Cole Schave collection: face jobs?

[DiceX]

If the cutting blade is perfectly horizontal to the table

 

Yes, the chop is straight down. The blade is flat on one side and angled on the other.

 

 

But the blade itself has a slight angle to it in relation to the horizontal plane of the table, correct? Such that there is a leading and a trailing edge as it intersects with the table.

 

The attached pic shows what I mean by the blade has an angle on one side.

The blade in relation to the table is perfectly square. It strikes the entire surface of the book at the same time.

 

[DiceX]

Books were trimmed after they have been folded.

 

Here's a pic of the Spartan Printing Company, circa 1977.

 

The guy is operating the trimming machine.

 

 

I can't exactly tell what he's doing, but it looks like he's trimming a stack of unfolded paper.

 

Is it possible that books were trimmed more than once? Once when flat and again when assembled and folded?

 

That does seem to be the case. The pages would have to be cut apart before they are assembled and then trimmed again once assembled. That explains many printing errors I've seen.

 

What still has me scratching my head is why the centerfold sticks out further than the wrap next to it, and that wrap sticks out further than the one next to it... and so on. Since the paper is the same age, I cannot see how wraps shrinking uniformly smaller from the centerfold outward with "aging" being the answer. The centerfold should shrink just as much as the 1st wrap if age is the answer to shrinkage. The pages would still be square. There must be another reason for it other than aging.

 

Further more, why do SA Marvels seem to have more of a reverse V effect at the top of the book and often little to none at the bottom?

 

That also leans toward my theory of exposure to elements.

When the books are standing in a box, the tops are more exposed than the bottoms.

 

 

Possible, but I'd wager to say that books stored flat and in open areas have the same effect. We could probably find examples that exhibit the same traits in Pedigree collections that we know were not stored upright in boxes.

 

I don't know. West can probably answer that question though.

 

 

[DiceX]

What still has me scratching my head is why the centerfold sticks out further than the wrap next to it, and that wrap sticks out further than the one next to it... and so on. Since the paper is the same age, I cannot see how wraps shrinking uniformly smaller from the centerfold outward with "aging" being the answer. The centerfold should shrink just as much as the 1st wrap if age is the answer to shrinkage. The pages would still be square. There must be another reason for it other than aging.

 

I don't know the answer to this other than to speculate that the outermost pages have more exposure to air than than the next page on the inside and given decades to do so, it shrinks a few millimeters more than the inner pages.

 

That's pure speculation, but I can tell you for 100% fact that it's not because the book was trimmed before it was folded.

 

 

I'm not so sure. If I went to a comic store and found a comic that used pulp paper, I have a feeling the pages would look "V" shaped and not straight.

 

In any event, let's get this thread back on track. Who are burning at the stakes today?

 

I don't know the answer. I can just rule out the trimming.

 

 

[Timely]

Books were trimmed after they have been folded.

 

Here's a pic of the Spartan Printing Company, circa 1977.

 

The guy is operating the trimming machine.

 

 

I can't exactly tell what he's doing, but it looks like he's trimming a stack of unfolded paper.

 

Is it possible that books were trimmed more than once? Once when flat and again when assembled and folded?

 

That does seem to be the case. The pages would have to be cut apart before they are assembled and then trimmed again once assembled. That explains many printing errors I've seen.

 

What still has me scratching my head is why the centerfold sticks out further than the wrap next to it, and that wrap sticks out further than the one next to it... and so on. Since the paper is the same age, I cannot see how wraps shrinking uniformly smaller from the centerfold outward with "aging" being the answer. The centerfold should shrink just as much as the 1st wrap if age is the answer to shrinkage. The pages would still be square. There must be another reason for it other than aging.

 

Further more, why do SA Marvels seem to have more of a reverse V effect at the top of the book and often little to none at the bottom?

 

That also leans toward my theory of exposure to elements.

When the books are standing in a box, the tops are more exposed than the bottoms.

 

 

Possible, but I'd wager to say that books stored flat and in open areas have the same effect. We could probably find examples that exhibit the same traits in Pedigree collections that we know were not stored upright in boxes.

 

I don't know. West can probably answer that question though.

 

 

Well, we know the Mile Highs were stored flat in huge stacks.

