• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Preservation considerations for CGC book collectors by Rune
2 2

50 posts in this topic

Others believe the holders are air tight, but they are not, as that would require a vacuum seal.

 

 

CGC holders are comprised of an outer-well and an inner-well. The outer-well is not air tight. The inner-well is air tight. The comics are completely sealed inside of the inner-well.

 

 

It is heat sealed, not vacuum sealed. In order for it to be air tight it would have to be snug against the inner well. This is incorrect as it is not; just like third party graded coins. They are sonically sealed. If they were air tight, it would require a vacuum seal.

 

Quote from the CGC grading process page concerning encapsulation:

 

 

'...this is accomplished through compression and ultrasonic vibration.'

 

If a vacuum seal was used (which would be required to form an air tight bond) the comic book would be compromised in the process and be damaged.

 

I am willing to conduct an experiment. I will submerge a CGC slab in water. I'll leave it there for an hour. Then I will dry the outside of the inner well before removing the comic. I should be able to spot/photograph water damage fairly easily. If the inner well is not air-tight, then the book will suffer water damage - at least that's my theory.

 

I'll post the results in my own journal. Stay tuned!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Newshane - I see what you're getting at. But water tight and air tight are two different things. Also mintcollector is stating that its not an air/vacuum sealed container. Such a container would prevent any air from flowing in or out. But something water tight can still allow air to between. A vacuum sealed container would shrink around whatevers inside and damage your books. Air flow is obviously extremely limited in a water tight container but its molecules are small enough to slowly pass back and forth. Just like a water tight door on a ship, Water will not come through if properly closed but air can still pass through.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Newshane - I see what you're getting at. But water tight and air tight are two different things. Also mintcollector is stating that its not an air/vacuum sealed container. Such a container would prevent any air from flowing in or out. But something water tight can still allow air to between. A vacuum sealed container would shrink around whatevers inside and damage your books. Air flow is obviously extremely limited in a water tight container but its molecules are small enough to slowly pass back and forth. Just like a water tight door on a ship, Water will not come through if properly closed but air can still pass through. [/quote

 

You are completely correct and I thank you for your response. I do not get here on a daily basis, but I don't think certain individuals understand what air tight means. It is really sad how much false information circulates on this forum. Maybe that is one reason why a lot of members are leaving?

 

For one thing, to be truly air tight a vacuum seal is needed. This would cause the book to be pushed completely against he inner well and will damage the book. Coins and currency (graded) are not air tight either. They are also not water tight.

 

Kind Regards,

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your response Meshuggah.

 

I understand your point about vacuum and my technical misuse of the word air-tight. After examining a cracked slab for myself, I can't imagine that the seal would allow a tremendous amount of "breathing." It seems as though the amount of gas exchange would be kept to an absolute minimum. I think anyone who is truly worried about the effect of this process on the condition of a comic book is probably over-reacting to say the least. I feel as though my books are mighty secure within the slabs. Do I place my slabs in Mylar bags? Yes, I do. But I concede that it's probably overkill.

 

Comics have been stored for decades in sub-optimal conditions and have fared pretty darn well. I think my comics are fine in Mylar bags with alkaline-buffered backing boards will hold up well over the coming decades, even without microchamber paper.

 

I'll try to begin my experiment on the "water-tight" aspect of the slab later on tonight and I will keep everyone posted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your response Meshuggah.

 

I understand your point about vacuum and my technical misuse of the word air-tight. After examining a cracked slab for myself, I can't imagine that the seal would allow a tremendous amount of "breathing." It seems as though the amount of gas exchange would be kept to an absolute minimum. I think anyone who is truly worried about the effect of this process on the condition of a comic book is probably over-reacting to say the least. I feel as though my books are mighty secure within the slabs. Do I place my slabs in Mylar bags? Yes, I do. But I concede that it's probably overkill.

 

Comics have been stored for decades in sub-optimal conditions and have fared pretty darn well. I think my comics are fine in Mylar bags with alkaline-buffered backing boards will hold up well over the coming decades, even without microchamber paper.

 

I'll try to begin my experiment on the "water-tight" aspect of the slab later on tonight and I will keep everyone posted.

 

Your experiment is pointless unless it is for your own 'observations.' Here is why; in a truly air tight environment oxidation could not occur. There are countless examples of rust developing on staples in CGC graded comic books AFTER they are encapsulated. Therefore, in an air tight environment this would not be possible.

 

As for water damage, this occurs with CGC slabs as well. Just ask any of the countless forum members who have gone through a flood. Not sure what you are attempting to prove as facts and logic do not misrepresent the truth. CGC posts its encapsulation process online; as do PMG (for currency) and NGC (for coins). No certified collectible is vacuum sealed; thus none are air tight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your response Meshuggah.

