering their books due to this - it's a money grab, pure & simple.

 

With all due respect and as previously stated, I am also involved with conservation of antiques and collectibles. It is part of what dealers and collectors do on a regular basis. I never stated in my original post that seven years is the 'rule.' I simply stated the proven truth that within ten to fifteen all books should have their microchamber changed (some will say longer; some less so). If you think that after this time this paper will still be as effective as when it was first placed in the original holder, you are mistaken. Therefore, I am not helping to fathom any such 'myth.' I am merely providing basic facts to those that want to properly conserve their books.

 

In conclusion, as CGC gets older and older I have started to ask questions for those sellers that tell me they held the book for years, or pulled it right off the rack and had it graded. Some of those questions involve (assuming they were the original owner of the book); how long has it been in the slab. I would not be comfortable buying a book that was slabbed ten years ago and is still in its original slab. I also do NOT like older holders; personally.

 

There is an excellent book and even a product catalog that talks about the effectiveness of microchamber paper, as well as humidity and temperature control and the like. The effects of these environmental factors in regards to paper base materials is extreme.

 

Respectfully yours,

 

'mint'

 

With all due respect, you throw your "antique collector" credentials around quite a bit on these boards as though they actually mean something. You have no idea of the background and experience of many of the people on these boards. Didn't I just see you lecturing Gary Colabuono (Moondog) of all people on comics the other day? Look, I don't doubt you mean well and have a lot to offer, but if you try to be a little less patronizing it would help the discourse.

 

Now on the topic at hand, what exactly are your qualifications with regards to the highly specialized field of paper conservation? You state that it is "proven truth" that all books should have their microchamber paper changed. Please cite your source for this as I would very much like to read any study on the subject. What is this excellent book on microchamber paper you mention (and a product catalog? ).

 

I don't disagree with your basic premise. As I said I think everyone understands that MCP has a finite lifespan with regard to effectiveness, but how long the period is anyone's guess without actual data. Again, if you have those data I would love to see them.

 

Number one, could you please provide evidence of the thread where I supposedly did what is stated below (per your guote):

 

"Didn't I just see you lecturing Gary Colabuono (Moondog) of all people on comics the other day?"

 

You mean about curreny collecting (i.e. paper money); and NOT comic books? Did you even read what I wrote and what we were discussing? Just to be clear and for the record, this was in a pressing thread when someone was comparing the pressing of comic books to other related collectibles; mainly paper money. Since when is several weeks ago; just the other day? I am sorry, but one cannot compare 'pressing' of paper money (which is actually a linen based product with embossing) to the 'pressing' of a comic book. This is why currency collectors are often called 'rag' collectors. Ever hear of 'EPQ' and 'PPQ?' I also think that anyone reading that thread would NOT think I was disrespetful to the person in question. Most even ignored the subject entirely as it was NOT the basis of the thread. The molecular structure of paper money versus comic books is COMPLETELY different. How does this qualify as a lecture? Stating a factual analysis to a question or comparison raised is a lecture? By your opinion, does this mean I am now lecturing you? I would beg to differ.

 

Here are some books and catalogs to help you with your research in relation to conservation.

 

Without going into hardcore scientific explanation (at first); I would recommend the EXCELLENT book called; 'Saving Stuff' by Don Willaims.This is a simple DOWN TO EARTH approach about conservation. Someone mentioned that they stored their books in a safe deposit box for twenty years with no problem. Yes, this can happen but what about the individual who I know of who did the same and had nothing but moisture damaged books to show for it? The individual factors like the storage environment and location, relative humidity and temperature variation all play a vital role. This ONE experience is not conclusive enough to make a scientific observation one way or another.

 

As for catalogs, I would use what I personally use (and other MUSEUMS and auctions/auction houses I have been involved with) use:

 

University Products: they provide complete conservation products and actually provide these tidbits of information in the catalog. A lot of museums and auction houses use their products.Private collectiors do too. It is a not so well guarded secret.

 

If you require speciality archival bags made, I would recommend Bags Unlimited; another excellent resource for storage related items. They are already known to these forums.

