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

[fantastic_four]

Logic hurts.

 

No, bias hurts. You've made it clear you're starting from a perspective of detesting everything about pressing from every possible perspective, so trying to blame the transfer stains that have been well-understood for decades on pressing is no surprise.

 

A context for the approximate damage caused by a press has already been given. If you want something more specific, you're not going to find it here. I doubt you'll find it anywhere, but if you do, please do share it with the forum. Your constant attempts to exaggerate the short exposure to mild heat used in pressing as making some major difference in the state of a comic sounds exactly like those parents who refuse to take their kids to the beach because a little sun exposure is going to cause them to get cancer.

[comicwiz]

The snide comments are coming because those that want to see pressing causing problems are seeing pressing cause problems even though the problems are not associated with pressing.

It works both ways though and those who are invested in pressing may see lack of problems because they want to see lack of problems. Giving logical reasons why it isn't a problem is good while making stupid comments only weakens an argument and this is true on both sides of the discussion.

 

The slab is the ace in the back pocket. Inspection would mean cracking a slab open, which makes absolutely no sense when someone paid nosebleed prices on a high-grade book.

 

Before eBay, you had mail order grading problems. Sellers who felt they needed to over grade to get the price they wanted on a book played the "refund is in the mail" game and were really depending on suckers who couldn't grade, or didn't want to be too deep in the hole after factoring in shipping both ways or the hassle of hunting down a phantom cheque.

 

eBay just compounded this problem, but made it slightly more convenient for buyers to get refunds. You still had "eBay grading" that caused friction between sellers and buyers, and the height of unscrupulous activity was probably a three-way tie between using stock images for books and receiving crud, cobbling images from the web and sending empty boxes, or cracking out purple label books or blue label books and selling them as unrestored, or a higher grade than when they were slabbed. I know the laundry list is long, but you get the gist.

 

CPR is essentially enabling a different kind of over grading practice, that essentially attempts to pull the wool over buyers eyes. The major departure is that the slab legitimizes the practice, and discourages any kind of inspection beyond the cover wrap. You have no refund policies (because it's a CGC'd book), there are costs associated to requesting information on defects the slab conveniently hides, and the only recourse left to the collecting community is the long-shot hope a scan exists of the book in it's pre-CPR condition/grade.

 

Another difference is we'll probably see a dozen or so threads in a calendar year about Chuck and company over grading, over pricing, and pretty much over infuriating the collecting community, but CPR, which is the new over grading, just keeps trucking.

 

How is it overgrading though? I press my 9.0 and it becomes a 9.4 it is now a 9.4. It isn't overgraded. It isn't like at midnight the book is going to revert back. Heck, I think you could even argue that the book was always a 9.4 but poor care turned it in to a 9.0.

 

I'll agree to disagree on the generality of the statement, and in the context it was used. However there is no way you could tell me the spine shifted monstrosities this community discovered weren't over graded. The discovery which lead to numerous books being found didn't happen in a vacuum, and don't think for a minute they are the only books out there that fit the description. Don't worry though, CGC has told everyone the situation is under control, which has simply given the license it has issued to carry out this practice an extended expiry date - or at least until some other examples are brought to light.

[ChrisInBaltimore]

The snide comments are coming because those that want to see pressing causing problems are seeing pressing cause problems even though the problems are not associated with pressing.

It works both ways though and those who are invested in pressing may see lack of problems because they want to see lack of problems. Giving logical reasons why it isn't a problem is good while making stupid comments only weakens an argument and this is true on both sides of the discussion.

 

The slab is the ace in the back pocket. Inspection would mean cracking a slab open, which makes absolutely no sense when someone paid nosebleed prices on a high-grade book.

 

Before eBay, you had mail order grading problems. Sellers who felt they needed to over grade to get the price they wanted on a book played the "refund is in the mail" game and were really depending on suckers who couldn't grade, or didn't want to be too deep in the hole after factoring in shipping both ways or the hassle of hunting down a phantom cheque.

 

eBay just compounded this problem, but made it slightly more convenient for buyers to get refunds. You still had "eBay grading" that caused friction between sellers and buyers, and the height of unscrupulous activity was probably a three-way tie between using stock images for books and receiving crud, cobbling images from the web and sending empty boxes, or cracking out purple label books or blue label books and selling them as unrestored, or a higher grade than when they were slabbed. I know the laundry list is long, but you get the gist.