 

Again, if aging were the factor, The Mile High Action #1 should have no "V" shape as it was on the bottom of a 7 foot stack for 40 years... as would none of the older Mile Highs that were compressed, receiving virtually no air. I can tell you the "V" shape is present on those books as well.

 

 

[joeypost]

Could the additional ink or sizing to the cover stock cause it to behave different compared to the interior pages over time?

[Dr. Balls]

 

 

[comix4fun]

 

 

 

 

 

Having been faced with discussions that have devolved into minutia that is extraordinarily painful, excruciatingly so, I have begun using a word to describe the feeling succinctly.....Excrutia.

[pickycollector]

I don't want every book I consider buying from this point forward to look like this. I don't want another uneven playing field. I don't want to have these books pressed and repressed yet again by buyers and sellers until they are pancakes. I don't want this BS, basically, and I'm sure I'm not alone. I personally won't buy any books that look like the a have books because I don't want to reward this type of manipulation and I don't like the appearance of the books themselves.

+1

[Logan510]

I don't want every book I consider buying from this point forward to look like this. I don't want another uneven playing field. I don't want to have these books pressed and repressed yet again by buyers and sellers until they are pancakes. I don't want this BS, basically, and I'm sure I'm not alone. I personally won't buy any books that look like the a have books because I don't want to reward this type of manipulation and I don't like the appearance of the books themselves.

+1

 

Unfortunately there's enough money to be made that the practice will continue. The only way it will stop is if the money goes away.

[Dale Roberts]

Here we go. Sorry I could not find a more drastic example to show my point, but it will do.

 

If you look at the left side of this back cover, you can see the front half of the book extends out further than the back half. You can see it more at the bottom of the left edge than at the top. The only thing that can explain this is that the book is folded last. If it was folded first and then trimmed, the front half & back half would be flush.

 

West, it is more possible that your particular example has a spine roll that caused the pages to misalign then to go contrary to all the evidence.

 

Finally, Dice, who worked hands on at a major publisher who printed comics and magazines has already confirmed the in house process as trimming being the last step. Unless Dice has an agenda and is lying.

 

When Dice first told me that, I didn't really think he was right due to the reverse-V effect we so often see, and I didn't think that if he was wrong that he was lying, just that he didn't actually work there in the 1960s and the process could have changed in ways he thought he knew but in reality he didn't. I didn't become convinced of it until I had seen dozens of right edges on blue CGC books with completely straight edges and no reverse-V shape that Timely is suggesting I've overlooked. I'll look back at them and see if I've overlooked a far more subtle V.

 

The only way forward really is to go back and look at some books in person and take pictures of the edges. Scans of the front cover only don't provide enough detail to say one way or the other.

 

Right.

 

I have come to the conclusion that the reverse V (I'm assuming you mean that the centrefold bulges out first with each additional wrap protruding less) happens because of this shrinkage.

 

The books that don't have that shrinkage, where the edges are more or less straight, are books that through some strange freak of nature - whether it was storage conditions, etc, managed to avoid shrinkage. They are rare, and some people think they are trimmed they are so straight, but I have seen them. I'd say less than 5% of the books in existence don't have protruding pages when they should (because other examples of the same book exhibit it).

 

Here is the final proof that books were trimmed after they were folded.

 

Most people think comics are perfectly square. They are not. They are all slightly trapezoidal.

 

If a book was trimmed while open at the centerfold as West postulates, then when the book was open at the centerfold, the open edges would be straight, meaning a cutting blade running across the top and bottom edge of the book would leave straight cuts.

 

These are pics I just took of 3 very different books - one Atlas, one Blue Bolt and one GA fatty. With the GA fatty, I actually just did the centerfold because it was loose.

 

I took a ruler against the interior edge (centerfold open) and did not find a straight edge.

 

I ran the rule along the edge of one side and watched where it landed on the other side.

 

Safe to say that if the book was trimmed before it was folded the edges (left and right) would line up with the ruler.

 

These are actually the best examples I have seen as they are fairly square. Some examples I have seen are much, much worse.

 

 

 

 

There's the definitive proof right there.

Now back to your regularly scheduled butthurt thread.

 

How do we know Roy 's ruler isn't warped?