 

Please feel free to attack me or misread my posts. It does not change the fact that books (or any paper collectible for that matter) requires detailed care that is much more attentive than that of say glass or crystal. This is why objects made of glass are a unique part of our history. They are fragile in nature, but at the same time structured to handle the most dynamic elements of moisture, humidity, and temperature.

 

I would be more than happy to provide evidence as to how many collections of paper related collectibles I have looked at this month alone that show some kind of detoriation due to improper storage. Only one this month was a VINTAGE comic book collection; unfortunately. I normally handle rare books, manuscripts, and historical documents much older than that of fifity to seventy years. I collect in this area specifically.This is why I take all the proper precautions I can. Microchamber paper can and does lose effectiveness if not stored in an air tight environment (i.e. a 'controlled micro environment'). Some individuals who seek my advice are under the INCORRECT assumption that blocking off air flow to an item can cause damage. This is incorrect as long as it is contained in a proper CONTROLLED 'micro environment.' This means that you are creating a unique fully controlled environment for the item to remain in its natural untouched state. The safe deposit box example provided could be a perfect example IF the conditions were controlled and maintained perfectly. This would include humidity, temperature control, and factors of containment (air tight (which no safe deposit box is), etc.).

 

Feel free to seek more advice or book recommendations any time. The research however, is up to you. There is evidence to suggest more than one outcome. That being said, like a wise man once said; 'Better safe than sorry,' and in the field of antiques and collectibles, I could NOT agree more.

 

Respectfully yours,

 

'mint'

[mschmidt]

Without going into hardcore scientific explanation (at first); I would recommend the EXCELLENT book called; 'Saving Stuff' by Don Willaims.This is a simple DOWN TO EARTH approach about conservation. Someone mentioned that they stored their books in a safe deposit box for twenty years with no problem. Yes, this can happen but what about the individual who I know of who did the same and had nothing but moisture damaged books to show for it? The individual factors like the storage environment and location, relative humidity and temperature variation all play a vital role. This ONE experience is not conclusive enough to make a scientific observation one way or another.

 

As for catalogs, I would use what I personally use (and other MUSEUMS and auctions/auction houses I have been involved with) use:

 

University Products: they provide complete conservation advice and actually provide these tidbits of information in the catalog. A lot of museums and auction houses use their products.Private collectiors do too. It is a not so well guarded secret.

 

If you require speciality archival bags made, I would recommend Bags Unlimited; another excellent resource for storage related items. They are already known to these forums.

 

Please feel free to attack me or misread my posts. It does not change the fact that books (or any paper collectible for that matter) requires detailed care that is much more attentive than that of say glass or crystal. This is why objects made of glass are a unique part of our history. They are fragile in nature, but at the same time structured to handle the most dynamic elements of moisture, humidity, and temperature.

 

I would be more than happy to provide evidence as to how many collections of paper related collectibles I have looked at this month alone that show some kind of detoriation due to improper storage. Only one this month was a VINTAGE comic book collection; unfortunately. I normally handle rare books, manuscripts, and historical documents much older than that of fifity to seventy years. I collect in this area specifically.This is why I take all the proper precautions I can.

So ... that was a rather long-winded way of saying "no, I don't have any proof to back up my claims but I'm a self-proclaimed expert so there"?

 

 

Microchamber paper can and does lose effectiveness if not stored in an air tight environment (i.e. a 'controlled micro environment').

No. Micro-chamber paper will loose its effectiveness over time irregardless of the storage environment. My earlier point was that there's no scientific evidence to back up either CGC's or your claim that this happens within 7-10 years, though.

 

 

Some individuals who seek my advice are under the INCORRECT assumption that blocking off air flow to an item can cause damage. This is incorrect as long as it is contained in a proper CONTROLLED 'micro environment.' This means that you are creating a unique fully controlled environment for the item to remain in its natural untouched state. The safe deposit box example provided could be a perfect example IF the conditions were controlled and maintained perfectly. This would include humidity, temperature control, and factors of containment (air tight (which no safe deposit box is), etc.).

In the vast majority of cases, these individuals (who seem like they should be giving you the advice and not the other way around) are correct. Storing paper in an air-tight environment is a recipe for disaster.

