THE AMAZING FANTASY #15 CLUB 39 39

[VintageComics]

18 minutes ago, Jaydogrules said:

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.

 

The word 'toasty' is not a scientific term.

It's slang and the majority of people talking comics are on the same page when someone uses it.

For example, when someone is 'burned' or 'roasted', it doesn't have anything to do with actual heat or fire and yet everyone knows what is meant.

 

[Jaydogrules]

14 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. 

Now I'm a "troll" because I point out that you quite literally posted something that said EXACTLY what I said three pages back?  Something that, in your zeal to disagree, just seemingly for the sport of doing so, you called "nonsense", only to then post the same thing, evidently oblivious to that fact.   To make things easy for you I bolded the relevant parts.  

And I'm the troll.

You're a class act.  

-J.

 

[Jaydogrules]

5 minutes ago, VintageComics said:

 

 

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

In the first quote above you are attributing PQ to foxing. PQ designations has 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 over all 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.

Actually I never said either of those things.  In fact I literally just said (again) that foxing has nothing to do with "PQ" maybe two posts back, but yet it can (and does) affect the colour.  And I also did not say that a book with foxing couldn't get higher grades. Did you read my post in context?  If you had, you would have seen that was a direct reference to a hypothetical posed by namisgr earlier.  

-J.

[VintageComics]

Yeah, sorry. For the sake of the discussion I'm not doing this dance. Just pointing out you're wrong (again).

[Jaydogrules]

14 minutes ago, VintageComics said:

Yeah, sorry. For the sake of the discussion I'm not doing this dance. Just pointing out you're wrong (again).

I'm sorry, what was I "wrong" about again?   Was it the science that I explained quite thoroughly, and then echoed by October's post above ?  Or am I "wrong" where you claimed I said things I didn't say? 

Rhetorical questions, of course.  

-J.

 

[namisgr]

One book you could benefit from reading is "How to Make Friends and Influence People". 

[drbanner]

This discussion makes me miss SC22 pimping AF15 in this thread...

[namisgr]

So let's get back to topic.

What do others think of this copy, with one edge beginning to tan as evidenced from the right edge of the front cover and the left edge of the back, thereby ruling out scanner artifact as an underlying cause for the appearance?  How much will it raise the value of AF15s owned by SC22 and Jaydogrules?

 

Edited May 10, 2017 by namisgr

[entalmighty1]

2 minutes ago, namisgr said:

So let's get back to topic.

What do others think of this copy, with one edge beginning to tan as evidenced from the right edge of the front cover and the left edge of the back, thereby ruling out scanner artifact as an underlying cause?  How much will it raise the value of AF15s owned by SC22 and Jaydogrules?

 

I mean, can you even quantify that value with a number at this point?  Obviously this copy will eclipse the trillion dollar mark.  I read that the board of directors at Apple is considering a straight up trade of the corporation for this copy.  

[Spiderturtle]

14 minutes ago, namisgr said:

So let's get back to topic.

What do others think of this copy, with one edge beginning to tan as evidenced from the right edge of the front cover and the left edge of the back, thereby ruling out scanner artifact as an underlying cause for the appearance?  How much will it raise the value of AF15s owned by SC22 and Jaydogrules?

 

It's gonna to for strong price,  a record price for an 8.0 

[namisgr]

Just now, Spiderturtle said:

It's gonna to for strong price,  a record price for an 8.0 

You're sitting on quite the excellent investment.  Congrats.

[zhamlau]

Trying to avoid the infighting, but I will say this. I really do hate WHATEVER it is you wanna call that brownish toning on the right hand side.

 

[drbanner]

2 minutes ago, Spiderturtle said:

It's gonna to for strong price,  a record price for an 8.0 

I think so too, but just imagine what it would go for if it had white pages!

[Bomber-Bob]

19 minutes ago, namisgr said:

 

 How much will it raise the value of AF15s owned by SC22 and Jaydogrules?

 

Good comment. Thanks for pointing it out and getting it out there. It's becoming obvious that this thread is the personal pimping grounds for a few select holders of AF15. I guess they feel like they are adding value to their books by promoting these new offerings. Fair enough but they should allow for negative discussion also. Every time someones points out a flaw on a big book in auction the cheering sections cries foul,claiming they are hurting the seller's profit margin. What about the poor buyer ? 

