When did pressing a comic before every sub become the norm?

[DamageInc-migration]

I wasn't suggesting it evil. Just agreeing that you need an extremely well-versed front man to run such an operation.

 

To write those articles you mostly just need a writer. I haven't seen another person with that talent on CGC's staff until Matt joined. He's not a prolific writer as that forever-in-the-works pedigree book of his is vivid evidence of, but he does enjoy it to an extent. I empathize greatly with his procrastination, I'm usually the same way.

 

(Let's assume I agree with what you say above)

Why aren't any of these terms in the CGC Glossary? Certainly you don't need a "real writer" to include these terms there?

[originalisbest]

But why wasn't CGC trying the educate the public about staining, warping, edge rippling, crushed spines, reverse spine-roll, flaring / butterfly, cockling, pebbling, gloss stains and melted inks 5 years ago?

 

They lacked a writer like Matt Nelson. Matt has a long history of both understanding the value of educating collectors and possessing the writing skill to do so. He also seems to enjoy it, and that's not a common trait. Borock is a pretty good writer, but I've never seen evidence he enjoys it like Matt does. Litch isn't bad at writing just based upon what I've seen him write in these forums, but I haven't seen that he has the desire to write as much as Matt always has. I don't think I've ever seen Haspel write a word, anywhere.

 

You've got to be kidding

 

No. In what industry do you work where public speaking or educational writing for the public is a common skill?

 

The spin is everything. (thumbs u

 

You guys are master conspiracy theorists. Certainly you're right that CGC has had a historical interest in not educating the public on restoration detection,

 

 

but now, yes, they sell pressing, so they are deciding now's a good time to educate the public on detecting damage due to pressing. It's self-serving, but I'm enjoying the articles tremendously. It's not the evil you're portraying it to be.

 

You say toe-may-toe, I say tow-mah-tow.

 

There's a certain amount of rolling-eyed, tinfoil-hat wearing, fingers-twitching goblins-lurk-around-the-corner populace in every field of endeavor. Comic collectin' 'specially.

[fantastic_four]

Certainly you don't need a "real writer" to include these terms there?

 

But you do need one to coin the terms in the first place. I'm unfamiliar with some of these terms until I heard Matt use them--Joey, do you use all of the terms Matt is using in his articles? They may be his own personal descriptions for the concepts he's describing. They're certainly not all in wide use, nor did I see some of them in Overstreet's Grading Guide.

[ChrisInBaltimore]

But why wasn't CGC trying the educate the public about staining, warping, edge rippling, crushed spines, reverse spine-roll, flaring / butterfly, cockling, pebbling, gloss stains and melted inks 5 years ago?

 

They have. They are putting out tidbits in their monthly newsletter about bad pressing... EXAMPLE

 

(thumbs u

 

But why now and not 5 years ago?

 

Because CGC owns a pressing company now

 

Exactly, they're hypocrites (thumbs u

 

How does that make them hypocrites? I'm not seeing it...

[fantastic_four]

So far as I know, pressing is the only defect or treatment widely considered restoration yet not disclosed by the CGC. My hope is that at some point in the future, market forces will compel the CGC to note evidence of pressing on the label.

 

CGC doesn't note almost any defects on the label at all. They used to note some select defects, but they stopped because customers kept thinking the defects they did choose to list were separate from the grade. I assume by "treatments" you mean restoration, and in the case of pressing they don't note it because they can't detect it. Pressing that isn't done well causes damage--perhaps that's what you're hoping they'll note in the future, pressing damage. Maybe they will.

[fantastic_four]

There has not been enough research to suss out exact details such as "exposure to X temperature for Y minutes will cause a Z% increase in acidity," etc., but there is good reason to err on the side of caution in terms of exposing books to high heat.

 

There has been more than you think--the Library of Congress does "advanced aging" tests on paper when doing various types of testing by exposing it to extreme heat to simulate aging. It's not exact, but they can approximate it. LoC conservationists told me in the past they avoid heat pressing when possible, but it causes minor enough aging such that they'll use it when necessary because safe display of a document isn't possible without pressing, such as a document that's heavily crumpled into a ball.

[jimbo_707]

Pressing of comic books is a con game because it's getting a buyer to pay more for something then he would if he had complete knowledge of the book's condition.

 

Any action that could impact the condition of the book (like pressing) should be disclosed. That would include full descriptions of how the book has been stored over the course of its life, the number of times it was read. Whether anyone with sticky hands ever touched the book, etc... All actions (including pressing) should be disclosed.

