Comics, Pulps, and Paperbacks: Why such a discrepancy in values? 25 25

[OtherEric]

On 9/21/2023 at 6:04 PM, Darwination said:

I'm a huge fan of Ranch Romances, a favorite pulp.  I don't know where it fits on the list of best selling pulps of all time, but I'd guess at least in the top 10 if not top 5.  It had great covers, neat features, and solid fiction that appealed to every member of the household and ran forever.  I don't have very many of them, but I check it out any time a new one gets scanned.

 

Ranch Romances is also famously the last pulp to be published in the classic format, lasting until 1971. 

[Darwination]

I'm going to go ahead and stick these here since it's an active thread and seems to have a lot of material.  I considered the sweat mags thread, but I don't know if these are exactly that.

I've been sorting through 40 boxes today (almost there, good lord, fun tho) and separating books out into type and genre, etc. First time I've ever done a comprehensive sort.  I always take cover scans of magazines and pulps (wish I'd done it for all  comics and newspapers and tabloids and paperbacks, too) as they come in, so I can see my collection that way, but it's another thing altogether to sort the slicks from the pulps from the modern mags, pulps into genres or titles, etc.  I showed off this set (have some dupes,too, not sure if these are all scans of my best copies) to my wife.  She sat there with a look of horror at my wonder with these covers.  Thomas Beecham, True Strange 1-7.  I think I saw the original of one of these cover's original painting sell in the last couple years for like a grand, no love from the art world!

 

[Surfing Alien]

On 9/22/2023 at 12:09 AM, Darwination said:

She looks high   Did a little looking and it's interesting that these were published by the Weider Brothers, they had quite the varied empire.

 

[Darwination]

Yeah, the Marilyn cover is slightly disturbing 😳 The original sold for under 2 grand at Heritage a couple of years ago, so maybe a humble collector like myself really could 'take it' - though I would likely need to hang in a room where my wife wouldn't have to look at funky Marilyn too often

The Elvis is my fave followed by the James Dean.

I wrote just a bit on Weider (who features prominently in that three part Netflix doc on Arnold Schwarzenegger) on a blog post from earlier this year on True Weird, the predecessor to True Strange, at:

http://darwinscans.blogspot.com/2023/07/true-weird-may-1956.html?m=1

[Darwination]

I'm so clueless on these paperbacks - I see a good one and wonder if it's pricey.  Robert Maguire.

Looking on eBay---this one, not so much.  Looks like the grading is schizo on the paperbacks, too.  What's my copy? G/VG? 

The main thing I notice with these is the spine creasing. The other is that the pages binding starts to go pretty quickly. Because, you know, people read them.  In my mind, paperbacks are a perfect way to read a novel.  The pages are the just the right size so you move quickly through a book, and pbs are light and not cumbersome.  You can pretty much hold it up and read with one hand.  Versus fat hardcovers or two column pulp magazine pages. On the other hand, you can read a hardcover a couple times without making a scratch.

It's the main reason I've ever bought them - so I can get at an out of print book.  A big fear is they can be abridged, but a little digging usually turns that info up. 

The Maguire is good, but a later edition is even better.  From James Bama:

 

Edited September 23, 2023 by Darwination

[OtherEric]

A huge box from @Surfing Alien's $10 sale last weekend, here's the first several:

The first one actually wasn't from the sale, you thought my when SA posted it was a joke?

 

[OtherEric]

And this gives me all the Ace F-Series Tarzans.  It still seems very weird to me that they only published a semi-random 10 of the 24 books.

[OtherEric]

And some pockets:

[OtherEric]

Avons:

 

[Book Guy]

On 9/21/2023 at 9:09 PM, Darwination said:

I'm going to go ahead and stick these here since it's an active thread and seems to have a lot of material.  I considered the sweat mags thread, but I don't know if these are exactly that.

I've been sorting through 40 boxes today (almost there, good lord, fun tho) and separating books out into type and genre, etc. First time I've ever done a comprehensive sort.  I always take cover scans of magazines and pulps (wish I'd done it for all  comics and newspapers and tabloids and paperbacks, too) as they come in, so I can see my collection that way, but it's another thing altogether to sort the slicks from the pulps from the modern mags, pulps into genres or titles, etc.  I showed off this set (have some dupes,too, not sure if these are all scans of my best copies) to my wife.  She sat there with a look of horror at my wonder with these covers.  Thomas Beecham, True Strange 1-7.  I think I saw the original of one of these cover's original painting sell in the last couple years for like a grand, no love from the art world!