 

Straight from the Library of Congress website:

 

"The assumption that a bound book structure squeezes out air and thus stabilizes the paper flies in the face of research cited above, which has repeatedly shown that paper bound in books or aged inside airtight enclosures ages faster than single sheets open to the environment."

 

Here's some recommended reading for anyone interested in archival storage:

 

- Temperature, Relative Humidity, Light, and Air Quality: Basic Guidelines for Preservation

- The Deterioration and Preservation of Paper: Some Essential Facts

[Theagenes]

To answer the other question; I can also tell you that as someone who is involved in conservation of antiques and related collectibles, the microchamber paper should be changed as noted. While I do not agree that every seven years is the rule, at least every ten to fifteen.

 

Please don't perpetuate this myth - there's no scientific evidence to support the theory that micro-chamber paper looses its effectiveness within 7-10 years.

 

Well, to be fair microchamber paper will eventually lose it's effectiveness once it's absorbed all the acids and polluntants it can hold, but how long this takes when stored in a comic book is anyone's guess. I would imagine it is much longer than 7-10 years given that it is used by archivists for much longer periods for old maps and documents, but I'm not aware of study that has tested this with pulp paper. I do remember someone posting that they had discussed CGC's 7-10 year policy with someone from CRI and that person just laughed at that. Of course someone from CRI isn't exactly unbiased.

 

Certainly - there's no doubt that at some point the mcp will become inert. It just irks me that CGC randomly picked 7 years as the active lifespan and that some people actually get suckered into reholdering their books due to this - it's a money grab, pure & simple.

 

With all due respect and as previously stated, I am also involved with conservation of antiques and collectibles. It is part of what dealers and collectors do on a regular basis. I never stated in my original post that seven years is the 'rule.' I simply stated the proven truth that within ten to fifteen all books should have their microchamber changed (some will say longer; some less so). If you think that after this time this paper will still be as effective as when it was first placed in the original holder, you are mistaken. Therefore, I am not helping to fathom any such 'myth.' I am merely providing basic facts to those that want to properly conserve their books.

 

In conclusion, as CGC gets older and older I have started to ask questions for those sellers that tell me they held the book for years, or pulled it right off the rack and had it graded. Some of those questions involve (assuming they were the original owner of the book); how long has it been in the slab. I would not be comfortable buying a book that was slabbed ten years ago and is still in its original slab. I also do NOT like older holders; personally.

 

There is an excellent book and even a product catalog that talks about the effectiveness of microchamber paper, as well as humidity and temperature control and the like. The effects of these environmental factors in regards to paper base materials is extreme.

 

Respectfully yours,

 

'mint'

 

With all due respect, you throw your "antique collector" credentials around quite a bit on these boards as though they actually mean something. You have no idea of the background and experience of many of the people on these boards. Didn't I just see you lecturing Gary Colabuono (Moondog) of all people on comics the other day? Look, I don't doubt you mean well and have a lot to offer, but if you try to be a little less patronizing it would help the discourse.

 

Now on the topic at hand, what exactly are your qualifications with regards to the highly specialized field of paper conservation? You state that it is "proven truth" that all books should have their microchamber paper changed. Please cite your source for this as I would very much like to read any study on the subject. What is this excellent book on microchamber paper you mention (and a product catalog? ).

 

I don't disagree with your basic premise. As I said I think everyone understands that MCP has a finite lifespan with regard to effectiveness, but how long the period is anyone's guess without actual data. Again, if you have those data I would love to see them.

 

Number one, could you please provide evidence of the thread where I supposedly did what is stated below (per your guote):

 

"Didn't I just see you lecturing Gary Colabuono (Moondog) of all people on comics the other day?"

 

You mean about curreny collecting (i.e. paper money); and NOT comic books? Did you even read what I wrote and what we were discussing? Just to be clear and for the record, this was in a pressing thread when someone was comparing the pressing of comic books to other related collectibles; mainly paper money. Since when is several weeks ago; just the other day? I am sorry, but one cannot compare 'pressing' of paper money (which is actually a linen based product with embossing) to the 'pressing' of a comic book. This is why currency collectors are often called 'rag' collectors. Ever hear of 'EPQ' and 'PPQ?' I also think that anyone reading that thread would NOT think I was disrespetful to the person in question. Most even ignored the subject entirely as it was NOT the basis of the thread. The molecular structure of paper money versus comic books is COMPLETELY different. How does this qualify as a lecture? Stating a factual analysis to a question or comparison raised is a lecture? By your opinion, does this mean I am now lecturing you? I would beg to differ.