Most of the things you mentioned would, if significant, have a readily identifiable effect on the condition of the book. Storage conditions would affect the page quality, handling with sticky hands would cause stains, multiple readings would likely cause spine stress, etc. None of those things would make other defects less apparent the way pressing does. A better example would be solvent cleaning: if you were selling a raw book that you knew had been cleaned, that should be disclosed. So far as I know, pressing is the only defect or treatment widely considered restoration yet not disclosed by the CGC. My hope is that at some point in the future, market forces will compel the CGC to note evidence of pressing on the label.

First, keep in mind that pressing does not restore a comic book to it's previous condition, it only gives the appearance of having done so. The creases and wrinkles are still there at a microscopic level.

 

I'll agree with you there in some aspects. An extremely flat comic is not the same as it was when it was created (stapled and then folded over, with a slight curvature). I dont know about the microscopic-ness of still existing creases. I dont collect my books at a microscopic level, just eye level, and eye appeal.

 

What about other treatments that you can't see with the naked eye, like solvent cleaning or micro-trimming? Do you not care about those things?

To understand that, it helps if you know the difference between elastic deformation and plastic deformation. If you bend or roll a comic cover in your fingers slightly, but it goes back to being flat as soon as you let go, that is elastic deformation. If you do the same thing but leave a finger bend, that's plastic deformation, which is irreversible. Plastic deformation cannot be pressed out, it can only be obscured or hidden.

 

Interesting, can you cite this, or provide some visual examples? I did a little google searching but couldnt find anything. It makes sense that a bent piece of paper is fundamentally change when it does not flex back to its natural position, and that pressing (which puts it back in its natural position) has to affect the paper by again changing the paper structure to go flat.

Elastic and plastic deformation are concepts that I learned about while acquiring an engineering degree; any basic material science textbook should treat those terms. (I worked as a mechanical engineer for several years before I decided to go into teaching. I may have to go back to it, because teaching isn't doing such a good job of supporting my habit...I mean hobby!)

 

If an 8.0 book (worth $1000) is pressed and gets slabbed as a 9.0, in my opinion it is not a true 9.0, it is an 8.0 that has been manipulated to look like a 9.0 to the naked eye. To make matters worse, the book has been exposed to extreme heat, which could be a catalyst for deterioration of the page quality in the long run. If I then unwittingly buy that book for $2000 (the 9.0 price), I have been robbed of $1000. If I never crack out the book and look at it under a microscope, I may not know that I have been robbed, but I have been robbed just the same.

 

"Robbed" is less of a grey area though...If the book that you purchased for $2k is worth $2k on the market, then I would argue that you were robbed of nothing. While you might not value you it as $2k, the market (likely) does. ... I would ask why are you bothering with buying CGC graded books when you disagree so fundamentally on grading.

If the book is worth $2K in the market, that value is based on the market's ignorance related to pressing (whether it's detectable, etc.). I suspect that eventually, pressed books will be viewed the way PLOD books are now, once detection techniques catch up. I can't usually tell (especially from a scan posted in an online auction) whether a book has been pressed, but I do pay a premium if I can determine that a book has not been pressed (either by buying OO books from dealers I trust or by identifying defects like finger bends, etc., that would vanish with even a light pressing. I buy slabbed books primarily because 1) I trust the CGC's restoration detection for everything other than pressing and 2) the mid-to-high-grade GA books I buy seldom come up for sale raw.

 

You also say that it "could" be a catalyst... which is not that same as "will"... its a supposition that has no specific facts behind it ...

Not true - there is a well-established qualitative relationship between heat and page quality; i.e., books stored in cooler environments stay whiter and more supple. There has not been enough research to suss out exact details such as "exposure to X temperature for Y minutes will cause a Z% increase in acidity," etc., but there is good reason to err on the side of caution in terms of exposing books to high heat.

It seems very easy for people to gloss over the extent to which sellers of books with undisclosed pressing are victimizing the collectors who buy those books.

 

There's no monetary impact from the market (pressed and non-pressed books change hands at the same rate).

False! I'm part of the market, and I pay significantly more for books that I believe to be unpressed. If I know a book has been pressed, I typically won't bid at all.

[originalisbest]

Pressing of comic books is a con game because it's getting a buyer to pay more for something then he would if he had complete knowledge of the book's condition.

 

Any action that could impact the condition of the book (like pressing) should be disclosed. That would include full descriptions of how the book has been stored over the course of its life, the number of times it was read. Whether anyone with sticky hands ever touched the book, etc... All actions (including pressing) should be disclosed.

