THE AMAZING FANTASY #15 CLUB 39 39

[namisgr]

6 hours ago, peewee22 said:

Yes probably the scan.

I'm less sure.  The same edge of the book shows toasting on both the front and back cover scans: the right front edge and the left back edge.  Coupled with the average page quality, the book may be lightly toasted.  The graders know for sure, having seen the interior covers and deciding to give the 8.0 grade.

 

I'm sure there are plenty of collectors who'd love to own this book, and it will fetch a great price, but I wouldn't be a buyer.

Edited May 7, 2017 by namisgr

[Jaydogrules]

6 hours ago, namisgr said:

I'm less sure.  The same edge of the book shows toasting on both the front and back cover scans: the right front edge and the left back edge.  Coupled with the average page quality, the book may be lightly toasted.  The graders know for sure, having seen the interior covers and deciding to give the 8.0 grade.

 

I'm sure there are plenty of collectors who'd love to own this book, and it will fetch a great price, but I wouldn't be a buyer.

When you use the pejorative "toasty" to describe a book (and I notice you use it often), what exactly are you referring to?  If you are referring to the appearance of edge tanning, you should know by now that that has absolutely nothing to do with the alleged "PQ" on the label, and everything to do with either the presence of light foxing  (very common among old books) and/or dust shadows (which can be caused by something as benign as a book being stored for years with a smaller book being stored on top of it).

-J.

[namisgr]

1 hour ago, Jaydogrules said:

When you use the pejorative "toasty" to describe a book (and I notice you use it often), what exactly are you referring to?  If you are referring to the appearance of edge tanning, you should know by now that that has absolutely nothing to do with the alleged "PQ" on the label, and everything to do with either the presence of light foxing  (very common among old books) and/or dust shadows (which can be caused by something as benign as a book being stored for years with a smaller book being stored on top of it).

-J.

It's neither foxing nor dust shadows, and it's not a 'pejorative' but a defect.  It's aging of the paper from the edge inward.  If you ever collected ten cent comics, you'd be familiar with the tanning halos that manifest on the interior covers and sometimes the exteriors as well.

 

CGC downgrades for cover tanning, the degree depending on its severity, and the structural grade in the absence of such tanning.  I learned this very early on in having submitted a copy of ASM #14 that was structurally a very fine to near mint book, but that had tanning rings around the front and back covers, especially on the interiors, and led to the comic being graded (appropriately) a 6.0.  Same thing for an otherwise near mint minus copy of Batman #155 (first Penguin) - 7.5, if memory serves me.

 

As for its relation to page quality, it frequently [not universally] reflects the quality of preservation of the cover paper and interior pages alike.  One look at early Silver Age comics from, say, the Mohawk Valley or Joe and Nadia Mannarino collections demonstrates the relationship at one extreme, as do the White Mountain and Curator collections at the opposite extreme.

Edited May 7, 2017 by namisgr

[Jaydogrules]

35 minutes ago, namisgr said:

It's neither foxing nor dust shadows, and it's not a 'pejorative' but a defect.  It's aging of the paper from the edge inward.  If you ever collected ten cent comics, you'd be familiar with the tanning halos that manifest on the interior covers and often the exteriors as well.

 

CGC downgrades for cover tanning, the degree depending on its severity, and the structural grade in the absence of such tanning.  I learned this very early on in having graded a copy of ASM #14 that was structurally a very fine to near mint book, but that had tanning rings around the front and back covers on both sides, and led to the comic being graded 6.0.

 

As for page quality, it frequently [not universally] relates to the quality of preservation of the cover paper as well.  One look at early Silver Age comics from, say, the Mohawk Valley or Joe and Nadia Mannarino collections demonstrates the relationship at one extreme, as do the White Mountain and Curator collections at the opposite extreme.

Paper oxidation (ie foxing) is the cause of the vast majority of edge tanning that you might see on books.  That isn't my opinion it's science.  The oxidation is what causes paper to lose its suppleness, and that is actually what CGC is referencing with their "PQ"(="Page Quality", not "page colour") designations on their labels (as wishy washy as they may be with it). The literal "colour" has virtually nothing to do with anything, as that tanning that you see is simply the effects of the oxidation of usually ferrous or copper on the paper.  And it may not "look" nice but it has nothing to do with the integrity of the paper.  None of this should be confused with the actual browning that happens to paper when its lignin is destroyed by things such as prolonged exposure to sunlight and/or humidity, which causes the paper to become brittle (the only "PQ" designation CGC uses that, ironically, actually is a "PQ" ).

-J.