 

Here are some books and catalogs to help you with your research in relation to conservation.

 

Without going into hardcore scientific explanation (at first); I would recommend the EXCELLENT book called; 'Saving Stuff' by Don Willaims.This is a simple DOWN TO EARTH approach about conservation. Someone mentioned that they stored their books in a safe deposit box for twenty years with no problem. Yes, this can happen but what about the individual who I know of who did the same and had nothing but moisture damaged books to show for it? The individual factors like the storage environment and location, relative humidity and temperature variation all play a vital role. This ONE experience is not conclusive enough to make a scientific observation one way or another.

 

As for catalogs, I would use what I personally use (and other MUSEUMS and auctions/auction houses I have been involved with) use:

 

University Products: they provide complete conservation advice and actually provide these tidbits of information in the catalog. A lot of museums and auction houses use their products.Private collectiors do too. It is a not so well guarded secret.

 

If you require speciality archival bags made, I would recommend Bags Unlimited; another excellent resource for storage related items. They are already known to these forums.

 

Please feel free to attack me or misread my posts. It does not change the fact that books (or any paper collectible for that matter) requires detailed care that is much more attentive than that of say glass or crystal. This is why objects made of glass are a unique part of our history. They are fragile in nature, but at the same time structured to handle the most dynamic elements of moisture, humidity, and temperature.

 

I would be more than happy to provide evidence as to how many collections of paper related collectibles I have looked at this month alone that show some kind of detoriation due to improper storage. Only one this month was a VINTAGE comic book collection; unfortunately. I normally handle rare books, manuscripts, and historical documents much older than that of fifity to seventy years. I collect in this area specifically.This is why I take all the proper precautions I can. Microchamber paper can and does lose effectiveness if not stored in an air tight environment (i.e. a 'controlled micro environment'). Some individuals who seek my advice are under the INCORRECT assumption that blocking off air flow to an item can cause damage. This is incorrect as long as it is contained in a proper CONTROLLED 'micro environment.' This means that you are creating a unique fully controlled environment for the item to remain in its natural untouched state. The safe deposit box example provided could be a perfect example IF the conditions were controlled and maintained perfectly. This would include humidity, temperature control, and factors of containment (air tight (which no safe deposit box is), etc.).

 

Feel free to seek more advice or book recommendations any time. The research however, is up to you. There is evidence to suggest more than one outcome. That being said, like a wise man once said; 'Better safe than sorry,' and in the field of antiques and collectibles, I could NOT agree more.

 

Respectfully yours,

 

'mint'

 

It really wasn't an attack. It was a request that you be less condescending. Clearly that didn't work. Look I get that you're probably used to being one of the smartest guys in the room, but trust me, that's not always the case. I've been known to handle "old things" on occasion as well.

 

Again, I'm not asking for product catalogs or popular works with nothing but anecdotes. I'm asking for empirical evidence on the duration of the efficacy of microchamber paper--preferably peer-reviewed, but I'd be happy with a gray literature report if know of one. I'm not being flippant--If that information exists I'd like to see it even if it's not on pulp paper. If such a study exists I would think CRI would reference it on their site but they don't. So please produce the evidence to back up your statement:

 

"I simply stated the proven truth that within ten to fifteen all books should have their microchamber changed"

 

I'm not saying your'e wrong. I'm just saying your self-professed expertise is not evidence, it's just anecdote.

[mintcollector]

To answer the other question; I can also tell you that as someone who is involved in conservation of antiques and related collectibles, the microchamber paper should be changed as noted. While I do not agree that every seven years is the rule, at least every ten to fifteen.

 

Please don't perpetuate this myth - there's no scientific evidence to support the theory that micro-chamber paper looses its effectiveness within 7-10 years.