Most of the things you mentioned would, if significant, have a readily identifiable effect on the condition of the book. Storage conditions would affect the page quality, handling with sticky hands would cause stains, multiple readings would likely cause spine stress, etc. None of those things would make other defects less apparent the way pressing does. A better example would be solvent cleaning: if you were selling a raw book that you knew had been cleaned, that should be disclosed. So far as I know, pressing is the only defect or treatment widely considered restoration yet not disclosed by the CGC. My hope is that at some point in the future, market forces will compel the CGC to note evidence of pressing on the label.

First, keep in mind that pressing does not restore a comic book to it's previous condition, it only gives the appearance of having done so. The creases and wrinkles are still there at a microscopic level.

 

I'll agree with you there in some aspects. An extremely flat comic is not the same as it was when it was created (stapled and then folded over, with a slight curvature). I dont know about the microscopic-ness of still existing creases. I dont collect my books at a microscopic level, just eye level, and eye appeal.

 

What about other treatments that you can't see with the naked eye, like solvent cleaning or micro-trimming? Do you not care about those things?

To understand that, it helps if you know the difference between elastic deformation and plastic deformation. If you bend or roll a comic cover in your fingers slightly, but it goes back to being flat as soon as you let go, that is elastic deformation. If you do the same thing but leave a finger bend, that's plastic deformation, which is irreversible. Plastic deformation cannot be pressed out, it can only be obscured or hidden.

 

Interesting, can you cite this, or provide some visual examples? I did a little google searching but couldnt find anything. It makes sense that a bent piece of paper is fundamentally change when it does not flex back to its natural position, and that pressing (which puts it back in its natural position) has to affect the paper by again changing the paper structure to go flat.

Elastic and plastic deformation are concepts that I learned about while acquiring an engineering degree; any basic material science textbook should treat those terms. (I worked as a mechanical engineer for several years before I decided to go into teaching. I may have to go back to it, because teaching isn't doing such a good job of supporting my habit...I mean hobby!)

 

If an 8.0 book (worth $1000) is pressed and gets slabbed as a 9.0, in my opinion it is not a true 9.0, it is an 8.0 that has been manipulated to look like a 9.0 to the naked eye. To make matters worse, the book has been exposed to extreme heat, which could be a catalyst for deterioration of the page quality in the long run. If I then unwittingly buy that book for $2000 (the 9.0 price), I have been robbed of $1000. If I never crack out the book and look at it under a microscope, I may not know that I have been robbed, but I have been robbed just the same.

 

"Robbed" is less of a grey area though...If the book that you purchased for $2k is worth $2k on the market, then I would argue that you were robbed of nothing. While you might not value you it as $2k, the market (likely) does. ... I would ask why are you bothering with buying CGC graded books when you disagree so fundamentally on grading.

If the book is worth $2K in the market, that value is based on the market's ignorance related to pressing (whether it's detectable, etc.). I suspect that eventually, pressed books will be viewed the way PLOD books are now, once detection techniques catch up. I can't usually tell (especially from a scan posted in an online auction) whether a book has been pressed, but I do pay a premium if I can determine that a book has not been pressed (either by buying OO books from dealers I trust or by identifying defects like finger bends, etc., that would vanish with even a light pressing. I buy slabbed books primarily because 1) I trust the CGC's restoration detection for everything other than pressing and 2) the mid-to-high-grade GA books I buy seldom come up for sale raw.

 

You also say that it "could" be a catalyst... which is not that same as "will"... its a supposition that has no specific facts behind it ...

Not true - there is a well-established qualitative relationship between heat and page quality; i.e., books stored in cooler environments stay whiter and more supple. There has not been enough research to suss out exact details such as "exposure to X temperature for Y minutes will cause a Z% increase in acidity," etc., but there is good reason to err on the side of caution in terms of exposing books to high heat.

It seems very easy for people to gloss over the extent to which sellers of books with undisclosed pressing are victimizing the collectors who buy those books.

 

There's no monetary impact from the market (pressed and non-pressed books change hands at the same rate).

False! I'm part of the market, and I pay significantly more for books that I believe to be unpressed. If I know a book has been pressed, I typically won't bid at all.

 

This has been pointed out before by awful people such as myself, but if you think gentle finger bends in a cover are proof that those nasty old pressers haven't gotten to a book, I guess it's not too far a leap that someone could press a book to get rid of the "worst" pressable defects, then introduce a few select finger bends to fool the ultimate buyer who doubtless would exclaim "Ho! a gentle finger bend. Surely this book hath never been squished."

