Explanation of the V on the right edge of comic books

[InvstmntComcSuply]

There has been considerable speculation regarding the V formation of the pages on the right side of comic books when viewed on edge. It is actually better visually represented by the > symbol, but V rolls off the tongue easier than "greater than symbol".

 

Common speculation was that the V was caused by a production sequence that went trim>staple>fold. Folding the book after it was trimmed seems like an intuitive cause of the V, but it fails to hold up, for a variety of reasons. One, can be easily illustrated by taking 16 sheets of paper and folding them in half, the resulting V is very pronounced. Much more so than most comic books.

 

Enter the Cole Schave thread. The mere mention of which is anathema to many, although, there is some redeeming value. Of course finding value in 500 pages of finger pointing, minimizing, discrediting, hyperbole, misdirection, agendas, yuk yuks, etc. can be similar to a typical comic con experience, complete with associated odours. However, as with any comic con, there are a few gems to be uncovered.

 

One was DiceX's post about the production sequence for saddlestitched books, which actually goes: fold>staple>trim. Another, was a single sentence by Jimbo, in what seemed to be an afterthought, to a post speculating about shrinkage forming the V. I didn't particularly agree with Jimbo's shrinkage theory, which was the majority of the post, so I must have breezed right past it, until this post by West.

 

Here's the other problem I have with the "aging" theory. If you look at thick books like World's Finest or Comic Cavalcade you will see that the books are assembled using 4 16 wraps sheets of paper that are then put on top of each other (making 64 pages) and the cover is then glued on. If you look at the right edge, it looks like this:

 

 

\

/

\

/

\

/

\

/

 

 

If aging were the explanation, and the outer wraps were shrinking more do to the atmosphere, the edge would look like this.

 

\

.\

.. \

... \

... /

.. /

./

/

 

 

But they don't.

 

 

Seeing the simple visual representation of the 4 x 16 wraps, next to the standard V, along with what must have been a residual memory of Jimbo's sentence:

 

 

It's also possible that some of the reverse V could be from spring back, if the books are under pressure when they're being cut.

 

was the Aha! moment for me and led to a draft version of the following, which I initially posted in the Cole Schave thread:

 

Paper has a resistance to folding. Take a piece of paper and fold it, and it will naturally lift at the fold after you set it down. This gap forms a pointed ellipse just inside the fold.

 

If an already stapled and folded book is clamped down flat across the entire width of the book as the cut along the right edge is performed, it will have a uniform, true, and square cut, with all the pages lining up perfectly vertical. However, once the clamping pressure is released, the residual energy in the paper is usually enough to re-establish the ellipse. Since each successive wrap has a tiny additional distance to travel around the circumference of the inside wrap, the right edge develops a distinctive stairstep V form, with the centerfold pages sticking out the furthest and trailing off to the cover pages.

 

This also accounts for the 4 x 16 wrap formations, as each set has their own ellipse, creating the distinctive look, per West's post.

 

I debated reposting this in CG, because lifting the curtain will lead in many different directions, some of which will be controversial. However, it is a knowledge that has significant value, especially in regards to restoration detection, when applied.

 

 

 

[DiceX]

Steve Borock and I discussed this very topic at length a few weeks ago and plan to discuss it in depth in the future as there are a lot of things to take into consideration. I'll type out a detailed post once we arrive at some possible answers.

 

 

[seanfingh]

Steve Borock and I discussed this very topic at length a few weeks ago and plan to discuss it in depth in the future as there are a lot of things to take into consideration. I'll type out a detailed post once we arrive at some possible answers.

 

 

[mikenyc]

Steve Borock and I discussed this very topic at length a few weeks ago and plan to discuss it in depth in the future as there are a lot of things to take into consideration. I'll type out a detailed post once we arrive at some possible answers.

 

 

This post needed to end with "and that's how I roll son!"

[DiceX]

Steve Borock and I discussed this very topic at length a few weeks ago and plan to discuss it in depth in the future as there are a lot of things to take into consideration. I'll type out a detailed post once we arrive at some possible answers.

 

 

 

 

 

[DiceX]

Steve Borock and I discussed this very topic at length a few weeks ago and plan to discuss it in depth in the future as there are a lot of things to take into consideration. I'll type out a detailed post once we arrive at some possible answers.

 

 

This post needed to end with "and that's how I roll son!"

 

I'm not as caustic as you are.

 

 

[Silver Surfer]

Name dropper!

[Ditch Fahrenheit]

I didn't realize there was any controversy over where the V came from.

 

I'd always heard it was tension from the paper fold which caused the pull-back.

 

I've also heard that staple offset placement in conjunction with the tension can cause uneven pull-back.

