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

[thirdgreenham]

Who are the pressers here on the board again? JoeyPost...and who else?

 

Peace,

 

Chip

 

I have a panini press. Does that count?

[originalisbest]

Who are the pressers here on the board again? JoeyPost...and who else?

 

Peace,

 

Chip

 

Well, there's evil Matt Nelson (a dirty presser by his own definition) but not sure who else, I'm sure there are more.

 

I happen to think Matt and Joey are both top-notch guys.

[Chip Cataldo]

Dirty presser? .

 

Peace,

 

Chip

[originalisbest]

Dirty presser? .

 

Peace,

 

Chip

 

That was Matt's definition of himself (from some time ago.)

[Prince Namor]

You can't continue to insist that you are against pressing for fear of damage to a book when we all endanger books with any sort of action except leaving them to sit in climate controlled, dark closet / mylar / acid free board.

 

Some of you might have seen that annual thread where Golden Age collectors in the GA forum sitting around a table at rarehighgrade's house during SD con and looking at some of the rarest and most precious books in existence. Chuch copies of GA GGA books, Church copies of pre Batman Detective Comics, Superman #1, blah, blah, blah.

 

You know what surprised me? There were drinks on the tables with the books. Wet drinks. The kind cause immediate, irreversible damage.

 

Were people outraged about the possible damage? There were a few jokes made about it, but nobody was called any mean names about it. Jimbo might have even participated in the thread...I can't remember.

 

Our books are endangered every single time they are not sitting at criogenic rest so for me that negates the "oh, it might get damaged during pressing" fear. It might get damaged during grading / shipping / reading (on or off the toilet) / showing off to family and friends / sharing / lugging them around at shows / sitting in the back of a truck being driven across the country, etc.

 

In some circles logic like this is called straining at gnats but swallowing camels.

 

It just doesn't take into perspective the big picture.

 

That's a well-reasoned position. One I can't really disagree with all that much.

 

For me, this is a hobby with relations driven by transactions, whether that be talking shop, buying or selling. In every instance, those transactions hinge on our reputations and integrity.

 

Following this path of logic to it's conclusion, when the transaction involves the exchange of goods for money, you are in essence buying that sellers reputation.

 

The idea of transacting under false pretenses is one thing I simply cannot reconcile about the play on reconditioning books and manipulating their appearance without disclosure of the work carried out.

 

This should not mean one should adopt a take no prisoners attitude simply because the certification market has enabled, commodified and legitimized the practice of transacting without the need to divulge "hidden" work or defects between the covers.

 

It might not happen overnight, in a week, in a month or for several years. But the perception problems associated to the way this hobby has used reconditioning methods to salt grades, values and hyper-inflated market gains purely for greed will eventually catch-up with it.

 

So if someone from the SDCC thread ends up selling one of those books, they should disclose that it was once at a table with wet drinks?

[comicwiz]

You can't continue to insist that you are against pressing for fear of damage to a book when we all endanger books with any sort of action except leaving them to sit in climate controlled, dark closet / mylar / acid free board.

 

Some of you might have seen that annual thread where Golden Age collectors in the GA forum sitting around a table at rarehighgrade's house during SD con and looking at some of the rarest and most precious books in existence. Chuch copies of GA GGA books, Church copies of pre Batman Detective Comics, Superman #1, blah, blah, blah.

 

You know what surprised me? There were drinks on the tables with the books. Wet drinks. The kind cause immediate, irreversible damage.

 

Were people outraged about the possible damage? There were a few jokes made about it, but nobody was called any mean names about it. Jimbo might have even participated in the thread...I can't remember.

 

Our books are endangered every single time they are not sitting at criogenic rest so for me that negates the "oh, it might get damaged during pressing" fear. It might get damaged during grading / shipping / reading (on or off the toilet) / showing off to family and friends / sharing / lugging them around at shows / sitting in the back of a truck being driven across the country, etc.

 

In some circles logic like this is called straining at gnats but swallowing camels.

 

It just doesn't take into perspective the big picture.

 

That's a well-reasoned position. One I can't really disagree with all that much.

 

For me, this is a hobby with relations driven by transactions, whether that be talking shop, buying or selling. In every instance, those transactions hinge on our reputations and integrity.

