THE AMAZING FANTASY #15 CLUB 39 39

[Jaydogrules]

On Sun May 07 2017 at 4:22 AM, 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.

Here's where you say precisely what you just said you didn't say, while at the same time using your favourite  (and just plain wrong) pejorative of "toasty" to denigrate a book you "wouldn't be a buyer" of.  

Or maybe I'm just making things up again.  Crazy me.  

I get it, you don't know the difference between page "quality" and page "colour" nor do you understand the science behind paper degradation, and what it actually means, even as you purport to pay a "premium" for a random "PQ" designation on a label, that may or may not even represent the current condition of the book in the slab.  You literally just don't know what you are talking about my man.  I was very thorough in my details and explanations, and evidently you believe your ego and reputation on these boards means all you have to do is say "nuh-uh" while offering absolutely nothing substantive to back up your entirely wrong OPINIONS. But of course you won't do that even though a monkey could do a simple Google search and see that everything I posted is technically accurate.  

But don't stop believin'  brother.  Get that campfire going and tell me some more about how much more you know than me and everyone else, and let's listen to some more of your ill-informed and unsolicited critiques of other people's books.  Meanwhile the more civilized of us will continue to abide the time honoured tradition of not saying anything at all if we don't have something nice to say that most of us learned in grade school.  

Anyway man, this conversation has run its course.  Peace out.  

-J.

Edited May 10, 2017 by Jaydogrules

[namisgr]

6 hours ago, Jaydogrules said:

 Get that campfire going and tell me some more about how much more you know than me and everyone else, and let's listen to some more of your ill-informed and unsolicited critiques of other people's books. 

-J.

Just more than you.   When it comes to how page quality is graded, if you think the designations 'white', 'off-white to white', 'off-white' and 'cream-to-off white' refer to anything other than the color of the paper, you know less about the subject than just about anyone else. 

As for unsolicited critiques of other's people's books, that's what you did in the thread by offering your glowing opinion of the AF15 in cgc 8.0 that's come up for sale, before I offered my own, so perhaps you should take your own advice and quit hyping books you own copies of.

Finally, it's telling that when shown a Batman 155 as an example of a comic that, owing to the conditions of its long-term storage, developed tanning halos (and neither foxing nor dust/sun shadows, which are different defects) on the covers front and back, inside and out, as well as interior pages that turned creamy, you choose to ignore it completely, as if there aren't tens of thousands of early SA comics for which the quality of the pages in the form of their CGC graded color reflects upon the storage environment and preservation of the cover stock as well.  And when told by other collectors that grading page quality is less wobbly than guessing numerical grades, and not that hard for seasoned collectors or dealers to do reasonably well, you ignore that as well.  I guess it shouldn't be so surprising from someone whose moniker says they 'rule'.

Edited May 10, 2017 by namisgr

[VintageComics]

I'll just politely note that even though namisgr and I have disagreed and agreed on things over the years, he's spot on IMO on his points on page quality and page color.

And I think most collectors and dealers who are lifers in the hobby will agree as well.

Is there anyone that disagrees with namisgr?

[peewee22]

11 minutes ago, VintageComics said:

I'll just politely note that even though namisgr and I have disagreed and agreed on things over the years, he's spot on IMO on his points on page quality and page color.

And I think most collectors and dealers who are lifers in the hobby will agree as well.

Is there anyone that disagrees with namisgr?

Or better yet, is there anyone that agrees with jaydog?

Edited May 10, 2017 by peewee22

[G.A.tor]

26 minutes ago, VintageComics said:

I'll just politely note that even though namisgr and I have disagreed and agreed on things over the years, he's spot on IMO on his points on page quality and page color.

And I think most collectors and dealers who are lifers in the hobby will agree as well.

Is there anyone that disagrees with namisgr?

In the "real" world color of paper has no direct impact on quality of said paper. That's because the paper could have been produced in any color. 

