THE AMAZING FANTASY #15 CLUB 39 39

[VintageComics]

9 hours ago, Guardian Comics said:

Are you guys really arguing about this?  For somebody to say that not a single copy of a book sold over the weekend when Leroy posted that he had sold one just the other day is nonsense.  Nobody knows everything, and to assume that you would be made aware of each and every sale as it happened is crazy to me.  (That point is obviously not directed at you JayDog).

Nobody professes to have the whole picture.

So rather than say it's nonsense why don't you say what the grade is and what it sold for (or at least what asking price is)?

[peewee22]

3 hours ago, VintageComics said:

And the blues are different on the back of those two labels being compared.

But another factor is that the blues actually do differ from CGC label to label (as they used to).

Scans often do not compare very accurately one to another, although in this case I'd be inclined to believe they are somewhat representative of the respective books.

Heritage's scans are reasonably good in my experience (so the 9.4 is probably close to what it looks like in hand) and both were scanned at Heritage if I'm not mistaken (if that is the BC to PeeWee's AF #15, albeit they were scanned at difference times so possibly different scanners as Heritage has changed their scanners over the years).

 

Yep i noticed the cgc label blues were different when i compared. Point of this was to show clean grays can make a huge difference in eye appeal. Even the reds are different....the Spidey reds and the gift box reds on back...if the scans are close to realism. But the books in hand are worth two in the bush. Scans are just scans.

[blazingbob]

Yup,  I find that a book is much different to some people when trying to buy it versus when they own it.  Eagle eyes pointing out every defect,  no mention when selling.   I also tend to dismiss guys who talk down a book and then magically make announcements that they just bought the book.  I hope people realize that the boards can be used to spread disinformation as well as information.    

[namisgr]

5 minutes ago, blazingbob said:

Yup,  I find that a book is much different to some people when trying to buy it versus when they own it.  Eagle eyes pointing out every defect,  no mention when selling.   I also tend to dismiss guys who talk down a book and then magically make announcements that they just bought the book.  I hope people realize that the boards can be used to spread disinformation as well as information.    

Why, it's like the NFL draft! 

[Sam I am]

52 minutes ago, namisgr said:

Why, it's like the NFL draft! 

[Wipple]

9 hours ago, Aman619 said:

At the risk of being a broken record about judging books by scans.... here's a tip.  First look at the white areas of CGC labels for any color tone.  Then use that tone to judge all the other colors. In these two books scans, the "greyer' grey copy is a much bluer tone in the labels white areas.  Blue makes colors cooler, as in a cool grey.  The other has a yellow and magenta fleshy tone in the whites, therefore any excess yellow seen in the grey background is also a result of the overall scan "warmer" (yellower) quality of the image. This also made the back cover look much yellower than it really is.

scanners do crazy things--same book. Two scanners in my office- default settings

 

[Aman619]

2 hours ago, blazingbob said:

Yup,  I find that a book is much different to some DEALERS when trying to buy it versus when they own it.  Eagle eyes pointing out every defect,  no mention when selling.   I also tend to dismiss DEALERS who talk down a book and then magically make announcements that they just bought the book.  I hope people realize that the boards can be used to spread disinformation as well as information.    

fixed that for you.  kettle meet black.  just keeping it real...

[Jaydogrules]

52 minutes ago, Wipple said:

scanners do crazy things--same book. Two scanners in my office- default settings

 

Damn.  That's eye opening.  

-J.

[VintageComics]

7 minutes ago, Jaydogrules said:

1 hour ago, Wipple said:

scanners do crazy things--same book. Two scanners in my office- default settings

 

Damn.  That's eye opening.  

That's a perfect example.

[VintageComics]

2 hours ago, blazingbob said:

Yup,  I find that a book is much different to some people when trying to buy it versus when they own it.  Eagle eyes pointing out every defect,  no mention when selling.   I also tend to dismiss guys who talk down a book and then magically make announcements that they just bought the book.  

That's one of the things that has changed the most about the chat forum.

It used to be about the comics. Now it's about talking comics up or down.

 

[peewee22]

7 minutes ago, VintageComics said:

That's a perfect example.