 

Following this path of logic to it's conclusion, when the transaction involves the exchange of goods for money, you are in essence buying that sellers reputation.

 

The idea of transacting under false pretenses is one thing I simply cannot reconcile about the play on reconditioning books and manipulating their appearance without disclosure of the work carried out.

 

This should not mean one should adopt a take no prisoners attitude simply because the certification market has enabled, commodified and legitimized the practice of transacting without the need to divulge "hidden" work or defects between the covers.

 

It might not happen overnight, in a week, in a month or for several years. But the perception problems associated to the way this hobby has used reconditioning methods to salt grades, values and hyper-inflated market gains purely for greed will eventually catch-up with it.

 

So if someone from the SDCC thread ends up selling one of those books, they should disclose that it was once at a table with wet drinks?

 

Probably not necessary, unless you've left your books with that dealer to submit to CGC.

[comicwiz]

You can't continue to insist that you are against pressing for fear of damage to a book when we all endanger books with any sort of action except leaving them to sit in climate controlled, dark closet / mylar / acid free board.

 

Some of you might have seen that annual thread where Golden Age collectors in the GA forum sitting around a table at rarehighgrade's house during SD con and looking at some of the rarest and most precious books in existence. Chuch copies of GA GGA books, Church copies of pre Batman Detective Comics, Superman #1, blah, blah, blah.

 

You know what surprised me? There were drinks on the tables with the books. Wet drinks. The kind cause immediate, irreversible damage.

 

Were people outraged about the possible damage? There were a few jokes made about it, but nobody was called any mean names about it. Jimbo might have even participated in the thread...I can't remember.

 

Our books are endangered every single time they are not sitting at criogenic rest so for me that negates the "oh, it might get damaged during pressing" fear. It might get damaged during grading / shipping / reading (on or off the toilet) / showing off to family and friends / sharing / lugging them around at shows / sitting in the back of a truck being driven across the country, etc.

 

In some circles logic like this is called straining at gnats but swallowing camels.

 

It just doesn't take into perspective the big picture.

 

That's a well-reasoned position. One I can't really disagree with all that much.

 

For me, this is a hobby with relations driven by transactions, whether that be talking shop, buying or selling. In every instance, those transactions hinge on our reputations and integrity.

 

Following this path of logic to it's conclusion, when the transaction involves the exchange of goods for money, you are in essence buying that sellers reputation.

 

The idea of transacting under false pretenses is one thing I simply cannot reconcile about the play on reconditioning books and manipulating their appearance without disclosure of the work carried out.

 

This should not mean one should adopt a take no prisoners attitude simply because the certification market has enabled, commodified and legitimized the practice of transacting without the need to divulge "hidden" work or defects between the covers.

 

It might not happen overnight, in a week, in a month or for several years. But the perception problems associated to the way this hobby has used reconditioning methods to salt grades, values and hyper-inflated market gains purely for greed will eventually catch-up with it.

 

I disagree. Using an example from the coins world (I often get jumped on for equating coins to comics, but whatever) there are acceptable degrees of altering a coin's appearance, and definitely fraudulent ones. Dipping a coin (if silver or gold, sometimes nickel, copper no (copper don't dip well) is an accepted practice, particularly if done by one with skills and experience. To the point where mention of same is hardly noted, UNLESS the coin is "dipped out", to the point where the appearance is unfavorably altered. Liken this to a good press job (undetectable) vs a bad one (way overdone, waffled, fanning, crushed what have yous.) So dipping = OK, if done right and well.

 

However, there are coin doctors who further the pursuit of enhancing a coin with chemicals, lasering, puttying, smoking, etc. with intent to deceive. Liken this to unmentioned ct, tear seals, glue pot and paste (underlining: when not mentioned -- not jabbing here at honest restoration techniques meant to be reversible/preserve books.)

 

The coin market says dipping is OK; more nefarious work, not OK. I see many parallels to comics with the one exception: it's actually pretty easy, with a practiced eye, to know dipped (and especially, dipped out) from not. I maintain that with a pressed book, absent personal knowledge of its history - not so much.