 

Well, to be fair microchamber paper will eventually lose it's effectiveness once it's absorbed all the acids and polluntants it can hold, but how long this takes when stored in a comic book is anyone's guess. I would imagine it is much longer than 7-10 years given that it is used by archivists for much longer periods for old maps and documents, but I'm not aware of study that has tested this with pulp paper. I do remember someone posting that they had discussed CGC's 7-10 year policy with someone from CRI and that person just laughed at that. Of course someone from CRI isn't exactly unbiased.

 

Certainly - there's no doubt that at some point the mcp will become inert. It just irks me that CGC randomly picked 7 years as the active lifespan and that some people actually get suckered into reholdering their books due to this - it's a money grab, pure & simple.

 

With all due respect and as previously stated, I am also involved with conservation of antiques and collectibles. It is part of what dealers and collectors do on a regular basis. I never stated in my original post that seven years is the 'rule.' I simply stated the proven truth that within ten to fifteen all books should have their microchamber changed (some will say longer; some less so). If you think that after this time this paper will still be as effective as when it was first placed in the original holder, you are mistaken. Therefore, I am not helping to fathom any such 'myth.' I am merely providing basic facts to those that want to properly conserve their books.

 

In conclusion, as CGC gets older and older I have started to ask questions for those sellers that tell me they held the book for years, or pulled it right off the rack and had it graded. Some of those questions involve (assuming they were the original owner of the book); how long has it been in the slab. I would not be comfortable buying a book that was slabbed ten years ago and is still in its original slab. I also do NOT like older holders; personally.

 

There is an excellent book and even a product catalog that talks about the effectiveness of microchamber paper, as well as humidity and temperature control and the like. The effects of these environmental factors in regards to paper base materials is extreme.

 

Respectfully yours,

 

'mint'

 

With all due respect, you throw your "antique collector" credentials around quite a bit on these boards as though they actually mean something. You have no idea of the background and experience of many of the people on these boards. Didn't I just see you lecturing Gary Colabuono (Moondog) of all people on comics the other day? Look, I don't doubt you mean well and have a lot to offer, but if you try to be a little less patronizing it would help the discourse.

 

Now on the topic at hand, what exactly are your qualifications with regards to the highly specialized field of paper conservation? You state that it is "proven truth" that all books should have their microchamber paper changed. Please cite your source for this as I would very much like to read any study on the subject. What is this excellent book on microchamber paper you mention (and a product catalog? ).

 

I don't disagree with your basic premise. As I said I think everyone understands that MCP has a finite lifespan with regard to effectiveness, but how long the period is anyone's guess without actual data. Again, if you have those data I would love to see them.

 

Number one, could you please provide evidence of the thread where I supposedly did what is stated below (per your guote):

 

"Didn't I just see you lecturing Gary Colabuono (Moondog) of all people on comics the other day?"

 

You mean about curreny collecting (i.e. paper money); and NOT comic books? Did you even read what I wrote and what we were discussing? Just to be clear and for the record, this was in a pressing thread when someone was comparing the pressing of comic books to other related collectibles; mainly paper money. Since when is several weeks ago; just the other day? I am sorry, but one cannot compare 'pressing' of paper money (which is actually a linen based product with embossing) to the 'pressing' of a comic book. This is why currency collectors are often called 'rag' collectors. Ever hear of 'EPQ' and 'PPQ?' I also think that anyone reading that thread would NOT think I was disrespetful to the person in question. Most even ignored the subject entirely as it was NOT the basis of the thread. The molecular structure of paper money versus comic books is COMPLETELY different. How does this qualify as a lecture? Stating a factual analysis to a question or comparison raised is a lecture? By your opinion, does this mean I am now lecturing you? I would beg to differ.

 

Here are some books and catalogs to help you with your research in relation to conservation.

 

Without going into hardcore scientific explanation (at first); I would recommend the EXCELLENT book called; 'Saving Stuff' by Don Willaims.This is a simple DOWN TO EARTH approach about conservation. Someone mentioned that they stored their books in a safe deposit box for twenty years with no problem. Yes, this can happen but what about the individual who I know of who did the same and had nothing but moisture damaged books to show for it? The individual factors like the storage environment and location, relative humidity and temperature variation all play a vital role. This ONE experience is not conclusive enough to make a scientific observation one way or another.