In our micro comic environment, most all comics were printed on "white" (relative degrees based on the quality and type of paper initially used) paper because that's the best color canvas for viewing comic art. 

PCE , back in the 80s, initiated a numerical system for defining page quality ...overstreet used a "whiteness" scale for defining (owl). Cgc uses colors to define page quality (visual association)

long time collectors will instinctively use various descriptive words to define quality (words like "bouncy" or "fresh" or  "toasty") and most know what those words associate or convey  

Ultimately, page quality is very important to most in defining the condition and grade of a comic, since the pages represent 90% + of the book (not just covers of course). So when most collectors say they would rather have a 9.0 with "white" Pages versus a 9.0 with "cr/ow" Pages, there is an assumption (which is generally accurate to some degree ) that while overall structure/defects  are similar, the better assigned pq book is generally believed to be in a better state of preservation.

that said, it's not an exact science, determining pq...its subjective , just like assigning an overall grade. The more experience one has, the better they should be at determining. 

So cgc offers a "guideline" , but folks will always disagree if they so choose. Unlikely a consensus can or will ever be reached.  

Edited May 10, 2017 by G.A.tor

[VintageComics]

1 hour ago, G.A.tor said:

In the "real" world color of paper has no direct impact on quality of said paper. That's because the paper could have been produced in any color. 

In our micro comic environment, most all comics were printed on "white" (relative degrees based on the quality and type of paper initially used) paper because that's the best color canvas for viewing comic art. 

I'll agree with what you said for the most part.

But not all comics were printed with White paper. Some were printed with Blue or Pink paper. They still use Tan, Brittle, Cream designations.

While an old teacher of mine once said that there is an exception to every rule (and I agree with him), I would argue that the majority of the time there is a relationship between the change in color of the paper from it's original state and a change in the actual quality of the paper (in regards to suppleness, life expectancy, etc)

And this was really the crux of the discussion as I understood it.

 

[G.A.tor]

1 minute ago, VintageComics said:

I'll agree with what you said for the most part.

But not all comics were printed with White paper. Some were printed with Blue or Pink paper. 

 That's why I said most all, pretty much every learned collector understands that certain publishers used different color paper 

[VintageComics]

3 minutes ago, G.A.tor said:

 That's why I said most all, pretty much every learned collector understands that certain publishers used different color paper 

I stated that more for others than for you.

[G.A.tor]

1 minute ago, VintageComics said:

I stated that more for others than for you.

 And really outside of quality/ fox the quantity of Comics printed on non-white paper  is probably  a fraction of 1% 

it is almost negligible in the discussion

Edited May 10, 2017 by G.A.tor

[VintageComics]

My point was to show that the relative change from White/Pink or Blue paper to a darker color are all considered the same way by collectors.

 

[october]

2 hours ago, peewee22 said:

Or better yet, is there anyone that agrees with jaydog?

That tanning halos are actually caused by foxing?

[Jaydogrules]

6 minutes ago, october said:

That tanning halos are actually caused by foxing?

 Oxidation or dust/sun shadows.  

Read a book.  

-J.

[VintageComics]

7 minutes ago, Jaydogrules said:

14 minutes ago, october said:

That tanning halos are actually caused by foxing?

 Oxidation or dust/sun shadows.  

Read a book.  

You used the word foxing incorrectly several times.

I don't think the word foxing means what you think it does.

[october]

10 minutes ago, Jaydogrules said:

 Oxidation or dust/sun shadows.  

Read a book.  

-J.

I have read some bizarro posts on the boards, but attributing interior tanning halos to dust and sun shadows takes the cake.

That makes absolutely ZERO sense. 

Edited May 10, 2017 by october

[Jaydogrules]

Just now, VintageComics said:

You used the word foxing incorrectly several times.

I don't think the word foxing means what you think it does.

