Are These Restoration

[PovertyRow]

I am mentioning pressing in this poll because of the many ways pressing can be done. I am not going to mention the obvious such as piece added, color touch and tear seals. I already know my answers but will wait for tomorrow to vote.

[blowout]

Great poll Pov, gets right to the heart of the issue.

[goldust40]

Yep, great polls. The strange thing was how easy it was to choose an answer.

 

IMO there are dividing lines between what is considered resto and what isn't that are more obvious than is thought on these boards. And the results so far seem to bear this out.

[Lantern]

"Original staples removed and cleaned."

 

I do not see this as restoration. This is nothing more than taking a book apart. It's when they are put back into the book that it becomes restoration.

 

 

 

[Jayman]

Very interesting poll Pov.

I have never looked into restoration techniques or opinions on the subject but my initial thoughts on the matter would be if one is not adding/introducing any foreign material new or old including chemicals (ie. chemical bath) and you are working with the existing materials of the book, it would not be considered restoration.

I voted "YES" to all catagories except for:

Original staples removed and cleaned (depending how they are cleaned, no chemicals)

Using a book press or similar weight to press a book

Dismantling and pressing a book retaining all original materials

 

I am looking forward to your opinions as well as others to set me straight if I am way of base on my thinking here as this is new territory for me.

[PovertyRow]

"Original staples removed and cleaned."

 

I do not see this as restoration. This is nothing more than taking a book apart. It's when they are put back into the book that it becomes restoration.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Believe it or not, I actually DID consider adding "and putting the book back together"!

[Mushroom]

Interesting POV that you have created these polls. I have spent the morning thinking through a scenario that I would like the boards views on. I received in the post yesterday a Cheerios Premium (1947) z1 DD book 9.6 (Q) Lost Valley Pedigree (bought from Comicmankev. Thanks Kev it is truly a sweet book).

 

This book is only one of two that has been slabbed. It was given the green label because the cover is not attached. Now the interesting thing about that is (and Kev did state this in his description) the book just wasn't stapled (i.e there are no holes at all).

 

Why was it given a green label? There are many GA books with blue labels that have small amounts of colour touch, small amounts of glue etc etc let alone all those with production faults that are allowed to let slide....but not this book. Don't get me wrong.....I am more than happy as the prejudice against any label other than blue means that I got one hell of a book for less than $100.

 

My synopsis is....what if I cracked it out of the slab got a pro to staple the book (using vintage staples) resubmitted the book (gave no reference to CGC that it was the lost valley copy) and got it back in a blue label. Let's say, that I then sold it to somebody else for 3 times what I paid and did not disclose its' heritage.

 

According to Darth...if I was to do that then it is my business and I should be protected from having to disclose anything. I have my own views on this but I am interested in what your views are.

[blowout]

Why was it given a green label? There are many GA books with blue labels that have small amounts of colour touch, small amounts of glue etc etc let alone all those with production faults that are allowed to let slide....but not this book.

 

Have you spoken to CGC about this? The book in question sounds like it has a manufacturing defect, which should still have warranted a blue label. Maybe they made a mistake on this one?

[PovertyRow]

...I have spent the morning thinking through a scenario that I would like the boards views on. I received in the post yesterday a Cheerios Premium (1947) z1 DD book 9.6 (Q) Lost Valley Pedigree (bought from Comicmankev. Thanks Kev it is truly a sweet book).

 

This book is only one of two that has been slabbed. It was given the green label because the cover is not attached. Now the interesting thing about that is (and Kev did state this in his description) the book just wasn't stapled (i.e there are no holes at all).

 

Why was it given a green label? There are many GA books with blue labels that have small amounts of colour touch, small amounts of glue etc etc let alone all those with production faults that are allowed to let slide....but not this book. Don't get me wrong.....I am more than happy as the prejudice against any label other than blue means that I got one hell of a book for less than $100.

 

My synopsis is....what if I cracked it out of the slab got a pro to staple the book (using vintage staples) resubmitted the book (gave no reference to CGC that it was the lost valley copy) and got it back in a blue label. Let's say, that I then sold it to somebody else for 3 times what I paid and did not disclose its' heritage....