Edited May 7, 2017 by Jaydogrules

[namisgr]

There's so much wrong with your post, the only thing to do is ascribe it to ignorance and move on.  I'll just take a single shot, and point out that foxing is typically from spotty growth of biological material coupled with oxidation, and not aging of the paper, the latter which causes white pages and white cover stock to turn in strips progressively light yellow, medium yellow, light tan, and finally darker shades of tan, all of which are measures of color, which dating back to before the creation of the OWL guide has been the primary designate for paper preservation.

 

Like I said, entire collections sometimes suffered from their storage conditions to develop aged cover stock and interior pages that appear 'toasted'.  Such as what happens to newspapers left in a hot garage or shed for many weeks.  And such as what happened to most of the early Silver from the Mohawk Valley collection, like this example below, with cream to off white interior pages, and edge tanning to both interior and exterior covers front and back:

Edited May 7, 2017 by namisgr

[Jaydogrules]

7 minutes ago, namisgr said:

There's so much wrong with your post, the only thing to do is ascribe it to ignorance and move on.  I'll just take a single shot, and point out that foxing is from growth of biological material, and not aging of the paper, the latter which causes white pages and white cover stock to turn progressively light yellow, medium yellow, light tan, and finally darker shades of tan, all of which are measures of color, which dating back to before the creation of the OWL guide has been the primary designate for paper preservation.

Seriously?   Read a book man.  You're so enslaved to the "PQ" on the label you probably don't even know that CGC originally didn't want to put it on their labels at all because they knew how it's generally just a shot in the dark, bordering on pure BS.

"Age" does not- I repeat- does not- cause a book to turn colours.  Poor storage conditions can compromise the lignin in the paper (look it up!), but that doesn't necessarily cause the paper to turn different colours either.  The sun could bleach a book white and it could still have brittle pages.  

So learn about what you're trying to lecture me about before you try to lecture me.  

-J.

[namisgr]

5 minutes ago, Jaydogrules said:

Seriously?   Read a book man.  You're so enslaved to the "PQ" on the label you probably don't even know that CGC originally didn't want to put it on their labels at all because they knew how it's generally just a shot in the dark, bordering on pure BS.

"Age" does not- I repeat- does not- cause a book to turn colours.  Poor storage conditions can compromise the lignin in the paper (look it up!), but that doesn't necessarily cause the paper to turn different colours either.  The sun could bleach a book white and it could still have brittle pages.  

So learn about what you're trying to lecture me about before you try to lecture me.  

-J.

You're confused.

I'm neither confused, nor interested in having comics with poorly preserved cover stock showing edge yellowing in my collection, provided I can acquire another example with well preserved cover paper.  I know I'm far from alone on this - just check out what the Curator copy of Fantastic Four #1 fetched for its numerical grade, and what the cover paper looked like on it.

Edited May 7, 2017 by namisgr

[Jaydogrules]

4 minutes ago, namisgr said:

You're confused.

I'm neither confused, nor interested in having comics with poorly preserved cover stock showing edge yellowing in my collection, provided I can acquire another example with well preserved cover paper.

That's great, I've seen some of your books and you have some amazing stuff.  While I'm sure we all want "the perfect book" (and that standard is different for everyone), I think most of us mere mortals are happy simply owning the best of what we can find and afford.

-J.

[nWo_22]

On 5/7/2017 at 1:20 PM, namisgr said:

You're confused.

I'm neither confused, nor interested in having comics with poorly preserved cover stock showing edge yellowing in my collection, provided I can acquire another example with well preserved cover paper.  I know I'm far from alone on this - just check out what the Curator copy of Fantastic Four #1 fetched for its numerical grade, and what the cover paper looked like on it.

Bob you are 110% correct.  

[G.A.tor]

On ‎5‎/‎7‎/‎2017 at 3:19 PM, Jaydogrules said:

 the "PQ" on the label you probably don't even know that CGC originally didn't want to put it on their labels at all because they knew how it's generally just a shot in the dark, bordering on pure BS.

 

it was my understanding that cgc didn't initially want on the label because depending on storage conditions after the book was graded, the PQ could change, and what's on the label might not reflect currect/future condition...

J,  I know you don't believe all that much in PQ on the label, but for those of us that have been doing this a long time (10,20,30,40+ years), pq was and generally is, very important, AND, is typically very easy to determine...

Edited May 9, 2017 by G.A.tor

[G.A.tor]

On ‎5‎/‎7‎/‎2017 at 3:19 PM, Jaydogrules said:

 

"Age" does not- I repeat- does not- cause a book to turn colours.  Poor storage conditions can compromise the lignin in the paper (look it up!), but that doesn't necessarily cause the paper to turn different colours either.  The sun could bleach a book white and it could still have brittle pages.  

So learn about what you're trying to lecture me about before you try to lecture me.  

-J.