 

I like TRUE STRANGE as well. I have the Elvis and I think one other, though I don't see it here. Might be wrong

 

[OtherEric]

And today's haul ends with the Signets:

[Darwination]

On 9/23/2023 at 12:36 AM, Book Guy said:

I like TRUE STRANGE as well. I have the Elvis and I think one other, though I don't see it here. Might be wrong

 

There was True Weird as well. I found more dupes of True Strange and a dupe of one of these True Weird today, I think it must be some sort of illness. Strange and Weird, but True.

[Darwination]

On 9/23/2023 at 12:24 AM, OtherEric said:

Avons:

 

LMAO, Waiting for Willy.  Willy can only hope.

[Darwination]

Ok, paperback people, school me here.

I'm looking at that James Bama cover and am thinking I want it.   I start looking around at eBay copies and at Flickr and realize pretty quickly that there's a lot of differences in how this painting looks from publisher to publisher and even edition to edition.  It's not the original paperback printing.  Even the original paperback printing followed a first hardcover edition.  Then am I just hunting the first edition with the cover I like?  But then I look at these editions, and they are so different.  Here's the original art (with nice model reference) that Steve has up at Flickr:

Almost photorealistic - few like Bama are able to achieve such detail.  Amazing.

But then I look at the copies available, how different the original looks than the printing in many cases.

And I get that even the same printing is going to look different depending on condition, whether you are looking at a scan or a photo, how that photo or scan has been processed, etc, but here we go, Bantam 1963

Bantam 1965 via Steve

Bantam 1967

1970 Corgi verion from Boy de Haas at Flickr

I think de Haas here probably has his black levels jacked a bit, but I'm feeling that a lot of that black is in the printing in the first place.  You're losing a lot of detail, but some might prefer the darker look.

Do collectors tend to go for the first edition in an oft-reprinted book like this, or are they hunting particular pressings? 

Edited September 23, 2023 by Darwination

[Surfing Alien]

On 9/23/2023 at 3:10 AM, Darwination said:

Ok, paperback people, school me here.

I'm looking at that James Bama cover and am thinking I want it.   I start looking around at eBay copies and at Flickr and realize pretty quickly that there's a lot of differences in how this painting looks from publisher to publisher and even edition to edition.  It's not the original paperback printing.  Even the original paperback printing followed a first hardcover edition.  Then am I just hunting the first edition with the cover I like?  But then I look at these editions, and they are so different.  Here's the original art (with nice model reference) that Steve has up at Flickr:

Almost photorealistic - few like Bama are able to achieve such detail.  Amazing.

But then I look at the copies available, how different the original looks than the printing in many cases.

And I get that even the same printing is going to look different depending on condition, whether you are looking at a scan or a photo, how that photo or scan has been processed, etc, but here we go, Bantam 1963

Bantam 1965 via Steve

Bantam 1967

1970 Corgi verion from Boy de Haas at Flickr

I think de Haas here probably has his black levels jacked a bit, but I'm feeling that a lot of that black is in the printing in the first place.  You're losing a lot of detail, but some might prefer the darker look.

Do collectors tend to go for the first edition in an oft-reprinted book like this, or are they hunting particular pressings? 

The paintings never translate to the printed page with the same color strike and detail. The books were produced purely for commercial reasons and the print quality striven for was only enough to make you pick the book up off a rack from a glance at five feet.

In other words, if they could get guys to see headlights at five feet, and they'd pick them up like the deer they were, the publisher had done its job

This was a primary reason why Barye Phillips, the undoubted "King" of paperback artists painted just enough detail to sell the book, and he was masterful at nearly impressionistic Good Girls. He and the publishers knew that all that detail would be lost in translation and did not sell the book. They still commissioned and bought paintings from all of these artists who infused detail into their paintings, because the volume of publications required it (Phillips was fast, but couldn't paint them all, even though sometimes it seems like he did )

So, as for which to buy? The one you like most of course. No one (I know at least) collects Bama pb art or this edition of Tomboy as a "thing" so there's plenty to choose from at reasonable prices.