 

Well, I have a couple of takes on it. First I would indeed check with CGC. No staples is a manufacturing defect and I don't see why it should recieve a Qualified for that. Appearance-wise, the book is lacking one or two staples. Certainlt, IMO, not a major defect that - well qualkifies a Qualified. Maybe someone at CGC slipped up. Personally I think it should have a Blue label with a notation "manufactured without staples" and graded according to the books condition.

 

Should you send it to a restorer, the restorer should give back a checklist of what was done. As far as I am concerned, that checklist should remain with the book for its entire life (yeah - fat chance! )

 

But this is a rather invasive restoration, because I don;t know if the restorer would have a saddle stitcher (the kind of binding that uses staples). Thing is, a sadle stitcher wouldn't be of much use to a restorer because in the overwhelming majority of books a restorer would work on, the staple holes would already be there. And a modern stapler that could handle the size of a comic book may well not take a vintage staple - if you could find unused vintage staples.

 

So basically, holes would have to be made in the cover and interior pages to accomodate the staple. Or, is the restorer DID have a stapler they could use, they would have to insure the width of the holes created would align with the width of the vintrage staples. And if it did, it would mean using the staplere to create the holes, removing the new staples, and reinserting the vintage ones.

 

My opinion is that this would certainly qualify as something that should be disclosed.

 

See next post for an overview of why I consider many things restoration, as this is getting long.

[PovertyRow]

Well, I voted everything was restoration except for two things: Using finger to take a non-color breaking type wave or bend out of the book, and storing books that originally had no problems in such a way that they were preserved intact, such as the Edgar Church collection.

 

I remember posting maybe 18 or so months ago about WHY restoration should be perceived in a certain way. But dang I cannot find it after much searching so I will abbreviate my opinion.

 

A comic book is a fragile thing. WHY does a true HG comic (I am talking older comics and especially GA) command so much more than even Overstreet "pricing"?

 

Because a true older HG book has bested all the odds. It has good color. No staining. Staples are clean. It is not creased or torn. Pages are fresh. And it lies flat. Finding a 30's, 40's or 50's book in such a state is a rare thing. (Hell, even the legendary Harvey File Copies - actually a warehouse find, I believe and not a true File Copy - don't have fresh pages.) So even a book that HAS beat all the odds but were poorly stored, as were the Harveyr warehouse find, well -they lack the true HG page quality.

 

Now as regards pressing: So you have a book with all the other qualifiers but it DOES NOT LIE FLAT. To the folk who say "restoration is only something that ADDS to the book" - I submit that even heavy weight or book-press pressing DOES add something to the book. It adds FLATNESS where is did not exist when the book was acquired. The book has been modified from its recieved condition.

 

To me, THAT is restoration.

 

::Forgot to add the following core of my argument and it is why the post is edited::

 

The things is, due to the fragile nature of comic books, actually finding a true high grade that has not been altered in ANY way (and I am talking older books now - GA to early SA) is a special thing. THIS book has survived the odds. NO ONE has manipulated the book in ANY way. It is as it was manufactured. No color touch, no pressing, no nothing. I feel it is something to think about. And the ONLY reason I elected that using your finger to essentially "uncurl" a bend is not restoration is because the bend was probably put their by reading, and by a careless curl or two with the fingers. Uncurling it with the fingers is just doing the same thing in a different direction WITH THE SAME TOOL USED TO CREATE THE CURL IN THE FIRST PLACE. (the fingers). Now I'd kill to see someone remove a spine roll or a color breaking crease or a full length-of the-book what do you call it? That full length narrow spine concave indent that sometimes occurs, with finger pressure.

 

So - la de dah, Pov! La de dah!

[Arty]

Interesting POV that you have created these polls. I have spent the morning thinking through a scenario that I would like the boards views on. I received in the post yesterday a Cheerios Premium (1947) z1 DD book 9.6 (Q) Lost Valley Pedigree (bought from Comicmankev. Thanks Kev it is truly a sweet book).