 

fixed that for you

[Straw-Man]

the last several pages of this thread have me anxiously looking forward to my next dentist's visit; in fact, i'm calling to see if i can move it up.

[vaultkeeper]

We all thought eventually all our books would turn to dust. Now it looks like they will just shrink away into nothingness.

[pickycollector]

The fanning of pages (from interior to cover) I believe happens as the pages age over time. The cover the most, because (A) it's on the outside, so most exposed and (B) because it uses different paper than the interior. I would argue that cover paper is possibly even inferior to interior paper as you see more pre-chipping on covers than you do on interior leaves.

 

Roy - still gathering scans...

Interesting assumption

 

I would like to hear about it from board members whom are original owners of 60's Marvel books (I know there a few of those collectors among us) and listen from their experience if their books have changed through the years or not.

[fantastic_four]

I would like to hear about it from board members whom are original owners of 60's Marvel books (I know there a few of those collectors among us) and listen from their experience if their books have changed through the years or not.

 

I'd bet a large amount of money that no original owner would have ever noticed this. By the time any of them would have even thought to look, they would have never looked at the right edge closely enough as kids to even know how much of the interior pages were poking through on the right side in the past as compared to some point in a more modern time.

[Bronty]

I don't want every book I consider buying from this point forward to look like this. I don't want another uneven playing field. I don't want to have these books pressed and repressed yet again by buyers and sellers until they are pancakes. I don't want this BS, basically, and I'm sure I'm not alone. I personally won't buy any books that look like the a have books because I don't want to reward this type of manipulation and I don't like the appearance of the books themselves.

+1

 

Unfortunately there's enough money to be made that the practice will continue. The only way it will stop is if the money goes away.

 

well that's precisely why I am not going to buy books that look like this. This latest form of manipulation is a little easier to spot so its more of a realistic choice for buyers to not support books that look like this.

 

Now maybe its naive to think this way, but my collection is my collection and I don't have to open the gates for any books that I don't care for. I wouldn't buy a 9.8 with a huge miswrap either, or at least certainly not pay 9.8 prices for it.

 

[VintageComics]

Here we go. Sorry I could not find a more drastic example to show my point, but it will

do.

 

 

 

Cool photos - thanks Roy.

 

Here's the thing (and I'm not taking sides) but couldn't this off-angle trim be produced whether the book was trimmed folded or unfolded?

 

The way I'm seeing it is whether that book is folded in a pile, or laying flat in a pile of unfolded sheets, the thing causing this is the blades inability to cut at some point, whether it's because it's dulling or the energy of the blade pushing down is meeting a point of resistance in the pile (and the paper starts moving in a downward direction with the blade rather than taking the cut cleanly) to create an uneven edge.

 

The difference in angles I've seen on some books between front half and back half when the book is lay open at the centerfold (especially SA Marvels) is so great, that there is just no way to create it with a large cutting blade across the open face. It must have been done after the book was folded.

 

That angle that we've been discussing, and the fact that you can actually see continuous cutting marks across the entire face of the cut (meaning across all 32 folded wraps) proves to me that it must have been made after the book was folded.

 

 

[Bronty]

not a bad point

 

At the same time I have trouble reconciling to this idea that the reverse v is caused by the environment. :confused:

[pickycollector]

 

 

I clearly know which book I would like to own and which one I would not

[faster friends]

Glad I am a DC guy.

[VintageComics]

I would like to hear about it from board members whom are original owners of 60's Marvel books (I know there a few of those collectors among us) and listen from their experience if their books have changed through the years or not.

 

I'd bet a large amount of money that no original owner would have ever noticed this. By the time any of them would have even thought to look, they would have never looked at the right edge closely enough as kids to even know how much of the interior pages were poking through on the right side in the past as compared to some point in a more modern time.

 

Agreed. I don't think anyone would remember that minute of a detail that far back. The only way to know for sure would be to look for photographs of SA books from the mid 1960's on the newsstands. There already is a GA forum thread doing this very thing for GA books. I'd love to see it.

 

I just wanted to add that I recently processed a fairly large original owner SA collection. The books were stored in neat stacks and in a relatively humid environment (not air conditioned).

 

The majority of the books had "peek through / overhang" in varying degrees right from the stacks.