 

CPR is essentially enabling a different kind of over grading practice, that essentially attempts to pull the wool over buyers eyes. The major departure is that the slab legitimizes the practice, and discourages any kind of inspection beyond the cover wrap. You have no refund policies (because it's a CGC'd book), there are costs associated to requesting information on defects the slab conveniently hides, and the only recourse left to the collecting community is the long-shot hope a scan exists of the book in it's pre-CPR condition/grade.

 

Another difference is we'll probably see a dozen or so threads in a calendar year about Chuck and company over grading, over pricing, and pretty much over infuriating the collecting community, but CPR, which is the new over grading, just keeps trucking.

 

How is it overgrading though? I press my 9.0 and it becomes a 9.4 it is now a 9.4. It isn't overgraded. It isn't like at midnight the book is going to revert back. Heck, I think you could even argue that the book was always a 9.4 but poor care turned it in to a 9.0.

 

I'll agree to disagree on the generality of the statement, and in the context it was used. However there is no way you could tell me the spine shifted monstrosities this community discovered weren't over graded. The discovery which lead to numerous books being found didn't happen in a vacuum, and don't think for a minute they are the only books out there that fit the description. Don't worry though, CGC has told everyone the situation is under control, which has simply given the license it has issued to carry out this practice an extended expiry date - or at least until some other examples are brought to light.

 

Oh I agree with the crazy spines. That is a bit different though. That is also on CGC.

[pickycollector]

The snide comments are coming because those that want to see pressing causing problems are seeing pressing cause problems even though the problems are not associated with pressing.

It works both ways though and those who are invested in pressing may see lack of problems because they want to see lack of problems. Giving logical reasons why it isn't a problem is good while making stupid comments only weakens an argument and this is true on both sides of the discussion.

 

The slab is the ace in the back pocket. Inspection would mean cracking a slab open, which makes absolutely no sense when someone paid nosebleed prices on a high-grade book.

 

Before eBay, you had mail order grading problems. Sellers who felt they needed to over grade to get the price they wanted on a book played the "refund is in the mail" game and were really depending on suckers who couldn't grade, or didn't want to be too deep in the hole after factoring in shipping both ways or the hassle of hunting down a phantom cheque.

 

eBay just compounded this problem, but made it slightly more convenient for buyers to get refunds. You still had "eBay grading" that caused friction between sellers and buyers, and the height of unscrupulous activity was probably a three-way tie between using stock images for books and receiving crud, cobbling images from the web and sending empty boxes, or cracking out purple label books or blue label books and selling them as unrestored, or a higher grade than when they were slabbed. I know the laundry list is long, but you get the gist.

 

CPR is essentially enabling a different kind of over grading practice, that essentially attempts to pull the wool over buyers eyes. The major departure is that the slab legitimizes the practice, and discourages any kind of inspection beyond the cover wrap. You have no refund policies (because it's a CGC'd book), there are costs associated to requesting information on defects the slab conveniently hides, and the only recourse left to the collecting community is the long-shot hope a scan exists of the book in it's pre-CPR condition/grade.

 

Another difference is we'll probably see a dozen or so threads in a calendar year about Chuck and company over grading, over pricing, and pretty much over infuriating the collecting community, but CPR, which is the new over grading, just keeps trucking.

+1

 

Great post

[originalisbest]

Logic hurts.

 

No, bias hurts. You've made it clear you're starting from a perspective of detesting everything about pressing from every possible perspective, so trying to blame the transfer stains that have been well-understood for decades on pressing is no surprise.

 

A context for the approximate damage caused by a press has already been given. If you want something more specific, you're not going to find it here. I doubt you'll find it anywhere, but if you do, please do share it with the forum. Your constant attempts to exaggerate the short exposure to mild heat used in pressing as making some major difference in the state of a comic sounds exactly like those parents who refuse to take their kids to the beach because a little sun exposure is going to cause them to get cancer.

 

Accurate, logical, eloquently said, ff -- if jimbo weren't so carefully nurturing his increasingly paranoid delusions, his logical side might have to agree with you. It'd be akin to the scene of smoking malfunctioning androids from Star Trek (perhaps it already is.)