 

I understand your point about vacuum and my technical misuse of the word air-tight. After examining a cracked slab for myself, I can't imagine that the seal would allow a tremendous amount of "breathing." It seems as though the amount of gas exchange would be kept to an absolute minimum. I think anyone who is truly worried about the effect of this process on the condition of a comic book is probably over-reacting to say the least. I feel as though my books are mighty secure within the slabs. Do I place my slabs in Mylar bags? Yes, I do. But I concede that it's probably overkill.

 

Comics have been stored for decades in sub-optimal conditions and have fared pretty darn well. I think my comics are fine in Mylar bags with alkaline-buffered backing boards will hold up well over the coming decades, even without microchamber paper.

 

I'll try to begin my experiment on the "water-tight" aspect of the slab later on tonight and I will keep everyone posted.

 

Your experiment is pointless unless it is for your own 'observations.' Here is why; in a truly air tight environment oxidation could not occur. There are countless examples of rust developing on staples in CGC graded comic books AFTER they are encapsulated. Therefore, in an air tight environment this would not be possible.

 

As for water damage, this occurs with CGC slabs as well. Just ask any of the countless forum members who have gone through a flood. Not sure what you are attempting to prove as facts and logic do not misrepresent the truth. CGC posts its encapsulation process online; as do PMG (for currency) and NGC (for coins). No certified collectible is vacuum sealed; thus none are air tight.

 

Okay. The slabs aren't air-tight. As I pointed out earlier, I get that.

 

We'll see about the water. The experiment is for my own observation. I want to know how badly the book will be impacted. I'd rather see it for myself than trust your self-proclaimed expertise, no offense. (shrug)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your response Meshuggah.

 

I understand your point about vacuum and my technical misuse of the word air-tight. After examining a cracked slab for myself, I can't imagine that the seal would allow a tremendous amount of "breathing." It seems as though the amount of gas exchange would be kept to an absolute minimum. I think anyone who is truly worried about the effect of this process on the condition of a comic book is probably over-reacting to say the least. I feel as though my books are mighty secure within the slabs. Do I place my slabs in Mylar bags? Yes, I do. But I concede that it's probably overkill.

 

Comics have been stored for decades in sub-optimal conditions and have fared pretty darn well. I think my comics are fine in Mylar bags with alkaline-buffered backing boards will hold up well over the coming decades, even without microchamber paper.

 

I'll try to begin my experiment on the "water-tight" aspect of the slab later on tonight and I will keep everyone posted.

 

Your experiment is pointless unless it is for your own 'observations.' Here is why; in a truly air tight environment oxidation could not occur. There are countless examples of rust developing on staples in CGC graded comic books AFTER they are encapsulated. Therefore, in an air tight environment this would not be possible.

 

As for water damage, this occurs with CGC slabs as well. Just ask any of the countless forum members who have gone through a flood. Not sure what you are attempting to prove as facts and logic do not misrepresent the truth. CGC posts its encapsulation process online; as do PMG (for currency) and NGC (for coins). No certified collectible is vacuum sealed; thus none are air tight.

 

Okay. The slabs aren't air-tight. As I pointed out earlier, I get that.

 

We'll see about the water. The experiment is for my own observation. I want to know how badly the book will be impacted. I'd rather see it for myself than trust your self-proclaimed expertise, no offense. (shrug)

 

No offense, but my so called 'self proclaimed expertise' comes directly from CGC. Keep in mind it was you who were proven wrong about a slab being air tight. This is an absurd ideology that common sense alone should be able to dispell. Oxidation cannot occur without air.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just going to take the high road here. :)

 

Giving you factual basis is not attacking you as a person. Therefore, how would this statement even apply?

 

It is obvious that slabs are not water tight or air tight. A vacuum seal would be required for this. If you feel a need to ignore me for pointing out the fallacy of your logic, be my guest. Just note that there is no 'high road' involved.

 

 

Edited by mintcollector
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Furthermore, do not expose your CGC books to more than about 100 degrees Celcius (=200 degrees Fahrenheit), and at 100 degress C do not bake the book for more than about 5 min:

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1951063&fpart=1 (it is an old thread, but still interesting :popcorn: )

 

250 F = 120 C, if anyone should wonder about this conversion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess this post proves that CGC books are not water or air tight - actually CGC books may be quite susceptible to humidity and water:

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2794764&fpart=1

 

I tried to check the cert numbers, but they have been removed from the Census - just to see when these books were encapsulated - but I guess CGC has not changed procedures over the years...