The age of a book itself, doesn't cause anything to happen to a comic... as J mentioned, it is effect of outside elements and conditions that change the comic (heat, light, moisture, etc)...

While in theory, sun could "bleach" a comic white, this is typically not the case, because paper lignin is naturally more brown, and is actually "bleached" (chemically) to its white color... so when heat  and light rays constantly bombard a comic cover (or pages), the typical result is that the cover or page darkens because the lignin molecules, when exposed to oxygen in the air (accelerated by heat), begin to change and become less stable. The lignin will absorb more light, giving off a darker color.

[namisgr]

59 minutes ago, G.A.tor said:

The age of a book itself, doesn't cause anything to happen to a comic... as J mentioned, it is effect of outside elements and conditions that change the comic (heat, light, moisture, etc)...

Who on this entire board would believe that age in and of itself causes comics to deteriorate, rather than the interaction between aging during long-term storage and storage conditions?  I can't imagine anyone.  One look at the 75 year old comics from the Edgar Church or Vancouver pedigrees makes it irrefutable, let alone the science of paper preservation.

 

From an earlier post of mine with an example from the Mohawk Valley pedigree, exhibiting 'toasted' cover stock and interior pages [and not foxing  ]...

Like I said, entire collections sometimes suffered from their storage conditions to develop aged cover stock and interior pages that appear 'toasted'.  Such as what happens to newspapers left in a hot garage or shed for many weeks.

Edited May 9, 2017 by namisgr

[Spiderturtle]

On May 7, 2017 at 1:20 PM, namisgr said:

You're confused.

I'm neither confused, nor interested in having comics with poorly preserved cover stock showing edge yellowing in my collection, provided I can acquire another example with well preserved cover paper.  I know I'm far from alone on this - just check out what the Curator copy of Fantastic Four #1 fetched for its numerical grade, and what the cover paper looked like on it.

Similar idea with last year's ha 9.4

https://comics.ha.com/itm/silver-age-1956-1969-/superhero/amazing-fantasy-15-marvel-1962-cgc-nm-94-off-white-pages/a/7124-91113.s

[G.A.tor]

1 hour ago, namisgr said:

Who on this entire board would believe that age in and of itself causes comics to deteriorate, rather than the interaction between aging during long-term storage and storage conditions?  I can't imagine anyone.  One look at the 75 year old comics from the Edgar Church or Vancouver pedigrees makes it irrefutable, let alone the science of paper preservation.

 

From an earlier post of mine with an example from the Mohawk Valley pedigree, exhibiting 'toasted' cover stock and interior pages [and not foxing  ]...

Like I said, entire collections sometimes suffered from their storage conditions to develop aged cover stock and interior pages that appear 'toasted'.  Such as what happens to newspapers left in a hot garage or shed for many weeks.

absolutely the reason comics uniformly show certain "flaws" or exhibit certain  characteristics, the storage conditions and elements they were or were not exposed to

Edited May 9, 2017 by G.A.tor

[Jaydogrules]

4 hours ago, namisgr said:

 

 

4 hours ago, namisgr said:

Who on this entire board would believe that age in and of itself causes comics to deteriorate, rather than the interaction between aging during long-term storage and storage conditions?  I can't imagine anyone.  One look at the 75 year old comics from the Edgar Church or Vancouver pedigrees makes it irrefutable, let alone the science of paper preservation.

 

From an earlier post of mine with an example from the Mohawk Valley pedigree, exhibiting 'toasted' cover stock and interior pages [and not foxing  ]...

Like I said, entire collections sometimes suffered from their storage conditions to develop aged cover stock and interior pages that appear 'toasted'.  Such as what happens to newspapers left in a hot garage or shed for many weeks.

Actually, you're still a bit off base (though I acknowledge the ever so slight course correct).  Blazing heat in a storage unit will not cause a book to get "toasty".  I've seen comics come out of dry storage units that were there for 15 years, no climate control, nothing, and look perfect (well, at least not with any environmental damage). Exposure to sunlight will damage a book though. Moisture is the biggest environmental risk factor to comics.  Dry heat is not.  Heat does not make a book look "toasty" (at least not in the way you seem to mean it). Dust shadows and sun shadows do that, and neither of those necessarily has anything to do with "page quality".  You can have a dust shadow with newsstand fresh suppleness in the pages. Don't believe me ?  Look it up.  

A book can deteriorate even under the supposedly most optimal storage conditions.  And look, if you don't believe me, call CGC/CCS and ask them for yourselves.  

Depending on the original quality of the paper it was printed it on the acids that are naturally in the paper all by themselves can literally eat through the paper and cause it to become brittle over time.  This can happen in a cool, dry, temperature controlled attic!   