I used it describe ONE cause of "tanning".  Also because foxing, which does NOT affect the actual "quality" (ie the integrity) of the paper  (ie the lignin), and simply the colour (ie the visual appearance).  This was in response to the myth that the "colour" of the paper is inextricably tied to the "quality" when it is certainly not.  

For a more detailed explanation just re-read my very detailed posts about it above.  

-J.

[Jaydogrules]

1 minute ago, october said:

I have read some bizarro posts on the boards, but attributing interior tanning halos to dust and sun shadows takes the cake.

That makes absolutely ZERO sense. 

Science doesn't make sense to you ? 

But you're okay with a colloquialism like "toasty" as a perfectly fine description, even though it literally has nothing to do with either heat or fire.  

-J.

[october]

Per Tracey Heft, a conservation expert....

Sun shadow/oxidation shadow: oxidation of the paper from exposure to light and air. Usually a small, darkened strip on one or more edges of the book. Might be removable or at least minimizable by washing and/or bleaching.

Dust shadow: usually occurs on books stored flat in piles. The dust shadow is a darkened strip where part of book was exposed to dust particles as they fell. The dust gets ingrained in the paper fibers, leaving a darkened strip. Can sometimes be dry cleaned away. Washing may set the stain and make it impossible to remove.

Tanning: caused by breakdowns in the cellulose chains in paper, which result in increased acidity and a darkening in newsprint and cover stock. Tends be an "all over" thing or at the very least a gradual change from tanned to untanned, with the outer edges of the folio being darker than the interior portions. Often occurs on both sides of the folio, unlike sun shadows and dust shadows, which affect only the exposed side. Usually removable by washing and/or bleaching.

Dust and sun shadows don't cause tanning halos. Not sometimes, not occasionally, not ever. Three completely separate things, with separate causes and separate appearances. Read a book yourself. 

Edited May 10, 2017 by october

[Jaydogrules]

8 minutes ago, october said:

Per Tracey Heft, a conservation expert....

Sun shadow/oxidation shadow: oxidation of the paper from exposure to light and air. Usually a small, darkened strip on one or more edges of the book. Might be removable or at least minimizable by washing and/or bleaching.

Dust shadow: usually occurs on books stored flat in piles. The dust shadow is a darkened strip where part of book was exposed to dust particles as they fell. The dust gets ingrained in the paper fibers, leaving a darkened strip. Can sometimes be dry cleaned away. Washing may set the stain and make it impossible to remove.

Tanning: caused by breakdowns in the cellulose chains in paper, which result in increased acidity and a darkening in newsprint and cover stock. Tends be an "all over" thing or at the very least a gradual change from tanned to untanned, with the outer edges of the folio being darker than the interior portions. Often occurs on both sides of the folio, unlike sun shadows and dust shadows, which affect only the exposed side. Usually removable by washing and/or bleaching.

Dust and sun shadows don't cause tanning halos. Not sometimes, not occasionally, not ever. Three completely separate things, with separate causes and separate appearances. Read a book yourself. 

Um excuse me.  Did you even read what you just posted?   

Seriously dude.  

-J.

[october]

1 minute ago, Jaydogrules said:

Um excuse me.  Did you even read what you just posted?   

Seriously dude.  

-J.

Oh. I get it. 

I am out, troll. 

[VintageComics]

On 2017-05-07 at 2:16 PM, Jaydogrules said:

 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).

 

 

17 hours ago, Jaydogrules said:

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.

Sorry Jaydogrules, you don't know that you're wrong (again).

In the first quote above you are attributing PQ to foxing. PQ designations have pretty much nothing to do with foxing (except that in my experience books that do exhibit foxing actually happen to have excellent PQ - the Larson collection is one example of this - many books had foxing from the collection but the Pedigree is also known overall for it's excellent page quality).

In the 2nd quote below, you are saying that a book with light foxing can't pull a CGC 8.0 or even a 9.4 from CGC. It can.

These are only two posts I quoted.

Edited May 10, 2017 by VintageComics