 

The evidence above may be further strengthened by observations that placing CGC books in fire proof safes exposed them to high levels of humidity and resulted in rusted staples:

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1140967&fpart=1

 

Thus it may be a good idea not to use fire proof safes, or to be very careful with controlling the humidity when using such safes, and to place CGC books into closed Mylar bags (or similar solutions). Although using such Mylar bags will probably not provide 100% protection against water or air, it may restrict influx, which may reduce any impact of transient high or low humidity.

 

Regarding my first post in this thread, since Mr. Rodel did not observe water damage when testing a few books, maybe he did not submerge the books long enough to see any effect - but I am just guessing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got the Gerber Mylar D 914M2 for normal sized CGC books a few months ago, bags are 2 mil and work fine - you can find them here:

 

http://www.egerber.com/category.asp?CategoryID=450&SubcategoryID=566

 

1000x1000.jpg

 

An important thing to know is that Mylar D offers nearly 100% UV protection:

 

"Our specially Impregnated Mylar D stops 99% of the UV light. Mylar D is accepted as photo safe to direct contact and is used internationally by archives and museums.

 

Yes, it costs 8 times more than standard Mylar, but it blocks UV hundreds of times more than other plastics."

 

And the basics:

 

"Advantages of Mylar® Type D Compared to Commonly Used Plastics:

Resistance to diffusion of gases like oxygen, Carbon Dioxide, Sulfur Dioxide, etc. is 350 times greater than polyethylene.

 

Permanence. There is no noticeable change in storage-100 years when compared to 2 to 5 years for others.

 

Resistance to moisture, insect attack, fungus, mold, mildew, acid, oils, grease, and solvents is "excellent" compared to "fair" for others.

 

Strength and creep resistance is 10 times that of polyethylene, one-third the strength of steel.

 

Volatile Additions--Mylar® contains no dangerous plasticizers, slip additives, surface coatings, antioxidants, acid-hydrolysis compared to other commonly used plastics."

 

I used the archival double-sided tape to seal the Mylar bags:

 

http://www.egerber.com/category.asp?CategoryID=451&SubcategoryID=558

 

The tape is a bit fiddly to work with, but not that hard either, seems to do a great job of sealing the bags. I seal them about ½" from the end of the flap, all the way from left to right, this should secure the book a nearly airtight environment.

 

So I guess this is the end of line for me - no more cheap plastic bags.

 

All info above is from the Gerber website. Sorry if this sounds like a Gerber commercial, but I have found no better Mylar solution for CGC books (many sellers on EBay wrongly advertise that they sell Mylar for CGC books - those are from Clearbags.com and not Mylar. For CGC magazines Clearbags may still be the best or only option, Gerber does not seem to produce optimal sizes - for magazines 10 7/16 x 15 1/4” dimensions are great, the Gerber 1114M2 or 1117M2 are probably both too wide and/or too short or too long).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Others believe the holders are air tight, but they are not, as that would require a vacuum seal.

 

 

CGC holders are comprised of an outer-well and an inner-well. The outer-well is not air tight. The inner-well is air tight. The comics are completely sealed inside of the inner-well.

 

 

It is heat sealed, not vacuum sealed. In order for it to be air tight it would have to be snug against the inner well. This is incorrect as it is not; just like third party graded coins. They are sonically sealed. If they were air tight, it would require a vacuum seal.

 

Quote from the CGC grading process page concerning encapsulation:

 

 

'...this is accomplished through compression and ultrasonic vibration.'

 

If a vacuum seal was used (which would be required to form an air tight bond) the comic book would be compromised in the process and be damaged.

 

I am willing to conduct an experiment. I will submerge a CGC slab in water. I'll leave it there for an hour. Then I will dry the outside of the inner well before removing the comic. I should be able to spot/photograph water damage fairly easily. If the inner well is not air-tight, then the book will suffer water damage - at least that's my theory.

 

I'll post the results in my own journal. Stay tuned!

 

Did this ever happen? I don't see it in your journal…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Others believe the holders are air tight, but they are not, as that would require a vacuum seal.

 

 

CGC holders are comprised of an outer-well and an inner-well. The outer-well is not air tight. The inner-well is air tight. The comics are completely sealed inside of the inner-well.

 

 

It is heat sealed, not vacuum sealed. In order for it to be air tight it would have to be snug against the inner well. This is incorrect as it is not; just like third party graded coins. They are sonically sealed. If they were air tight, it would require a vacuum seal.

 

Quote from the CGC grading process page concerning encapsulation:

 

 

'...this is accomplished through compression and ultrasonic vibration.'