 

How would you treat a book, which spent nearly its entire life dismembered and trapped behind drywall, only to be salvaged, reassembled, and sold under the pretense the book had always been intact? Does the need to make "mo money" and thump ones chest on another "rare find" trump the need to know the history of the book and the lab work that allowed it to grade true blue?

 

I don't think it's all that necessary in the context of what I'm describing to list comparable practices in other collecting categories because this hobby is replete with it's own historical reference and vantage point. Namely, that comic certification played both sides long enough for those who saw a financial benefit in gamifying grades to give this activity legitimacy. What I'm saying is that reasons like "everyone else was doing it" or "if I didn't do it, someone else would" are what most of the players will find themselves saying to excuse the conduct and behaviour.

 

I won't be that guy.

[originalisbest]

You can't continue to insist that you are against pressing for fear of damage to a book when we all endanger books with any sort of action except leaving them to sit in climate controlled, dark closet / mylar / acid free board.

 

Some of you might have seen that annual thread where Golden Age collectors in the GA forum sitting around a table at rarehighgrade's house during SD con and looking at some of the rarest and most precious books in existence. Chuch copies of GA GGA books, Church copies of pre Batman Detective Comics, Superman #1, blah, blah, blah.

 

You know what surprised me? There were drinks on the tables with the books. Wet drinks. The kind cause immediate, irreversible damage.

 

Were people outraged about the possible damage? There were a few jokes made about it, but nobody was called any mean names about it. Jimbo might have even participated in the thread...I can't remember.

 

Our books are endangered every single time they are not sitting at criogenic rest so for me that negates the "oh, it might get damaged during pressing" fear. It might get damaged during grading / shipping / reading (on or off the toilet) / showing off to family and friends / sharing / lugging them around at shows / sitting in the back of a truck being driven across the country, etc.

 

In some circles logic like this is called straining at gnats but swallowing camels.

 

It just doesn't take into perspective the big picture.

 

That's a well-reasoned position. One I can't really disagree with all that much.

 

For me, this is a hobby with relations driven by transactions, whether that be talking shop, buying or selling. In every instance, those transactions hinge on our reputations and integrity.

 

Following this path of logic to it's conclusion, when the transaction involves the exchange of goods for money, you are in essence buying that sellers reputation.

 

The idea of transacting under false pretenses is one thing I simply cannot reconcile about the play on reconditioning books and manipulating their appearance without disclosure of the work carried out.

 

This should not mean one should adopt a take no prisoners attitude simply because the certification market has enabled, commodified and legitimized the practice of transacting without the need to divulge "hidden" work or defects between the covers.

 

It might not happen overnight, in a week, in a month or for several years. But the perception problems associated to the way this hobby has used reconditioning methods to salt grades, values and hyper-inflated market gains purely for greed will eventually catch-up with it.

 

I disagree. Using an example from the coins world (I often get jumped on for equating coins to comics, but whatever) there are acceptable degrees of altering a coin's appearance, and definitely fraudulent ones. Dipping a coin (if silver or gold, sometimes nickel, copper no (copper don't dip well) is an accepted practice, particularly if done by one with skills and experience. To the point where mention of same is hardly noted, UNLESS the coin is "dipped out", to the point where the appearance is unfavorably altered. Liken this to a good press job (undetectable) vs a bad one (way overdone, waffled, fanning, crushed what have yous.) So dipping = OK, if done right and well.

 

However, there are coin doctors who further the pursuit of enhancing a coin with chemicals, lasering, puttying, smoking, etc. with intent to deceive. Liken this to unmentioned ct, tear seals, glue pot and paste (underlining: when not mentioned -- not jabbing here at honest restoration techniques meant to be reversible/preserve books.)

 

The coin market says dipping is OK; more nefarious work, not OK. I see many parallels to comics with the one exception: it's actually pretty easy, with a practiced eye, to know dipped (and especially, dipped out) from not. I maintain that with a pressed book, absent personal knowledge of its history - not so much.

 

How would you treat a book, which spent nearly its entire life dismembered and trapped behind drywall, only to be salvaged, reassembled, and sold under the pretense the book had always been intact? Does the need to make "mo money" and thump ones chest on another "rare find" trump the need to know the history of the book and the lab work that allowed it to grade true blue?