[AGGIEZ]

[Bronty]

thanks OP for the post. It does help seeing it in one spot without all the extraneous crepe in the other thread.

[Ares]

I've also heard that staple offset placement in conjunction with the tension can cause uneven pull-back.

 

It can also grow hair on their palm

[mrmyst]

Oh great, another one.

[InvstmntComcSuply]

I didn't realize there was any controversy over where the V came from.

 

I'd always heard it was tension from the paper fold which caused the pull-back.

I've also heard that staple offset placement in conjunction with the tension can cause uneven pull-back.

 

I doubt many people would take the time to absorb and understand the above statement, if it was presented to them in a vacuum. Even if the statement itself is understood, without a clear and thorough understanding of the mechanics of HOW it occurs, the knowledge alone does not provide an advantage over the uninformed.

 

I did consider that a very small minority, already did understand the mechanics of how the V was formed, per my "lifting the curtain" statement, however, I feel it was knowledge that was closely held, due to the advantage it afforded those who understood it. That advantage being that they were better able to catch post production trimming, including microtrimming, better than those without the knowledge.

[Timely]

I've said it before & I'll say it again.

 

The > formation is simply a function of same-sized sheets of paper wrapping around more & more sheets of paper the further you get from the centerfold. Since the centerfold wraps around nothing, it sticks out the furthest. The sheet of paper that lays next to the cover wraps has to wrap around all the other wraps, making it appear to be the shortest.

 

If you lay a thick 64 page golden age book down on a flat surface and look at the bottom edge you will notice the further away from the centerfold a wrap is, the more paper that wrap uses to wrap around the spine. That is what creates the > on the right edge, nothing more.

[InvstmntComcSuply]

I've said it before & I'll say it again.

 

The > formation is simply a function of same-sized sheets of paper wrapping around more & more sheets of paper the further you get from the centerfold. Since the centerfold wraps around nothing, it sticks out the furthest. The sheet of paper that lays next to the cover wraps has to wrap around all the other wraps, making it appear to be the shortest.

 

This is exactly the same as the example of folding 16 identical sheets I gave in the OP. With identical size sheets, you will see that the V is far more pronounced than the average comic. Extend that to additional wraps for Silver or Golden books and the V would be huge. Of course the caveat is that some saddle stitched books (most likely Golden age, independent or lower volume) were not mass produced with the exact same production methods.

 

I figured much of this would play out, but I'll go ahead and add this: the above implies that centerfolds are slightly shorter width wise than the next wrap, which are slightly shorter than the next, and so on.

 

[Ares]

Just trim it them to make it even

[porcupine48]

Shrinkage,teehee

[Ditch Fahrenheit]

I didn't realize there was any controversy over where the V came from.

 

I'd always heard it was tension from the paper fold which caused the pull-back.

I've also heard that staple offset placement in conjunction with the tension can cause uneven pull-back.

 

I doubt many people would take the time to absorb and understand the above statement, if it was presented to them in a vacuum. Even if the statement itself is understood, without a clear and thorough understanding of the mechanics of HOW it occurs, the knowledge alone does not provide an advantage over the uninformed.

 

I did consider that a very small minority, already did understand the mechanics of how the V was formed, per my "lifting the curtain" statement, however, I feel it was knowledge that was closely held, due to the advantage it afforded those who understood it. That advantage being that they were better able to catch post production trimming, including microtrimming, better than those without the knowledge.

 

But we're not 'most' people...we're comic book nerds.

 

Most of the raw graders live, eat and breath this stuff.

 

I don't think it gives you an advantage in trimming detection (at least I can't think of one off the top of my head), but it does help prevent false positives on the right edge.

[Bronty]

Are you sure West? And if so what gives you that certainty ?

 

I had done the same experiment years ago where I wrapped sheets around each other and the > effect, just like the OP says, was *remarkably* more pronounced than on comics. Coupled with dices comments that the process was to fold the paper before the cut, the OP's suggestion of tension pullback seems plausible.

[InvstmntComcSuply]

Just to show that it was a common assumption even among us nerds, From the Schave thread:

OK, I mentioned this the last time that Roy came up with the shrinkage theory. I attended a seminar (along with hundreds of others) where Bedrock and Matt Nelson explained how to detect restoration.

 

They talked about the V and how if it's missing, that's a sign the book has been trimmed. They said the "V" was formed because the pages were cut, stapled, and then folded.

 

I took notes.

....

I will admit that at the time of that seminar I assumed that books were cut and then folded. The cover shrinkage/expansion explanation for cover overhang was unknown to me then. An unnaturally squared off page edge (lack of V) is still a reliable method to detect post production trimming. My experience has been that most books exhibit some kind of V to the page edge regardless of publisher or age.