 

If a vacuum seal was used (which would be required to form an air tight bond) the comic book would be compromised in the process and be damaged.

 

I am willing to conduct an experiment. I will submerge a CGC slab in water. I'll leave it there for an hour. Then I will dry the outside of the inner well before removing the comic. I should be able to spot/photograph water damage fairly easily. If the inner well is not air-tight, then the book will suffer water damage - at least that's my theory.

 

I'll post the results in my own journal. Stay tuned!

 

Did this ever happen? I don't see it in your journal…

 

Yes, it did happen! I talk about everything on THIS PAGE. You'll have to scroll down a few.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yes, it did happen! I talk about everything on THIS PAGE. You'll have to scroll down a few.

 

Still it is intriguing how Rodel could conclude otherwise. One possible explanation could be the amount of exposure, for example being submerged in a few minutes vs. 24 hours hm But I am just guessing. Even a few hours may be way too much exposure:

 

"All of these slabs were in CGC-issued open-at-the-top poly bags (to protect against scratching), upright, in a box. The water came in over the top and filled the bags approximately 1" - 2". It's difficult to say how long they sat in the water filled bags since my wife didn't want to venture into the basement until she knew it was safe (the power was still on), but it's safe to assume a few hours (2-4)."

Source: http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2794764&fpart=1

 

I fully agree that your results clearly indicate that Mylar bags are warranted for extra protection (not that these bags will prevent water damage to completely submerged books, but it may reduce impact of transient high levels of humidity - and protect from water damage, if books are not submerged for a long time). If fact, had the unlucky person in the quote above used sealed Mylar bags (or similar sealed bags), the 1-2" of water would probably not have harmed his books - since the water would probably just flow down the Mylar and never enter the holder.

 

Using the Gerber 914M2 and their archival tape (taped all the way from left to right), I do believe the amount of oxygen influx is greatly reduced. And of course there is the 99% UV protection of the Gerber Mylar D.

 

Now I wonder how the acid free archival tape responds to water hm:facepalm:

 

BTW, here is my new ToD #1 9.8 WP in Gerber 2 mil (914M2) Mylar D sealed with clear double-sided acid-free archival tape (at 40% air humidity, 72 F) - but no experiments will be performed on that book (tsk)lol

 

03072014-1.JPG

 

PS. It just struck me that the Count indeed is the real Batman :idea: I mean, the Count can actually transform into a bat (thumbs u - while Batman has no such ability! :roflmao: (sorry, I could not help it but to share this insight :facepalm::grin: )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just curious: now that the slab is in a 2 mil Mylar (which dimensions look a tad bigger than the slab) will the slab still fit in a CGC box?

 

I would be surprised, if a 914M2-bagged book no longer fitted in a CGC box. The 2 mil Mylar is very thin, it bends easily, even if it has 1/3 the strength of steel.

 

The problem may more likely be if you stack your CGC books (horizontal storage), then the Mylar can be very slippery (the Mylar surface is very smooth), this may cause your books to slide, if you are not careful. So far I have not had these problems to any great extent using 2 mil, but using 4+ mil may be quite another story....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another matter, beyond preserving books, is preservation of (original) comic book art.

 

Some of us like to get the art framed, and getting this professionally done using anti-UV museum glass (or even conservation glass with 99% anti-UV) can be expensive.

 

Ok, I have not tried this myself, I love to support my local frame shop, sigh, but going through Gerber's products, there may be ways to provide great UV protection for your art - without paying a premium for anti-UV glass.

 

So how much can we cut expenses trying to get the art framed similar to using extremely expensive conservation glass?

 

1. Gerber 4-mil Mylar D archives can be bought here - assuming the art is 10" x 15", 1117R (= 11 1/2" x 17 1/2") should be fine - cost is $16 per 10 pieces (plus shipping):

 

http://www.egerber.com/category.asp?CategoryID=450&SubcategoryID=559

 

Remember that Mylar D is something special: "Our specially Impregnated Mylar D stops 99% of the UV light. Mylar D is accepted as photo safe to direct contact and is used internationally by archives and museums. Yes, it costs 8 times more than standard Mylar, but it blocks UV hundreds of times more than other plastics."

Source: http://www.egerber.com/aboutpreservation2.asp

 

This way getting UV protection similar to conservation glass may be done for a fraction of conservation glass prices, simply by inserting art in 4 mil thick Mylar D® snugs.

 

Then I guess you can purchase whatever frame you want and just insert the art (thumbs u

 

Again, I have not tested the above, it's just an idea :idea: - but this way you may be able to frame a piece of original art and get 99% UV protection for less than $20 (if you can find a matching prebuild and inexpensive frame).