 

As for catalogs, I would use what I personally use (and other MUSEUMS and auctions/auction houses I have been involved with) use:

 

University Products: they provide complete conservation advice and actually provide these tidbits of information in the catalog. A lot of museums and auction houses use their products.Private collectiors do too. It is a not so well guarded secret.

 

If you require speciality archival bags made, I would recommend Bags Unlimited; another excellent resource for storage related items. They are already known to these forums.

 

Please feel free to attack me or misread my posts. It does not change the fact that books (or any paper collectible for that matter) requires detailed care that is much more attentive than that of say glass or crystal. This is why objects made of glass are a unique part of our history. They are fragile in nature, but at the same time structured to handle the most dynamic elements of moisture, humidity, and temperature.

 

I would be more than happy to provide evidence as to how many collections of paper related collectibles I have looked at this month alone that show some kind of detoriation due to improper storage. Only one this month was a VINTAGE comic book collection; unfortunately. I normally handle rare books, manuscripts, and historical documents much older than that of fifity to seventy years. I collect in this area specifically.This is why I take all the proper precautions I can. Microchamber paper can and does lose effectiveness if not stored in an air tight environment (i.e. a 'controlled micro environment'). Some individuals who seek my advice are under the INCORRECT assumption that blocking off air flow to an item can cause damage. This is incorrect as long as it is contained in a proper CONTROLLED 'micro environment.' This means that you are creating a unique fully controlled environment for the item to remain in its natural untouched state. The safe deposit box example provided could be a perfect example IF the conditions were controlled and maintained perfectly. This would include humidity, temperature control, and factors of containment (air tight (which no safe deposit box is), etc.).

 

Feel free to seek more advice or book recommendations any time. The research however, is up to you. There is evidence to suggest more than one outcome. That being said, like a wise man once said; 'Better safe than sorry,' and in the field of antiques and collectibles, I could NOT agree more.

 

Respectfully yours,

 

'mint'

 

It really wasn't an attack. It was a request that you be less condescending. Clearly that didn't work. Look I get that you're probably used to being one of the smartest guys in the room, but trust me, that's not always the case. I've been known to handle "old things" on occasion as well.

 

Again, I'm not asking for product catalogs or popular works with nothing but anecdotes. I'm asking for empirical evidence on the duration of the efficacy of microchamber paper--preferably peer-reviewed, but I'd be happy with a gray literature report if know of one. I'm not being flippant--If that information exists I'd like to see it even if it's not on pulp paper. If such a study exists I would think CRI would reference it on their site but they don't. So please produce the evidence to back up your statement:

 

"I simply stated the proven truth that within ten to fifteen all books should have their microchamber changed"

 

I'm not saying your'e wrong. I'm just saying your self-professed expertise is not evidence, it's just anecdote.

 

Could you please STOP misquoting me or taking statements out of context. Where did I state this:

 

'I simply stated the proven truth that within ten to fifteen all books should have their micro chamber changed.'

 

 

Are you sure those were my exact words, really?

 

 

 

 

[mschmidt]

Could you please STOP misquoting me or taking statements out of context. Where did I state this:

 

'I simply stated the proven truth that within ten to fifteen all books should have their micro chamber changed.'

 

 

Are you sure those were my exact words, really?

 

With all due respect and as previously stated, I am also involved with conservation of antiques and collectibles. It is part of what dealers and collectors do on a regular basis. I never stated in my original post that seven years is the 'rule.' I simply stated the proven truth that within ten to fifteen all books should have their microchamber changed (some will say longer; some less so). If you think that after this time this paper will still be as effective as when it was first placed in the original holder, you are mistaken. Therefore, I am not helping to fathom any such 'myth.' I am merely providing basic facts to those that want to properly conserve their books.

 

Was this a trick question?

[mintcollector]

Could you please STOP misquoting me or taking statements out of context. Where did I state this:

 

'I simply stated the proven truth that within ten to fifteen all books should have their micro chamber changed.'

 

 

Are you sure those were my exact words, really?