Furthermore, a book can be perfectly stored, and still have "tan pages" because, guess what ?- that was actually the quality of the paper it was originally printed on.  How would CGC (or even some of our esteemed experts on these boards know the difference)? - bad news, they really don't.  Different types and quality of paper were commonly used during a book's initial print run, especially in the GA and early SA.  This fact has been discussed at times on these boards, by boardies knowledgeable of these matters, but it's always conveniently forgotten and/or ignored when the discussion of "PQ" comes up because it doesn't fit the narrative of a few who "want to believe".

And here's one last rub for you- and I've also mentioned this before- "PQ" can (and has) degraded on even slabbed books, even those stored under perfect conditions.   There is nothing a slab can do to stop the natural acids of the paper from doing it's thing, short of restoring the book (or "conserving" it).  So on top of the "PQ" grading that you are putting so much stock (too much stock IMO) in being wildly inconsistent , what you see on the label may be even doubly wrong.  

-J.

Edited May 9, 2017 by Jaydogrules

[namisgr]

What's your evidence that page quality grading is 'wildly inconsistent'?  It's at least as consistent as numerical grading, and based on my experience with hundreds of submissions and participation in a live grading contest, easier than numerical grading.

 

As for another of your hang-ups, that I put 'too much stock' in page quality, this is a notion you've fabricated out of thin air.  Given that you know nothing about the way my collection was accumulated, the nature of the comics that were in it, and the personal preferences in eye appeal and preservation behind the decisions made in building it, you basically don't know what you're talking about.

 

Finally, I can't fathom why you've even brought up the topic of page quality again.  The discussion was dealing with an AF15  coming up for auction that was graded 8.0 and has yellowed cover stock (and not foxing) on one edge front and back.  After a bunch of comments were made here about how stellar the copy looked to some collectors, I offered a different viewpoint based on problems with the preservation of the cover stock that, to me, make this copy less desirable than others at comparable or slightly inferior numerical grades but superior eye appeal.  My viewpoint on the lightly toasted 9.4 copy that Spiderturtle posted a link to would be comparable.  It's clearly not a viewpoint that I, alone, hold, because there are numerous examples of collectors crushing previous record prices to buy copies of AF15, FF1, and other major keys that sport exceptionally white and well preserved cover paper.

 

Post-----script: And what Silver Age comics were printed with tan pages, pray tell?  

Edited May 9, 2017 by namisgr

[Bomber-Bob]

56 minutes ago, Jaydogrules said:

 

So on top of the "PQ" grading that you are putting so much stock (too much stock IMO) in being wildly inconsistent , what you see on the label may be even doubly wrong.  

-J.

Jaydog, do you trust/believe the grade on the label ? IMO, the grade is more 'wildly inconsistent' and collectors put too much stock into it.

Edited May 9, 2017 by Bomber-Bob

[Jaydogrules]

28 minutes ago, Bomber-Bob said:

Jaydog, do you trust/believe the grade on the label ? IMO, the grade is more 'wildly inconsistent' and collectors put too much stock into it.

A structural grade can, to a reasonable extent, be determined and verified visually through a slab and with graders' notes.  

The "PQ" on the label, unless you can interact with the book directly, cannot, not to any extent, be ascertained through a slab. "PQ" ("Page Quality") does not have anything to do with how a book "looks", it is the suppleness of the pages in hand, and that has nothing to do with the literal colour of the pages.  I think the fact that books with legitimately brittle pages usually appear brown leads people to believe that a "less white looking" book must have "inferior page quality".  But as I have tried painstakingly to explain above, that is not necessarily true, and to namisgr who just edited his post, I repeat, those "toasty" looking edges you think you see in those scans of those AF 15's have nothing to do with the "PQ" on the label, those are either light dust or sun shadows (assuming they are even really there as I have seen scanners produce a similar effect).   To suggest otherwise would mean that you believe a book with light foxing (ie tanning, and not to be confused with mold, which is biological, caused by exposure to moisture, and can spread around a book) can still pull an 8.0 or even a 9.4 from CGC.  

-J. 

Edited May 9, 2017 by Jaydogrules

[namisgr]

1 hour ago, Jaydogrules said:

"PQ" ("Page Quality") does not have anything to do with how a book "looks", it is the suppleness of the pages in hand, and that has nothing to do with the literal colour of the pages. 

-J. 

Heh.

[namisgr]

1 hour ago, Jaydogrules said:

and to namisgr who just edited his post, I repeat, those "toasty" looking edges you think you see in those scans of those AF 15's have nothing to do with the "PQ" on the label

-J. 

Heh heh.  Mohawk Valley anyone?  How about those Savannah Marvels?  Joe and Nadia collection?

Edited May 9, 2017 by namisgr