 

This book is only one of two that has been slabbed. It was given the green label because the cover is not attached. Now the interesting thing about that is (and Kev did state this in his description) the book just wasn't stapled (i.e there are no holes at all).

 

Why was it given a green label? There are many GA books with blue labels that have small amounts of colour touch, small amounts of glue etc etc let alone all those with production faults that are allowed to let slide....but not this book. Don't get me wrong.....I am more than happy as the prejudice against any label other than blue means that I got one hell of a book for less than $100.

 

My synopsis is....what if I cracked it out of the slab got a pro to staple the book (using vintage staples) resubmitted the book (gave no reference to CGC that it was the lost valley copy) and got it back in a blue label. Let's say, that I then sold it to somebody else for 3 times what I paid and did not disclose its' heritage.

 

Cheerios comic books were manufactured without staples. They are glued at the spine. That's why its qualified.

 

Anyway your question is still valid...I bet that if professionally reglued, it is impossible to detect.

[fantastic_four]

Now as regards pressing: So you have a book with all the other qualifiers but it DOES NOT LIE FLAT. To the folk who say "restoration is only something that ADDS to the book" - I submit that even heavy weight or book-press pressing DOES add something to the book. It adds FLATNESS where is did not exist when the book was acquired. The book has been modified from its recieved condition.

 

To me, THAT is restoration.

 

Adding flatness is what you're doing when you use your thumb to do the pressing. I just can't see the tool used as making any difference...if I use a tissue paper to wipe a wet booger off of a comic, is that then restoration? What about using a knife to scrape off a dried booger?

 

I don't think anybody really says "restoration is only something that ADDS to the book" if they think that all the way through. I can't remember ever hearing anyone say that trimming isn't restoration. My current (and evolving) concept of material manipulation is more specific--restoration is adding unoriginal material to a book, or removing original material in an intentionally deceptive way.

[goldust40]

Now as regards pressing: So you have a book with all the other qualifiers but it DOES NOT LIE FLAT. To the folk who say "restoration is only something that ADDS to the book" - I submit that even heavy weight or book-press pressing DOES add something to the book. It adds FLATNESS where is did not exist when the book was acquired. The book has been modified from its recieved condition.

 

To me, THAT is restoration.

 

Adding flatness is what you're doing when you use your thumb to do the pressing. I just can't see the tool used as making any difference...if I use a tissue paper to wipe a wet booger off of a comic, is that then restoration? What about using a knife to scrape off a dried booger?

 

I don't think anybody really says "restoration is only something that ADDS to the book" if they think that all the way through. I can't remember ever hearing anyone say that trimming isn't restoration. My current (and evolving) concept of material manipulation is more specific--restoration is adding unoriginal material to a book, or removing original material in an intentionally deceptive way.

 

Pressing with heat dehydrates the comic - therefore it takes something away from it and decreases its' longevity. So yes, effectively it is removing original material, even if you can't spot it.

[fantastic_four]

Pressing with heat dehydrates the comic - therefore it takes something away from it and decreases its' longevity. So yes, effectively it is removing original material, even if you can't spot it.

 

Isn't that just temporary, though? Doesn't humidity rehydrate paper? And if it doesn't, how does dehydration impact the aesthetic function or form of the paper?

[goldust40]

Pressing with heat dehydrates the comic - therefore it takes something away from it and decreases its' longevity. So yes, effectively it is removing original material, even if you can't spot it.

 

Isn't that just temporary, though? Doesn't humidity rehydrate paper? And if it doesn't, how does dehydration impact the aesthetic function or form of the paper?

 

I'm no expert, but one thing is for certain - heat chemically alters paper, or allows chemical reactions to occur in it, making it flaky, brown, and eventually brittle. Newsprint, being the fragile and easily perishable paper that it is, cannot stand up to more than one heat induced process when it struggles to survive in neutral environments.

 

Storing comics in a humid room is considered to be a bad move - if anything humidity dries out paper rather than rehydrates it.