 

With all due respect and as previously stated, I am also involved with conservation of antiques and collectibles. It is part of what dealers and collectors do on a regular basis. I never stated in my original post that seven years is the 'rule.' I simply stated the proven truth that within ten to fifteen all books should have their microchamber changed (some will say longer; some less so). If you think that after this time this paper will still be as effective as when it was first placed in the original holder, you are mistaken. Therefore, I am not helping to fathom any such 'myth.' I am merely providing basic facts to those that want to properly conserve their books.

 

Was this a trick question?

 

Yes, but my question was for 'theagenes' because he still has yet to answer my inquiry on the paper money versus comic books inquiry. My original comments were on paper money, not comic books like he claimed. This is why I replied to HIM. And yes, that was the sarcastic point of that question. I guess once again it was lost in translation.

 

Since you answered instead and since I have yet to answer your previous inquiries, I would like to.

 

Number one, a well known archival and historic document company that houses some of the most important documents in the world uses 'controlled micro environments' by thus blocking off all air flow in some instances; or by reducing it altogether in others. Your statements are in direct conflict with the findings. This has been shown (in all studies I have read) that this slows down the aging of paper related items. Your statements on the Library of Congress were correct, though taken out if context, in this regard. While I have yet to check the link fully lately (I read the website awhile ago); there is no scientific evidence that I have ever read to suggest paper ages in an 'air tight micro controlled environment', conclusively. Air tight and micro environment being the key words. By this logic any collector who stores books in backing boards and bags in a safe deposit box or puts a CGC comic book in a resealable bag, would have to worry; if air flow is cut off. However, according to all proprietary data I have read, air flow brings with it harmful contaminants. Those that place these items in secure micro environments would have to worry even more. Air tight environments are fully secure, assuming they are controlled. Humidity, temperature fluctuation, and the containment materials all matter.

 

If you store any collectible in a separate container you are attempting to create a 'micro environment.' Add silica gel and use items like bags, boards, and the like, and you are limiting air flow. You do agree that backing boards and bags should be changed every so often, correct? Micro chamber paper works much the same way, with consistent air flow. To use an example stated, had the comic books stated in a previous answer been stored in a totally controlled air tight environment, those bags and boards would not have yellowed as fast, if at all.

 

 

[Jeffro.]

 

It really wasn't an attack. It was a request that you be less condescending. Clearly that didn't work.

 

Your request has been made to him by several others. None of the requests has been successful thus far.

[Theagenes]

 

Yes, but my question was for 'theagenes' because he still has yet to answer my inquiry on the paper money versus comic books inquiry. My original comments were on paper money, not comic books like he claimed. This is why I replied to HIM. And yes, that was the sarcastic point of that question. I guess once again it was lost in translation.

 

Since you answered instead and since I have yet to answer your previous inquiries, I would like to.

 

Number one, a well known archival and historic document company that houses some of the most important documents in the world uses 'controlled micro environments' by thus blocking off all air flow in some instances; or by reducing it altogether in others. Your statements are in direct conflict with the findings. This has been shown (in all studies I have read) that this slows down the aging of paper related items. Your statements on the Library of Congress were correct, though taken out if context, in this regard. While I have yet to check the link fully lately (I read the website awhile ago); there is no scientific evidence that I have ever read to suggest paper ages in an 'air tight micro controlled environment', conclusively. Air tight and micro environment being the key words. By this logic any collector who stores books in backing boards and bags in a safe deposit box or puts a CGC comic book in a resealable bag, would have to worry; if air flow is cut off. However, according to all proprietary data I have read, air flow brings with it harmful contaminants. Those that place these items in secure micro environments would have to worry even more. Air tight environments are fully secure, assuming they are controlled. Humidity, temperature fluctuation, and the containment materials all matter.

 

If you store any collectible in a separate container you are attempting to create a 'micro environment.' Add silica gel and use items like bags, boards, and the like, and you are limiting air flow. You do agree that backing boards and bags should be changed every so often, correct? Micro chamber paper works much the same way, with consistent air flow. To use an example stated, had the comic books stated in a previous answer been stored in a totally controlled air tight environment, those bags and boards would not have yellowed as fast, if at all.