 

I don't think it's all that necessary in the context of what I'm describing to list comparable practices because what certification did was play both sides long enough for those who saw a financial benefit in gamifying grades to give this activity legitimacy. All I'm saying is that reasons like "everyone else was doing it" or "if I didn't do it, someone else would" are what most of the players will find themselves saying to excuse the conduct and behaviour.

 

I won't be that guy.

 

I think I'd say I don't paint any and all work done on a book with the same, big black-tar brush that you seem to use in your example. It depends on the work, it depends on the book.

 

I once burnished a fingerprint off an old '50s book that revealed a nice, unblemished surface below, and you really couldn't tell, not in any angled light, that the fingerprint had been there, or that anything was amiss with the gloss of the book. It sits happily in my collection. I must be the worst kind of criminal.

[Sqeggs]

How would you treat a book, which spent nearly its entire life dismembered and trapped behind drywall, only to be salvaged, reassembled, and sold under the pretense the book had always been intact?

 

If you are referring to the Action 1, the story of its find was very widely publicized. I would guess anyone who bid on it knew the story. Was it dismembered while behind the drywall? I thought it was ripped in a scuffle between the finder and a relative.

[jimbo_707]

You can't continue to insist that you are against pressing for fear of damage to a book when we all endanger books with any sort of action except leaving them to sit in climate controlled, dark closet / mylar / acid free board.

 

Some of you might have seen that annual thread where Golden Age collectors in the GA forum sitting around a table at rarehighgrade's house during SD con and looking at some of the rarest and most precious books in existence. Chuch copies of GA GGA books, Church copies of pre Batman Detective Comics, Superman #1, blah, blah, blah.

 

You know what surprised me? There were drinks on the tables with the books. Wet drinks. The kind cause immediate, irreversible damage.

 

Were people outraged about the possible damage? There were a few jokes made about it, but nobody was called any mean names about it. Jimbo might have even participated in the thread...I can't remember.

 

Our books are endangered every single time they are not sitting at criogenic rest so for me that negates the "oh, it might get damaged during pressing" fear. It might get damaged during grading / shipping / reading (on or off the toilet) / showing off to family and friends / sharing / lugging them around at shows / sitting in the back of a truck being driven across the country, etc.

 

In some circles logic like this is called straining at gnats but swallowing camels.

 

It just doesn't take into perspective the big picture.

I had to think about these comments for a moment, and you do make some valid points.

 

For the record, keeping books in a climate controlled, dark closet is exactly what I do with mine most of the time. I do enjoy looking at my slabbed books in their slabs. On rare occasions, I'll look at the interior art in some of my lower-grade books. I haven't read a high-grade GA book in well over 20 years; I normally read reprints or digital copies. As a kid, I used to read every book I bought. I've had a learning curve like anyone else, and I remember damaging books on occasion, which is why I now handle my books rarely and with extreme care. I did enjoy, and sometimes miss, reading those vintage books.

 

In terms of the SD thread, I saw it but may not have commented. I guess I'm willing to overlook risks that are taken for the sake of enjoying a book as opposed to risks that are taken in order to turn a profit on a book or to one-up someone else. (You will never see one of my raw books near a slice of melba toast let alone an open bottle of beer.) Comic books are to be enjoyed or appreciated; I don't want to lose sight of that.

 

I did scan some of my books so I could share them with other boardies, and I had misgivings about doing that because I've heard that light can damage books. As an adult I haven't done anything to a book that involves as much risk as does heating it up and squeezing the bejesus out if it. (As a kid I fell asleep reading comics in bed, etc.) The thought of people doing that - in contrast to the extreme care I take with my books - disheartens me enough that when I see a pressed book, I have a difficult time trying to enjoy that book without dwelling on the fact that it was pressed. Pressing has made the hobby less enjoyable for me.

 

I suppose my reasons for being against pressing and my reasons for being angry about pressing are not quite the same. My reasons for being against pressing are basically 1) the risks of structural damage, 2) the risks related to heating a book to 180-220F, 3) the risks related to dramatically changing the moisture content of a book, 4) and, more than anything else, the feeling that something special has been lost when a well-preserved book has been tampered with in an attempt to conceal it's true history or condition.