 

Bravo to dice for his other "real evidence 'cause I dreamt it might be so" examples of the evils of pressing!

[originalisbest]

The snide comments are coming because those that want to see pressing causing problems are seeing pressing cause problems even though the problems are not associated with pressing.

It works both ways though and those who are invested in pressing may see lack of problems because they want to see lack of problems. Giving logical reasons why it isn't a problem is good while making stupid comments only weakens an argument and this is true on both sides of the discussion.

 

The slab is the ace in the back pocket. Inspection would mean cracking a slab open, which makes absolutely no sense when someone paid nosebleed prices on a high-grade book.

 

Before eBay, you had mail order grading problems. Sellers who felt they needed to over grade to get the price they wanted on a book played the "refund is in the mail" game and were really depending on suckers who couldn't grade, or didn't want to be too deep in the hole after factoring in shipping both ways or the hassle of hunting down a phantom cheque.

 

eBay just compounded this problem, but made it slightly more convenient for buyers to get refunds. You still had "eBay grading" that caused friction between sellers and buyers, and the height of unscrupulous activity was probably a three-way tie between using stock images for books and receiving crud, cobbling images from the web and sending empty boxes, or cracking out purple label books or blue label books and selling them as unrestored, or a higher grade than when they were slabbed. I know the laundry list is long, but you get the gist.

 

CPR is essentially enabling a different kind of over grading practice, that essentially attempts to pull the wool over buyers eyes. The major departure is that the slab legitimizes the practice, and discourages any kind of inspection beyond the cover wrap. You have no refund policies (because it's a CGC'd book), there are costs associated to requesting information on defects the slab conveniently hides, and the only recourse left to the collecting community is the long-shot hope a scan exists of the book in it's pre-CPR condition/grade.

 

Another difference is we'll probably see a dozen or so threads in a calendar year about Chuck and company over grading, over pricing, and pretty much over infuriating the collecting community, but CPR, which is the new over grading, just keeps trucking.

+1

 

Great post

 

Paranoid post, maybe. Sorry comicwiz, but a properly CPR book isn't pulling the wool over anyone's eyes. The book is what it is, & either you agree with the grade of it, or not. Since you're apt to do so anyway, feel free to wallow in the muck, and work yourself up to a fever pitch about what kind of shill I must be, and for whom. It's always an entertaining spectacle!

[comicwiz]

The snide comments are coming because those that want to see pressing causing problems are seeing pressing cause problems even though the problems are not associated with pressing.

It works both ways though and those who are invested in pressing may see lack of problems because they want to see lack of problems. Giving logical reasons why it isn't a problem is good while making stupid comments only weakens an argument and this is true on both sides of the discussion.

 

The slab is the ace in the back pocket. Inspection would mean cracking a slab open, which makes absolutely no sense when someone paid nosebleed prices on a high-grade book.

 

Before eBay, you had mail order grading problems. Sellers who felt they needed to over grade to get the price they wanted on a book played the "refund is in the mail" game and were really depending on suckers who couldn't grade, or didn't want to be too deep in the hole after factoring in shipping both ways or the hassle of hunting down a phantom cheque.

 

eBay just compounded this problem, but made it slightly more convenient for buyers to get refunds. You still had "eBay grading" that caused friction between sellers and buyers, and the height of unscrupulous activity was probably a three-way tie between using stock images for books and receiving crud, cobbling images from the web and sending empty boxes, or cracking out purple label books or blue label books and selling them as unrestored, or a higher grade than when they were slabbed. I know the laundry list is long, but you get the gist.

 

CPR is essentially enabling a different kind of over grading practice, that essentially attempts to pull the wool over buyers eyes. The major departure is that the slab legitimizes the practice, and discourages any kind of inspection beyond the cover wrap. You have no refund policies (because it's a CGC'd book), there are costs associated to requesting information on defects the slab conveniently hides, and the only recourse left to the collecting community is the long-shot hope a scan exists of the book in it's pre-CPR condition/grade.

 

Another difference is we'll probably see a dozen or so threads in a calendar year about Chuck and company over grading, over pricing, and pretty much over infuriating the collecting community, but CPR, which is the new over grading, just keeps trucking.