 

 

You're correct, I misremembered the nature of your exchange with Gary. He asked you an honest question about whether currency pressing had become accepted in that hobby and this was your response:

 

"Just is just my opinion, but please do not attempt to compare the pressing of comic books to another collecting field that you may not be educated in. All that this does is either make you look like you do not know what you are talking about; or causes someone who is knowledgeable in the stated field to come and state facts, thus proving you wrong."

 

This illustrates the point I was trying to make. Maybe you don't realize it but you're coming across as a pompous jerk when you post things like this. I doubt you mean to. I'm sure in real life you're a nice guy and very knowledgeable in your field, but your posting style conveys a desperate need to convince everyone that you should be recognized as some sort of collectibles guru (whether you mean it to or not). And you do this by not only constantly reminding everyone of your supposed expertise, but by trying to belittle the level of expertise of others (as you did with Gary above).

 

You made a very specific claim regarding microchamber paper, which I asked you to back up by citing your source. This was partially because I was dubious that you actually had any real evidence to back up that claim (which seems to be born out by the fact that you've posted nothing but paragraphs of non-sequitor information unrelated to original subject), but also because if there was study on the effective lifespan of microchamber paper I really would love to read it.

 

Instead you responded with this:

 

"Without going into hardcore scientific explanation (at first); I would recommend the EXCELLENT book called; 'Saving Stuff' by Don Willaims.This is a simple DOWN TO EARTH approach about conservation."

 

In other words, you wouldn't understand all that sciency stuff anyway---here's a nice general easy-to-read book on conservation for you instead.

 

And that's the problem. You immediately assume that everyone one these boards is an insufficiently_thoughtful_person and knows nothing about conservation. Do you think the arguments on vacuum vs. breathable environments haven't been discussed ad nauseum on these boards the years. Do you not think that their may be individuals on these boards whose expertise and knowledge in paper conservation equals or even exceeds your own? You clearly know very little about some of the people who post here, yet you assume that none of them could be as knowledgeable as you.

 

For all you know I could work at a government research center that houses one of the largest curation facilities in the country, responsible for the conservation and storage of vast numbers of historic objects and documents.

 

For all you know I could be a professional archaeologist who regularly has to carefully excavate and recover incredibly delicate materials from deteriorating bone to fragments of woven cloth preserved in anaerobic environments for thousands of years.

 

For all you know I could be a collector of fragile paper materials and ephemera from from the 16th century to the early 20th century, including books, prints, dime novels, newspapers, typescripts, pulps, hectographed fanzines, etc.

 

Granted, those may be far-fetched scenarios, but you don't really know, do you? Suppose even one of them were true. Don't you think I might be a little annoyed if you implied that I won't understand the science behind microchamber paper?

 

Frankly, I feel like I've wasted enough time on this conversation so I'm done. I hope that some of what I'm saying sinks in because I suspect you do have a lot to contribute, but no one is going to take you seriously unless you tone down the condescension a bit. Sadly I doubt that will happen as it seems that your natural reaction when others call you out on this is just to double down, get more defensive, and sputter something about your vast knowledge of antiques. But if you do take it to heart, and begin to engage other boardies as equals and fellow collectors rather than unwashed masses that desperately need your paternalistic guidance and wisdom, you might not only have a more enjoyable experience here, but even make some friends and (dare I say it) learn a few things.

 

Most sincerely,

Jeff

[skypinkblu]

Mint...I don't know about anyone else, but I keep getting the impression that you are trying to build yourself up as an expert all all things here. I'm not sure why,except as some kind of advertising campaign.

 

Several of us have suggested you be a little more laid back, but perhaps you aren't because you have some kind of agenda, * I'm* not smart enough to figure it out...but it's certainly the impression I get.

 

I do know that there are some VERY smart people here and Mike and Jeff are two of the smartest guys in these rooms. They have proven it, time and time again...and in a nice, helpful and non-condescending manner. You and I and a whole bunch of people could learn something from them, every day.

 

 

I don't want to sound "disrespectful"...I'm sure you have a lot of wonderful knowledge, but it comes off the wrong way.