[blowout]

Pressing with heat dehydrates the comic - therefore it takes something away from it and decreases its' longevity. So yes, effectively it is removing original material, even if you can't spot it.

 

Isn't that just temporary, though? Doesn't humidity rehydrate paper?

 

Which is exactly why some pressing jobs may revert back to a pre-pressed state over time.

[fantastic_four]

Which is exactly why some pressing jobs may revert back to a pre-pressed state over time.

 

Pro pressers do use heat, though. I'm fairly certain they also use humidity to "prep" the book prior to applying the heat.

 

I've REALLY got to stop regurgitating quotes from conservators and start experimenting with it. I tend to think all us regular posters here are two or steps in the pro pressing process shy of making an informed decision about the intrusion of pressing on a comic's structure.

[drbanner]

Which is exactly why some pressing jobs may revert back to a pre-pressed state over time.

 

Pro pressers do use heat, though. I'm fairly certain they also use humidity to "prep" the book prior to applying the heat.

 

I've REALLY got to stop regurgitating quotes from conservators and start experimenting with it. I tend to think all us regular posters here are two or steps in the pro pressing process shy of making an informed decision about the intrusion of pressing on a comic's structure.

 

I don't believe a pressed book would revert to the "bent shape" simply by adding humidity/moisture, there would have to be some force applied. If this isn't the case, wouldn't you be able to fix a "bent" book by simply applying humidity/moisture and watching as it somehow magically reverts back to it's pre-bent shape over time?

 

This is why basket weavers soak their reeds before working with them, it makes the wood fibers more malleable...or so I was told when I earned my basket-weaving merit badge!

[fantastic_four]

I don't believe a pressed book would revert to the "bent shape" simply by adding humidity/moisture, there would have to be some force applied. If this isn't the case, wouldn't you be able to fix a "bent" book by simply applying humidity/moisture and watching as it somehow magically reverts back to it's pre-bent shape over time?

 

I didn't mean they just use heat and moisture, which is why I still called them "pro pressers," so yes, I agree

[PovertyRow]

Now as regards pressing: So you have a book with all the other qualifiers but it DOES NOT LIE FLAT. To the folk who say "restoration is only something that ADDS to the book" - I submit that even heavy weight or book-press pressing DOES add something to the book. It adds FLATNESS where is did not exist when the book was acquired. The book has been modified from its recieved condition.

 

To me, THAT is restoration.

 

Adding flatness is what you're doing when you use your thumb to do the pressing. I just can't see the tool used as making any difference...if I use a tissue paper to wipe a wet booger off of a comic, is that then restoration? What about using a knife to scrape off a dried booger?

 

I don't think anybody really says "restoration is only something that ADDS to the book" if they think that all the way through. I can't remember ever hearing anyone say that trimming isn't restoration. My current (and evolving) concept of material manipulation is more specific--restoration is adding unoriginal material to a book, or removing original material in an intentionally deceptive way.

 

Well here's the thing. First, as regards using your finger to push back a bend: I just do not see that as restoration. No force has been added outside of the ordinary force on applies when reading a comic book. If turning the cover caused a bend or wave, turning it back with your finger is just fine. It is simply not pressing.But adding unusual pressure via a book press, or heat/humidity via a dry mount press, or heat via a hand-held heater - those are not ordinary forces.

 

As far as removing a wet booger? I addressed that a long time ago. When you remove a wet booger (or similar) with a tissue (or similar) you are gonna leave a - how to say it - "wet spot". The gloss (if we are talking about a cover) will be impacted. If you "smear" it with the tissue then the signs will spread. I don;t see how that could be considered restoration.

 

Usinfg a knife to scrape off a dried booger will probably leave something akin to a tape pull.

 

The thing is, it is not only the process but the RESULT that has to be considered. Do you think a book with cover gloss streaks or a booger pull is actually restored?

 

As far as "resto is only something added" - I have read that exactly on these boards many times. Myabe by just a few people but it always crops up. Do not understand it and never will.