[ItsJustRyan]

But why wasn't CGC trying the educate the public about staining, warping, edge rippling, crushed spines, reverse spine-roll, flaring / butterfly, cockling, pebbling, gloss stains and melted inks 5 years ago?

 

They have. They are putting out tidbits in their monthly newsletter about bad pressing... EXAMPLE

 

(thumbs u

 

But why now and not 5 years ago?

 

Because CGC owns a pressing company now

 

Exactly, they're hypocrites (thumbs u

 

How does that make them hypocrites? I'm not seeing it...

 

You don't see it Chris because its not hypocritical

 

It would be if CGC bashed pressing and then endorsed it. Kinda like Paula Dean endorsing diabetes medication.

[jimbo_707]

 

This has been pointed out before by awful people such as myself, but if you think gentle finger bends in a cover are proof that those nasty old pressers haven't gotten to a book, I guess it's not too far a leap that someone could press a book to get rid of the "worst" pressable defects, then introduce a few select finger bends to fool the ultimate buyer who doubtless would exclaim "Ho! a gentle finger bend. Surely this book hath never been squished."

 

True. In fact, I'm sure it's happened.

[jimbo_707]

First, keep in mind that pressing does not restore a comic book to it's previous condition, it only gives the appearance of having done so. The creases and wrinkles are still there at a microscopic level.

 

To understand that, it helps if you know the difference between elastic deformation and plastic deformation. If you bend or roll a comic cover in your fingers slightly, but it goes back to being flat as soon as you let go, that is elastic deformation. If you do the same thing but leave a finger bend, that's plastic deformation, which is irreversible. Plastic deformation cannot be pressed out, it can only be obscured or hidden.

 

That's all accurate, but nobody knows how to establish that the broken paper fibers you're describing as "plastic deformation" were redirected by pressing. Also the fibers don't always break--pressing corrects a lot of issues that are far more subtle damage to the fibers.

 

If you establish a method to consistently and reliably detect pressing via microscopic evaluation, please do share it. Nobody has to date. I do agree with your thinking--if anyone determines a way to detect pressing, microscopic evaluation of the fibers is the way it will be done.

 

To make matters worse, the book has been exposed to extreme heat, which could be a catalyst for deterioration of the page quality in the long run.

 

This is accurate, but only to an extremely minor extent. Somewhere in the same neighborhood as what a suntan does to the long-term condition of human skin. We've discussed this issue at great depth in the past.

 

Minor? Perhaps. But I consider my comic books works of art to be treasured. I want them to still be fresh and supple 1,000 years from now, long after I'm gone. That's why I pay for archival-quality storage materials. That's why I don't look at them under fluorescent light; if I want to look at my collection, I take the fluorescent bulb out of the socket and put in an incandescent bulb. (I don't take them out during the day, ever.) That's why I spend a significant amount of money on air conditioning in order to keep them cool during the summer months. In fact, I bought a book in a Heritage auction a few weeks ago, but I asked them not to ship it to me until after Labor Day so that it wouldn't have to travel in the heat of summer. The point is, to me, the thought of doing something to a comic that could damage it even a little bit is unconscionable.

 

Aside from the heat and deception issues, my loathing of pressing stems from the fact that it can damage books in many ways. I've seen books with staple tears, chipped corners, and pieces out of the edge, all from pressing attempts. No matter how skilled a presser is, damage can occur. Even if it only happens once in a while, once in a while is too often to justify the risk.

[VintageComics]

Another thing that I've repeatedly said in previous pressing conversations is that pressing is not evil, nor are the people that do it doing anything wrong.

 

People just vilify it because of the potential dollars and cents involved. If it was over $1 incentives, nobody would ever care whether a book was pressed or not. It's because there can be $100's and $1000's involved that it's controversial.

 

The reason there are $100's and $1000's involved is because some people want the best and will pay for it regardless of don't care how it got there. They just want it.

 

The price spread between pressed/unpressed books would probably completely disappear if people who didn't want pressed books would pay the "next grade price" for an unpressed book.

 

If you want to stop pressing incentive, then the easiest way to do it is to pay the "pressed price" for unpressed books.

 

It's simple economics.

 

 

 

 

[miraclemet]

...my loathing of pressing stems from the fact that it can damage books in many ways. I've seen books with staple tears, chipped corners, and pieces out of the edge, all from pressing attempts. No matter how skilled a presser is, damage can occur. Even if it only happens once in a while, once in a while is too often to justify the risk.