 

My anger about pressing stems partly from point #4 above but largely from having seen books that have, in fact, been structurally damaged through pressing. When I think about pressing or look at a pressed book, I am invariably reminded of those damaged comics, which were beautiful to begin with but were damaged because of someone's greed.

 

Have I called anyone a mean name? I suppose that's counter-productive. I do harbor resentment towards pressers because they have done something irreversible and, to me, undesirable to so many of the books I cherish. I think that if they cared as much about comic books as I do, they would at least refuse to press rare, high grade GA books. I wish just once a presser would say, "that book is beautiful the way it is; I won't risk damaging it." The fact that they never do makes me question their integrity.

 

Incidentally, books do expand and contract during the pressing process; I don't think anyone would dispute that - it's Chemistry 101. When things swell and shrink, there is normally some distortion of the shape, and comics are not immune. When a comic book is cut, the edges will normally be straight as an arrow. Well, I've seen an awful lot of books over the past year that have edges that look just a little off: a little wavy, a little convex. Maybe not enough to measure with your dime store plastic ruler, but enough for the human eye to pick up. I suspect that those books have been pressed. If I'm right, then for me, pressing does not even improve the appearance of most books.

[originalisbest]

Jimbo, you're more concerned, overall, than you need to be regarding the preservation of your books.

[revat]

Ah but if its for his Own books , who are we to judge?

[Green]

Ah but if its for his Own books , who are we to judge?

 

A buncha Jimbo707s?

[Green]

Jimbo, you're more concerned, overall, than you need to be regarding the preservation of your books.

Id argue hes more concerned, overall, than he needs to be of what others do in regarding the preservation of their own books.

[originalisbest]

Ah but if its for his Own books , who are we to judge?

 

He can do whatever he likes with his own books. Press 'em, not press 'em, freeze 'em, bury 'em, embed them in inert gas enclosures (remember that option from the 1985 Overstreet?)

 

But he seems just a wee bit over the top when it comes to commentary about others and what they do with their books and for what purpose (pressing and all that it goes with. Aesthetics alone, money alone, aesthetics & money both.)

 

We are told that potentially damaging books is cool if you're just enjoying them with a soda, but that potential damage if an f-up occurs during pressing is just awful, because (shudder) it was being done with profit in mind.

 

He claims that he can tell when a book's been pressed (perhaps) because the edges look off to him -- on this point I am going to respectfully disagree. Maybe he was seeing the work of a poor pressing job. I wouldn't know what one of those was -- only books I'd ever consider pressing would go to Matt or Joey. No need to bargain shop or DIY and potentially damage a book.

[originalisbest]

Jimbo, you're more concerned, overall, than you need to be regarding the preservation of your books.

Id argue hes more concerned, overall, than he needs to be of what others do in regarding the preservation of their own books.

 

Snap

[comix4fun]

Ah but if its for his Own books , who are we to judge?

 

 

It sounded like it was for ALL books from the sound of his tales of rescuing books that he had no interest in buying otherwise before he thought it was possible, maybe, that they could be pressed...perhaps.

 

I think it's the tilting at that particular windmill that brought the gavel down.

[jimbo_707]

Jimbo, you're more concerned, overall, than you need to be regarding the preservation of your books.

Id argue hes more concerned, overall, than he needs to be of what others do in regarding the preservation of their own books.

I won't say a word about how you conserve your Nintendo Powers.

[Green]

Jimbo, you're more concerned, overall, than you need to be regarding the preservation of your books.

Id argue hes more concerned, overall, than he needs to be of what others do in regarding the preservation of their own books.

I won't say a word about how you conserve your Nintendo Powers.

Call me sonny and the circle of life will be complete.

[comix4fun]

Jimbo, you're more concerned, overall, than you need to be regarding the preservation of your books.

Id argue hes more concerned, overall, than he needs to be of what others do in regarding the preservation of their own books.

I won't say a word about how you conserve your Nintendo Powers.

Call me sonny and the circle of life will be complete.

 

 

If you threaten to press your Nintendo Powers he'll be forced to buy them from you.