[Surfing Alien]

Was pretty busy yesterday so I guess we'll have some Saturday Sport instead of my usual Friday Fun

Did some work on my PKD collection with these crispy high grades. Maze of Death and Deus Irae are 1st PB's. Martian Time Slip is the 1st Book Edition.

 

I've also started working on a collection of Shirley Jackson and Ira Levin pbs. They're both kind of like Walter Tevis, great writers with low output but high critical and commercial acclaim. The low output makes them very do-able runs to put together, although nice copies can be challenging like so many 60'& 70's pbs.

The copy of "The Sundial" came perfectly shrink wrapped with a backer board inside! It looks super minty, I'd like to open it but admire the work so much, I think I'll keep it like it is. Kind of a primitive slab   If you want to read Jackson, "Come Along With Me" is a great choice. It's a collection put out soon after she passed and has a 1st publication (the title story) along with many classics, including "The Lottery"

 

I haven't read "This Perfect Day" yet, it's a dystopian science fiction novel, reviewed as pretty derivative of the classics like 1984, but well plotted as he was known for.  I like the cover art, despite its being relegated to second fiddle behind the giant fonts.

 

[Randall Dowling]

On 9/23/2023 at 2:10 AM, Darwination said:

Ok, paperback people, school me here.

I'm looking at that James Bama cover and am thinking I want it.   I start looking around at eBay copies and at Flickr and realize pretty quickly that there's a lot of differences in how this painting looks from publisher to publisher and even edition to edition.  It's not the original paperback printing.  Even the original paperback printing followed a first hardcover edition.  Then am I just hunting the first edition with the cover I like?  But then I look at these editions, and they are so different.  Here's the original art (with nice model reference) that Steve has up at Flickr:

Almost photorealistic - few like Bama are able to achieve such detail.  Amazing.

But then I look at the copies available, how different the original looks than the printing in many cases.

And I get that even the same printing is going to look different depending on condition, whether you are looking at a scan or a photo, how that photo or scan has been processed, etc, but here we go, Bantam 1963

Bantam 1965 via Steve

Bantam 1967

1970 Corgi verion from Boy de Haas at Flickr

I think de Haas here probably has his black levels jacked a bit, but I'm feeling that a lot of that black is in the printing in the first place.  You're losing a lot of detail, but some might prefer the darker look.

Do collectors tend to go for the first edition in an oft-reprinted book like this, or are they hunting particular pressings? 

Aren't the first two copies here the same printing?  I don't believe that Bantam had multiple printings under the same issue number, in this case- F3067 (pretty sure this predates number lines on these books).  My guess is that any printing differences are from age or lithographic process.  @Surfing Alien, can you confirm (or anyone else that knows more than me, which is pretty much everyone)?

As to the question of which one to collect, when I find a particular cover illustration that I like, I try to identify the first printing of it and pursue that.  YMMV.

Edit:  Just looking at Bruce Black's notes on Bantams and it sounds like it's kind of a mess.  I guess we'd need to see the copyright page to verify.

Edited September 23, 2023 by Randall Dowling
Found more information

[Darwination]

I'd already looked, Randall, in a copy I'd considered and was under the impression there were multiple different pressings.  Don't know how the numbers work, though.

 

Edited September 23, 2023 by Darwination

[MattTheDuck]

On 9/22/2023 at 6:06 AM, Darwination said:

Yeah, the Marilyn cover is slightly disturbing 😳 The original sold for under 2 grand at Heritage a couple of years ago, so maybe a humble collector like myself really could 'take it' - though I would likely need to hang in a room where my wife wouldn't have to look at funky Marilyn too often

The Elvis is my fave followed by the James Dean.

I wrote just a bit on Weider (who features prominently in that three part Netflix doc on Arnold Schwarzenegger) on a blog post from earlier this year on True Weird, the predecessor to True Strange, at:

http://darwinscans.blogspot.com/2023/07/true-weird-may-1956.html?m=1

Saw the calendar with the original photo (1956?) at an Estate sale a few weeks ago - $1000.

[OtherEric]

In today.  I've always thought this was a particularly striking cover design.