 

using your logic you also loathe people who read comic books, sell comic books and distribute comic books. Any of whom can comitt an act that could damage a book... and even if it only happened once in a while, its just to much to justify the risk.

 

Instead all books will reside at the place of publish, for visitors to observe (climate controlled environment, only visible from the observation deck please, no flash photography please...)

 

Im amazed you didnt plan on picking up the book in hand at Heritage. I mean you KNOW shippers can damage the book, so why risk it?

 

(all said in jest... love the spectrum of comic collectors on here, from the lackadaisical to the obsessive and everywhere in between!)

[VintageComics]

Aside from the heat and deception issues, my loathing of pressing stems from the fact that it can damage books in many ways. I've seen books with staple tears, chipped corners, and pieces out of the edge, all from pressing attempts. No matter how skilled a presser is, damage can occur. Even if it only happens once in a while, once in a while is too often to justify the risk.

 

Damage can occur anywhere at any time.

 

Your comics were pressed and heated multiple times when they were published.

 

Your comics are subject to heat and impact and humidity all the way from the presses to the newsstand to the Original Owner's first home, to the Fed Ex truck from the dealer who found the collection to sitting in a hot truck over a weekend to CGC to Heritage, etc, etc. They go through hell and back a 100 times before they ever end up in a collection 50 years later.

 

Your comics are affected every time they are handled, whether it's getting them graded or just reading them (many collectors still like handling the paper - I know I do).

 

If you feel there is value in keeping them out of an additional person's hands to keep them from getting damaged then that's fine, but in reality the percentage of damaged books is small. Probably less than 1 or 2%.

 

 

Beat me to it!

[jimbo_707]

The price spread between pressed/unpressed books would probably completely disappear if people who didn't want pressed books would pay the "next grade price" for an unpressed book.

 

If you want to stop pressing incentive, then the easiest way to do it is to pay the "pressed price" for unpressed books.

I do, but unfortunately, I'm in the minority.

[VintageComics]

The price spread between pressed/unpressed books would probably completely disappear if people who didn't want pressed books would pay the "next grade price" for an unpressed book.

 

If you want to stop pressing incentive, then the easiest way to do it is to pay the "pressed price" for unpressed books.

I do, but unfortunately, I'm in the minority.

 

[DamageInc-migration]

But why wasn't CGC trying the educate the public about staining, warping, edge rippling, crushed spines, reverse spine-roll, flaring / butterfly, cockling, pebbling, gloss stains and melted inks 5 years ago?

 

They lacked a writer like Matt Nelson. Matt has a long history of both understanding the value of educating collectors and possessing the writing skill to do so. He also seems to enjoy it, and that's not a common trait. Borock is a pretty good writer, but I've never seen evidence he enjoys it like Matt does. Litch isn't bad at writing just based upon what I've seen him write in these forums, but I haven't seen that he has the desire to write as much as Matt always has. I don't think I've ever seen Haspel write a word, anywhere.

 

You've got to be kidding

 

No. In what industry do you work where public speaking or educational writing for the public is a common skill?

 

The spin is everything. (thumbs u

 

You guys are master conspiracy theorists. Certainly you're right that CGC has had a historical interest in not educating the public on restoration detection,

 

 

but now, yes, they sell pressing, so they are deciding now's a good time to educate the public on detecting damage due to pressing. It's self-serving, but I'm enjoying the articles tremendously. It's not the evil you're portraying it to be.

 

You say toe-may-toe, I say tow-mah-tow.

 

There's a certain amount of rolling-eyed, tinfoil-hat wearing, fingers-twitching goblins-lurk-around-the-corner populace in every field of endeavor. Comic collectin' 'specially.

 

Oh great, seeing OIB show up is like seeing conditionfreak show up in a "gay superheroes" thread. You just know that eventually he'll say something really stupid.

[Ryan.]

Oh great, seeing OIB show up is like seeing conditionfreak show up in a "gay superheroes" thread. You just know that eventually he'll say something really stupid.

 

[mrmyst]

Ouch.

[joeypost]

Certainly you don't need a "real writer" to include these terms there?

 

But you do need one to coin the terms in the first place. I'm unfamiliar with some of these terms until I heard Matt use them--Joey, do you use all of the terms Matt is using in his articles? They may be his own personal descriptions for the concepts he's describing. They're certainly not all in wide use, nor did I see some of them in Overstreet's Grading Guide.

 

I do not use the same exact terms, but some overlapping of terms does exist.