[peewee22]

12 minutes ago, Bomber-Bob said:

Good comment. Thanks for pointing it out and getting it out there. It's becoming obvious that this thread is the personal pimping grounds for a few select holders of AF15. I guess they feel like they are adding value to their books by promoting these new offerings. Fair enough but they should allow for negative discussion also. Every time someones points out a flaw on a big book in auction the cheering sections cries foul,claiming they are hurting the seller's profit margin. What about the poor buyer ? 

I'm one to say I always point out the good...and the bad on a vintage comic. I started this conversation by pointing out the...the...the...dark colored line on the outside edge (God forbid I call it tanning). Then it started a roller coaster conversation and a couple were offended. Well, we are back to where we started. It is what it is. Tanning, haloing, discoloration, toasty (I love this word...it's now a member of my comic lingo).

This is part of why we are here. 

 

[Jaydogrules]

25 minutes ago, Bomber-Bob said:

Good comment. Thanks for pointing it out and getting it out there. It's becoming obvious that this thread is the personal pimping grounds for a few select holders of AF15. I guess they feel like they are adding value to their books by promoting these new offerings. Fair enough but they should allow for negative discussion also. Every time someones points out a flaw on a big book in auction the cheering sections cries foul,claiming they are hurting the seller's profit margin. What about the poor buyer ? 

Apart from this statement being patently false on its face, the fact that you think (or you think I think) 2 dudes on an internet chat board will sway the worldwide market for AF's is ludicrous.  

Just as it is equally ludicrous for someone to believe that someone's repeated misuse of a certain word to denigrate a book will influence anything in a negative way.  The book will sell for what it sells for. "The market" doesn't care what any of us think or say either way about a particular book.  

Something else I think I've actually stated quite specifically on multiple occasions.  

-J.

Edited May 10, 2017 by Jaydogrules

[Jaydogrules]

20 minutes ago, peewee22 said:

I'm one to say I always point out the good...and the bad on a vintage comic. I started this conversation by pointing out the...the...the...dark colored line on the outside edge (God forbid I call it tanning). Then it started a roller coaster conversation and a couple were offended. Well, we are back to where we started. It is what it is. Tanning, haloing, discoloration, toasty (I love this word...it's now a member of my comic lingo).

This is part of why we are here. 

 

You can call it whatever you want. My only purpose was to explain the various processes whereby that can result and how, on many of those occasions, it has nothing to do with the "PQ" CGC puts on the label and certainly has nothing to do with "heat" or "fire"- an obvious built in, and incorrect assumption- one makes when they toss about descriptors like "toasty".

-J.

Edited May 10, 2017 by Jaydogrules

[namisgr]

20 minutes ago, Jaydogrules said:

You can call it whatever you want. My only purpose was to explain the various processes whereby that can result and how, on many of those occasions, it has nothing to do with the "PQ" CGC puts on the label and certainly has nothing to do with "heat" or "fire"- an obvious built in, and incorrect assumption- one makes when they toss about descriptors as "toasty".

-J.

Are you seriously suggesting anyone uses the terms 'toasty' or 'browning' to infer that a comic may have gotten that way by being exposed to fire? 

 

As for heat, excessive temperatures are indeed one of the established environmental stimuli coming from long-term storage that can accelerate the yellowing of paper to give it a toasty appearance.  With central air conditioning just coming into use beginning in the late fifties and early sixties, it's no surprise that a lot of early SA books exhibit this deterioration of paper, both interior and cover.

Edited May 10, 2017 by namisgr

[Jaydogrules]

Just now, namisgr said:

Are you seriously suggesting anyone uses the terms 'toasty' or 'browning' to infer that a comic may have gotten that way by being exposed to heat or fire? 

Are you ? That was one of the first things I asked you (although admittedly, somewhat indirectly) at the very beginning of this cluster funkadelic.  

-J.

[Bomber-Bob]

31 minutes ago, Jaydogrules said:

Apart from this statement being patently false on its face, the fact that you think (or you think I think) 2 dudes on an internet chat board will sway the worldwide market for AF's is ludicrous.  

Just as it is equally ludicrous for someone to believe that someone's repeated misuse of a certain word to denigrate a book will influence anything in a negative way.  The book will sell for what it sells for. "The market" doesn't care what any of us think or say either way about a particular book.  

Something else I think I've actually stated quite specifically on multiple occasions.  

-J.

Jaydog, in all honesty, I was not thinking of your comments when making my statement. IMO, you are not pimping books,  just doing your PQ discussion. And, I agree with you that the market doesn't care what any of us think or say here. However, there are obviously others here who do think otherwise and do nothing but pimp up the financials. In all sincerity, I would much rather see a PQ post from you rather than another speculative financial comment from certain others.