 

How is it overgrading though? I press my 9.0 and it becomes a 9.4 it is now a 9.4. It isn't overgraded. It isn't like at midnight the book is going to revert back. Heck, I think you could even argue that the book was always a 9.4 but poor care turned it in to a 9.0.

 

I'll agree to disagree on the generality of the statement, and in the context it was used. However there is no way you could tell me the spine shifted monstrosities this community discovered weren't over graded. The discovery which lead to numerous books being found didn't happen in a vacuum, and don't think for a minute they are the only books out there that fit the description. Don't worry though, CGC has told everyone the situation is under control, which has simply given the license it has issued to carry out this practice an extended expiry date - or at least until some other examples are brought to light.

 

Oh I agree with the crazy spines. That is a bit different though. That is also on CGC.

 

I don't see it being different, but I had to use a specific example to show you what I meant.

 

Think about what took place in that instance.

 

CGC came away saying it was a 'bad" pressing job and was able to detect it better now that they had samples to determine the activity. Am I the only one that saw through that statement for the hogwash it really is?

 

Since when was it not necessary to review the entire book, nevermind the problem that they weren't able to accurately reflect the cover grade because the submitter migrated the defects to the back? The books were destroyed, but worse was that the defects shifted to the back cover did not appear to count toward the grade deductions (thus maintaining the over grading argument).

 

It wasn't just one book that snuck by either - and I'm pretty certain those reported here on the boards were a small population of the ones where this work was performed.

 

So if migrating defects to the back of the book gave CGC too much trouble in properly assessing the comic, and these are defects which can be made quite visible to plain sight be simply examing the front and rear cover, I can't imagine any internal damage being done to flatten books that would require a more thorough examination and inspection would get picked up at all.

[VintageComics]

The snide comments are coming because those that want to see pressing causing problems are seeing pressing cause problems even though the problems are not associated with pressing.

It works both ways though and those who are invested in pressing may see lack of problems because they want to see lack of problems. Giving logical reasons why it isn't a problem is good while making stupid comments only weakens an argument and this is true on both sides of the discussion.

 

I agree 100% and was going to post something along those lines. Both sides are pulling in opposite directions but there is 'windmill tilting' on both sides.

 

What is important is to lay facts out, not conjecture, then people can accurately decide rather than make their decisions based on rumor.

 

[DiceX]

Someone even told me once that pressing will make coupons inside of comics disappear.

I didn't believe it so I looked through all of my books and found the ones with clipped coupons, sure enough, the damned things had been pressed.

 

 

 

Dear Dice,

 

Will the moisture used in pressing make the sea monkeys in the ad on the back cover come to life? I am deathly afraid of monkeys of all kinds and I just don't want to risk it.

 

I'll hang up and listen for me answer.

 

Signed,

Petrified of pressing perpetuated primates.

 

This made me lollers in my panties.

 

 

[comicwiz]

The snide comments are coming because those that want to see pressing causing problems are seeing pressing cause problems even though the problems are not associated with pressing.

It works both ways though and those who are invested in pressing may see lack of problems because they want to see lack of problems. Giving logical reasons why it isn't a problem is good while making stupid comments only weakens an argument and this is true on both sides of the discussion.

 

The slab is the ace in the back pocket. Inspection would mean cracking a slab open, which makes absolutely no sense when someone paid nosebleed prices on a high-grade book.

 

Before eBay, you had mail order grading problems. Sellers who felt they needed to over grade to get the price they wanted on a book played the "refund is in the mail" game and were really depending on suckers who couldn't grade, or didn't want to be too deep in the hole after factoring in shipping both ways or the hassle of hunting down a phantom cheque.

 

eBay just compounded this problem, but made it slightly more convenient for buyers to get refunds. You still had "eBay grading" that caused friction between sellers and buyers, and the height of unscrupulous activity was probably a three-way tie between using stock images for books and receiving crud, cobbling images from the web and sending empty boxes, or cracking out purple label books or blue label books and selling them as unrestored, or a higher grade than when they were slabbed. I know the laundry list is long, but you get the gist.

 

CPR is essentially enabling a different kind of over grading practice, that essentially attempts to pull the wool over buyers eyes. The major departure is that the slab legitimizes the practice, and discourages any kind of inspection beyond the cover wrap. You have no refund policies (because it's a CGC'd book), there are costs associated to requesting information on defects the slab conveniently hides, and the only recourse left to the collecting community is the long-shot hope a scan exists of the book in it's pre-CPR condition/grade.