 

Or Mylar (D) archives may just be a good way to store art... (note that this post is not intended as some kind of Gerber commercial - there may of course be other Mylar producers offering similar solutions, I just did not take the time to investigate if other kinds of Mylar provide 99% UV protection).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wrote this post in another thread, but it took some time to write and it's probably better posted here - it's about how benefits of anti-UV protection may be exaggerated and provide a false sense of protection:

 

 

As to museum glass... I am a bit confused. I've never seen museum glass not 99% UV filter. The below picture shows the different kinds of glass and what you "get" from each

 

 

I can see that "Museum Glass" is now a registered trademark of Tru Vue; I believe a common understanding of museum glass is that it's just glass with UV protection and high clarity (reduced reflections) used by museums.

 

And then there's this experiment, although I do not like the exposure to direct sunlight - it may illustrate that visible light in extreme amounts may cause severe damage that any UV protection can't prevent:

 

http://www.ukiyoe-gallery.com/sunfade.htm

 

Results seem to have been reproduced here:

 

picture-004_zpsjflmcgoh.jpg

 

https://ellencarrlee.wordpress.com/tag/uv-filter/

 

So UV protection may be a high-priced joke when it comes to preventing fading :ohnoez:hm Still, just found this - maybe some truth to that...

 

"To reduce the fading of collections due to display lighting, especially the most rapid fading, there is only one option: reduce light exposure. Many museums, private donors, and their framers have assumed that the primary cause of fading is UV, and that a good UV filter would prevent their collections from fading. Some advertisements for UV filters imply the same. For colours that are sensitive to light — the crux of the museum lighting dilemma — UV usually contributes less than half of the fading and often only one tenth; therefore, it does not allow one to think any differently about reducing light exposure. (The exposure scales in the centre of Table 3 quantify this phenomenon.)

 

Why bother, then, with UV control? Because for many artifacts, such as paintings with permanent pigments or monochromatic prints and drawings, the yellowing and disintegration of the media and support by UV is the major form of deterioration suffered during uncontrolled museum lighting."

 

https://www.cci-icc.gc.ca/resources-ressources/agentsofdeterioration-agentsdedeterioration/chap08-eng.aspx

 

And:

 

"Scientists found that blocking all of the ultraviolet radiation portion of the solar spectrum would not eliminate fade damage for most fabrics, but will slow down the rate of fading by a factor of about three.

 

Because so many factors influence fading, finding the effect of one factor is extremely difficult. All parameters except the one being studied must be held constant for the duration of an experiment, which may run for months or even years of testing. That is why there is relatively little research in this area. To study the effect of radiation on fading, it is important to focus on one type of material while keeping the environment constant. Factors in the environment include chemical composition of the atmosphere, temperature, and humidity. The known exposure to radiation, including the known spectrum, and known dose (intensity X time) must be identified. Then there must be sufficient duration to observe the rate of color shift, or fading.

There have been studies like this of the fading and other damage effects of solar radiation but no consensus has yet emerged on which portion of the solar spectrum is most responsible nor on what spectral weighting function is appropriate for assessing in a single “UV transmittance” figure the contribution of different solar UV wavelengths to the damage."

 

It all translates to: expose your OA to as little light as possible :preach:

 

This was fun reading:

 

"There is nothing that does more to give conservators the reputation of kill-joys than the sight of one, with frown and luxmeter, patrolling a new exhibition the day before the opening, telling the technician that he must turn down the lights."

 

And the not so fun but important part too:

 

"Conservators need to understand light, because no one else is interested in the physics and psychology of exhibiting in a dim light. Architects are always trying to increase the brightness of indoor places, making vast atria with enough light to ensure exuberant growth of a miserably limited selection of exotic plants. It was not always so, as many dimly magnificent churches confirm."

 

http://www.conservationphysics.org/fading/light_i.php

 

I need a luxmeter! :idea: (I just love how this OA disease is developing and where it's taking me :cloud9::facepalm: )

 

Unavngivet2_zpsfomr9ups.png

 

(Source: Wikipedia)

 

Again, to repeat the take-home message: treat your art like vampires, and if you need to let them burn, do it as low and slow as possible (thumbs u (like 50 lux or less* - so cheap framing and low lux are probably a much better combo regarding preservation than expensive Museum/Conservation glass and high lux 2c )

 

* "Many dyes, both old and new, are faded perceptibly by 50 years of exposure to 50 lux for eight hours a day. 50 lux is not safe illumination. It is a compromise between deterioration and visibility." (also from http://www.conservationphysics.org/fading/light_i.php )

 

PS. The info above is of course just as relevant when displaying (CGC) comic books :gossip:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
2 2