Better check my af15 and make sure the grays are clean...lol.

[Aman619]

Most people just plug in their scanners and start scanning books.  Assuming that its been set up perfectly at the factory..  But in reality, scanners must be calibrated, or each scan must be fixed, one by one, by eye (preferably with the book in hand in a good light) afterwards in photoshop.  Saves a lot of time to set up a good scanning template that corrects to what you perceive to be accurate tones first, before doing your scanning.  Most comics paper aren't white, but rather a pleasing very light, or 'light' cream color.  Makes a less impressive scan sometimes but its more realistic.  Heritage was guilty (or perhaps not yet sufficiently careful in their scanning) for large periods of time of over whitening white covers (and other) books by pumping contrast and colors.  

Bottom line, can't trust what we see online when it comes to color AT ALL.  even a perfect scan will appear differently to EACH of us as a result of our own monitors.  and that goes for the scanner himself judging his results by looking at HIS monitor!

 

[peewee22]

13 minutes ago, Aman619 said:

Most people just plug in their scanners and start scanning books.  Assuming that its been set up perfectly at the factory..  But in reality, scanners must be calibrated, or each scan must be fixed, one by one, by eye (preferably with the book in hand in a good light) afterwards in photoshop.  Saves a lot of time to set up a good scanning template that corrects to what you perceive to be accurate tones first, before doing your scanning.  Most comics paper aren't white, but rather a pleasing very light, or 'light' cream color.  Makes a less impressive scan sometimes but its more realistic.  Heritage was guilty (or perhaps not yet sufficiently careful in their scanning) for large periods of time of over whitening white covers (and other) books by pumping contrast and colors.  

Bottom line, can't trust what we see online when it comes to color AT ALL.  even a perfect scan will appear differently to EACH of us as a result of our own monitors.  and that goes for the scanner himself judging his results by looking at HIS monitor!

 

Good points.

[comicquant]

2 minutes ago, Aman619 said:

Most people just plug in their scanners and start scanning books.  Assuming that its been set up perfectly at the factory..  But in reality, scanners must be calibrated, or each scan must be fixed, one by one, by eye (preferably with the book in hand in a good light) afterwards in photoshop.  Saves a lot of time to set up a good scanning template that corrects to what you perceive to be accurate tones first, before doing your scanning.  Most comics paper aren't white, but rather a pleasing very light, or 'light' cream color.  Makes a less impressive scan sometimes but its more realistic.  Heritage was guilty (or perhaps not yet sufficiently careful in their scanning) for large periods of time of over whitening white covers (and other) books by pumping contrast and colors.  

Bottom line, can't trust what we see online when it comes to color AT ALL.  even a perfect scan will appear differently to EACH of us as a result of our own monitors.  and that goes for the scanner himself judging his results by looking at HIS monitor!

 

Heritage doesn't scan their books which is why they look so different.  They're using digital cameras and true color (5k = pure white) bulbs for ambient lighting.  Its actually a much more realistic depiction of the book versus a scanner's representation.  What Heritage shows is no different than if you were standing outside on a perfectly clear day looking at the book.  Which is something probably very few of us have done so it looks a bit off.  Since coming back into collecting I've always wondered why dealers and collectors were literally scanning their books instead of using a digital camera.  I thought it was a joke at first.  Scanners (at least the ones most of us would buy) are typically for scanning documentation.  If buyers are unaware of some of the side effects of scanning a book you've got to wonder what they think when they see things like cross-hatching and reverse pixelation (ghost pixels = white spots).  Some of these larger online dealers still using scanners would probably notice a few more orders trickling through if they had a proper setup.

[peewee22]

5 minutes ago, comicquant said:

Heritage doesn't scan their books which is why they look so different.  They're using digital cameras and true color (5k = pure white) bulbs for ambient lighting.  Its actually a much more realistic depiction of the book versus a scanner's representation.  What Heritage shows is no different than if you were standing outside on a perfectly clear day looking at the book.  Which is something probably very few of us have done so it looks a bit off.  Since coming back into collecting I've always wondered why dealers and collectors were literally scanning their books instead of using a digital camera.  I thought it was a joke at first.  Scanners (at least the ones most of us would buy) are typically for scanning documentation.  If buyers are unaware of some of the side effects of scanning a book you've got to wonder what they think when they see things like cross-hatching and reverse pixelation (ghost pixels = white spots).  Some of these larger online dealers still using scanners would probably notice a few more orders trickling through if they had a proper setup.