 

Another difference is we'll probably see a dozen or so threads in a calendar year about Chuck and company over grading, over pricing, and pretty much over infuriating the collecting community, but CPR, which is the new over grading, just keeps trucking.

+1

 

Great post

 

Paranoid post, maybe. Sorry comicwiz, but a properly CPR book isn't pulling the wool over anyone's eyes.

 

I'll see your paranoid and raise you hook line and sinker, because it appears you clearly took the "bad pressing" bait CGC used on the spine shifted garbage it extolled under it's warranty of certification, and later retracted as being something that could be spotted. What happened the first time those passed through - did their ability to spot spine wear shifted to the rear cover magically enhance when Matt came on board?

 

The mistake you seem to be making is to regard CPR as anything more than a license CGC issues for people to get away with over grading comics. The only time it's done wrong is when CGC get's caught up in the perpetual cycle of embarrassment it has brought on to itself by allowing the practice to grow out of control.

[VintageComics]

Joe, the problem I see in your post is that it sounds like you are saying that CGC was formed to legitimatize behaviour that some or most people will disagree with, but gaming happens in every system so we are not exempt from it.

 

CGC was fooled by the shifted spine one, but then most people are fooled by good counterfeits.

 

Staying on target in this conversation (without getting off on tangents), people can decide whether they like pressing or not based on what it actually is, how it works, how it affects the paper, etc. Facts.

 

That's all I'm saying.

 

So far, to my knowledge and understanding, most of the arguments used to describe pressing as damaging and hurtful are not very convincing. Yes, there is an effect on the paper, but I am not convinced based on everything I've read (and I've read a lot) that it is any more damaging then many of the other things that comics are subjected to every single day by both collectors and dealers.

 

 

[fantastic_four]

I'll see your paranoid and raise you hook line and sinker, because it appears you clearly took the "bad pressing" bait CGC used on the spine shifted garbage it extolled under it's warranty of certification, and later retracted as being something that could be spotted. What happened the first time those passed through - did their ability to spot spine wear shifted to the rear cover magically enhance when Matt came on board?

 

No, they learned about that one from us when we spotted it in before and after scans. Their mistake aside from that is that I believe based upon empirical analysis of slabs that they've always counted spine ticks on the back cover significantly less than the front, and this technique exploited that fact. Forumites also brought their attention first to Ewert's micro-trimming and a trimming followed up by artificial aging method being used about a decade ago the same way, by analyzing before and after scans.

[comicwiz]

I'll see your paranoid and raise you hook line and sinker, because it appears you clearly took the "bad pressing" bait CGC used on the spine shifted garbage it extolled under it's warranty of certification, and later retracted as being something that could be spotted. What happened the first time those passed through - did their ability to spot spine wear shifted to the rear cover magically enhance when Matt came on board?

 

No, they learned about that one from us when we spotted it in before and after scans.

 

The shifting, indeed is made more apparent and stark when you have before/after scans. But what visual benefit could you make the argument for, was required for them to pick up the defects on the rear cover that weren't accounted for in the grade?

[ChrisInBaltimore]

I'll see your paranoid and raise you hook line and sinker, because it appears you clearly took the "bad pressing" bait CGC used on the spine shifted garbage it extolled under it's warranty of certification, and later retracted as being something that could be spotted. What happened the first time those passed through - did their ability to spot spine wear shifted to the rear cover magically enhance when Matt came on board?

 

No, they learned about that one from us when we spotted it in before and after scans.

 

The shifting, indeed is made more apparent and stark when you have before/after scans. But what visual benefit could you make the argument for that was required for them to pick up the defects on the rear cover that weren't accounted for in the grade?

 

I don't get your question...?

[fantastic_four]

The shifting, indeed is made more apparent and stark when you have before/after scans. But what visual benefit could you make the argument for that was required for them to pick up the defects on the rear cover that weren't accounted for in the grade?

 

They grade spine ticks less harshly on the back than the front. Whether or not they've always done that, only sometimes done that, or that they should have ever graded that way at all is controversial and up for discussion. I always assumed they graded back-cover defects less harshly based upon grades I've seen them give to books with back-cover defects severe enough to not merit that grade had they been on the front.