I think the 8.0 and 9.4 comparison was a fair one. My 8.0 looks exactly like the scan i presented. If Heritage scanned the 9.4 to scale i think we can see clean grays are invaluable to an af15 which is what initiated this conversation.

[comicquant]

5 minutes ago, peewee22 said:

I think the 8.0 and 9.4 comparison was a fair one. My 8.0 looks exactly like the scan i presented. If Heritage scanned the 9.4 to scale i think we can see clean grays are invaluable to an af15 which is what initiated this conversation.

I agree and there are some aspects that won't change such as the affects of tanning on any color.  You blend browns/reds with any color and its going to make a big difference.  Your copy is obviously well-preserved in comparison to the HA 9.4.  Thats probably the nicest 8.0 I've seen BTW.

[VintageComics]

49 minutes ago, comicquant said:

1 hour ago, Aman619 said:

Most people just plug in their scanners and start scanning books.  Assuming that its been set up perfectly at the factory..  But in reality, scanners must be calibrated, or each scan must be fixed, one by one, by eye (preferably with the book in hand in a good light) afterwards in photoshop.  Saves a lot of time to set up a good scanning template that corrects to what you perceive to be accurate tones first, before doing your scanning.  Most comics paper aren't white, but rather a pleasing very light, or 'light' cream color.  Makes a less impressive scan sometimes but its more realistic.  Heritage was guilty (or perhaps not yet sufficiently careful in their scanning) for large periods of time of over whitening white covers (and other) books by pumping contrast and colors.  

Bottom line, can't trust what we see online when it comes to color AT ALL.  even a perfect scan will appear differently to EACH of us as a result of our own monitors.  and that goes for the scanner himself judging his results by looking at HIS monitor!

 

Heritage doesn't scan their books which is why they look so different.  They're using digital cameras and true color (5k = pure white) bulbs for ambient lighting.  Its actually a much more realistic depiction of the book versus a scanner's representation.  What Heritage shows is no different than if you were standing outside on a perfectly clear day looking at the book.  Which is something probably very few of us have done so it looks a bit off.  Since coming back into collecting I've always wondered why dealers and collectors were literally scanning their books instead of using a digital camera.  I thought it was a joke at first.  Scanners (at least the ones most of us would buy) are typically for scanning documentation.  If buyers are unaware of some of the side effects of scanning a book you've got to wonder what they think when they see things like cross-hatching and reverse pixelation (ghost pixels = white spots).  Some of these larger online dealers still using scanners would probably notice a few more orders trickling through if they had a proper setup.

Aman619 was talking about early Heritage scans which were really poor but I don't blame Heritage. Scanner technology has come a long way over the years.

Early Heritage scans were extremely White.

Are you sure they are using photography and not scans?

I know Comic Connect uses photography now and I personally don't think their photos do their books justice.

[comicquant]

4 minutes ago, VintageComics said:

Aman619 was talking about early Heritage scans which were really poor but I don't blame Heritage. Scanner technology has come a long way over the years.

Early Heritage scans were extremely White.

Are you sure they are using photography and not scans?

I know Comic Connect uses photography now and I personally don't think their photos do their books justice.

I read this on the boards or on HA's site but can't find it on either.  I remember the detail about the lighting so I know its somewhere.  I guess it could've been connect but I'm almost positive it was HA.  But you're right, its all about the equipment and the user using the equipment (to aman's point).  

[lou_fine]

10 minutes ago, VintageComics said:

I know Comic Connect uses photography now and I personally don't think their photos do their books justice.

+1

I've also heard the same thing from both consignors who complain and buyers who are happy that the actual books looks much better in real life as opposed to whatever scans or pictures that CC are sometimes using in their auction listings. 

[Spiderturtle]

4 hours ago, namisgr said:

Why, it's like the NFL draft!