[ChrisInBaltimore]

The shifting, indeed is made more apparent and stark when you have before/after scans. But what visual benefit could you make the argument for that was required for them to pick up the defects on the rear cover that weren't accounted for in the grade?

 

They grade spine ticks less harshly on the back than the front. Whether or not they've always done that, only sometimes done that, or that they should have ever graded that way at all is controversial and all up for discussion.

 

OK that is what I thought he was asking.

 

My understanding is they grade both covers equally, but that seems to not be true. Big issue is that CGC doesn't disclose their grading standards. As we see more books enter the market, it seems to be arbitrary.

[hockey&comicsguy]

These threads are always so confusing to me. That said, the only conclusion I'm pretty certain of, let's say 99.2% certain, is that most of this is simply:

 

[Davenport]

Staying on target in this conversation (with getting off on tangents), people can decide whether they like pressing or not based on what it actually is, how it works, how it affects the paper, etc.

 

That's all I'm saying.

 

So far, to my knowledge and understanding, most of the arguments used to describe pressing as damaging and hurtful are not very convincing. Yes, there is an effect on the paper, but I am not convinced based on everything I've read (and I've read a lot) that it is any more damaging then many of the other things that comics are subjected to every single day by both collectors and dealers.

 

Right. But you have to agree some of the "facts, not conjecture" get glossed over when they come up.

 

Chris S. makes an excellent observation:

How is it overgrading though? I press my 9.0 and it becomes a 9.4 it is now a 9.4. It isn't overgraded. It isn't like at midnight the book is going to revert back. Heck, I think you could even argue that the book was always a 9.4 but poor care turned it in to a 9.0.

 

Okay, lets look at it. Pressing doesn't repair weakened or broken fibers. Correct? Only re-flattens. Fact, not conjecture. Agree?

 

Comic books are, in fact, books. Not solid or static lumps, but assemblies intended to move. Yes?

 

So if a re-flattened 9.0 becomes a slabbed 9.4, is it a 9.4?

 

I'll argue that a buyer cannot tell. If all one cares about is the label certification, then yes, it is in fact a certified CGC 9.4 as long as it remains in stasis.

 

But a comic book collector cannot tell if the book will operate as a 9.4. Maybe it will, maybe it wont, depending on the weakened and broken areas that were re-flattened. Right? Like a broken or weakened baseball bat, tent pole, conductor's wand, whatever. When broken or weakened, but laid out straight and sealed in a thick packaging, objects may appear 'factory fresh'. But what happens when their intended use comes into play?

 

Books are no different. They are an assembly that should move and operate at the grade given.

 

 

 

 

[comicwiz]

The shifting, indeed is made more apparent and stark when you have before/after scans. But what visual benefit could you make the argument for that was required for them to pick up the defects on the rear cover that weren't accounted for in the grade?

 

They grade spine ticks less harshly on the back than the front. Whether or not they've always done that, only sometimes done that, or that they should have ever graded that way at all is controversial and up for discussion. I always assumed they graded back-cover defects less harshly based upon grades I've seen them give to books with back-cover defects severe enough to not merit that grade had they been on the front.

 

I've only ever known CGC to give both front and rear cover equal weight. If this isn't the case, then maybe they need the community to do more unpaid detective work, and find visual examples so they can grade comics properly?

[fantastic_four]

But a comic book collector cannot tell if the book will operate as a 9.4. Maybe it will, maybe it wont, depending on the weakened and broken areas that were re-flattened. Right? Like a broken or weakened baseball bat, tent pole, conductor's wand, whatever. When broken or weakened, but laid out straight and sealed in a thick packaging, objects may appear 'factory fresh'. But what happens when their intended use comes into play?

 

Experiment with pressing yourself is my suggestion--it isn't that difficult. I haven't found pressed-out paper fibers to be weak or more likely to bend again in the same spot when I've pressed out non-color breaking bends. This is easiest to test on bends that are on corners since you can easily try to re-bend the same crease you just pressed out. The first time I heat-pressed a corner, I expected that putting pressure on that same corner along the same bend would be easier than normal--but I couldn't find evidence that the same crease wanted to re-bend to its former bent shape. So I can't tell that the weakness you're thinking affects the comic's function makes any noticeable difference.