Cole Schave collection: face jobs?

[mysterio]

 

The good news, apparently, is that the Costanza shrinking can be "fixed" with additional pressing. If that is the case we should start to see some of these books called out in the thread show up in new holders with normally sized covers.

I could not find the "don't hold your breath" emoticon

Why exactly would anyone auction that Hulk#1 if they could return it to be "fixed" with a light pressing?

 

I couldn't find the "don't hold your breath" emoticon or the "sarcasm" emoticon, so I went with that one...

[originalisbest]

fantastic-four, let me see if i can explain the perhaps subtle distinction i see between saying a book was "restored to prior state" and it, in comic collectors' eyes, having "restoration."

 

play like i was geeking on that gorgeous ff 12 in your sig line when it was raw. i thoughtlessly did so while eating a butterfinger. a piece of chocolate landed on the book, melted slightly, and stuck there. you didn't want it there, so you used the edge of your fingernail to get under the dollop of chocolate, and popped it right off. it's original state was to have no little piece of chocolate adhered to it's cover. it then, briefly, had said defect. you "restored it to it's original condition" by removing it.

 

do you really think, that in the vernacular of our hobby, that you now have a "restored book?"

 

i don't

i would never presume to argue with a litigating attorney...ok, maybe not too often, after all i was raised by one;)

and I don't really care what anyone calls pressing (as long as they disclose it if known) ..however....

 

i think in previous examples, someone (maybe you) used sneezing and snot as the example...

 

so...if you used a body part to remove the chocolate, sneeze residue or whatever, i'd just find it yucky, maybe not restoration, just a side effect of reading a book;) ..but unless you are going to be sitting on the books for days bare butt naked, i'm not sure how you'd remove wrinkles without using other tools;)

 

once you add tools, it's another animal;)

 

The below are examples of comic books that underwent physical transformation produced apparently by the use of tools, moisture and mechanical compression techniques.

 

They are not considered as being restored by the duly qualified experts at CGC who are bestowed by corporate authority to render an evaluation based on a business model grounded in a redesigned definition of comic book restoration that excludes "non-additive" procedures. Nor are they considered as such by the dealer who embraces said definition and profits from the sale of undisclosed alterations to the unsuspecting collector/investor thereof.

 

Conversely, they are absolutely considered as being restored by those in tune with the long standing industry recognized and accepted definition of comic book restoration that conveys a practical approach to collecting vintage artifacts, as with other collectible industries, and the intrinsic and market value associated with an original, unaltered object of age.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wonderful examples of books that have been greatly improved aesthetically, and yet, remain free of any "real" restoration -- i.e., additive processes. Thanks for sharing!

[mysterio]

I disagree. A consensus does not require the participants use the same methodology to form their opinion, just that they have the same opinion. There has been a clear consensus that RSR and shrinkage have not been handled correctly by CGC.

 

But there's no consensus on how to correctly handle it. I see little reason to think there will be based upon the impassioned reactions pervading the thread. I'm not sure I have an issue with the amount they're downgrading for shrinkage, i.e. barely at all below the 9.8 level. How much to downgrade for RSR I haven't formed an opinion on.

 

If we put a poll in this thread, or another, on pressing we may get a mixed result. If we put in a poll on whether or not someone considers RSRs or Costanza shrinkage to be damage, I'm pretty sure we'd get quite close to 100% consensus. To me, that is the key for starting the conversation on how to handle it.

 

Once the collecting community agrees that something is damage, then we can start the conversation on what to do to account for said damage. I disagree with your stance that a minimal downgrade at anything below a 9.8 is adequate. Not one of the examples shown in this thread that I can recall is a 9.8 book, and every one of them have less eye appeal than they did before the damage was applied.

 

I think the downgrade for RSR should be whatever the current downgrade for a book length crease is, and based on my limited experience with books in my collection that appears to be a 2.5-3.0 downgrade (I have a book that looks 9.4 save for an extremely light book length crease along the spine on the back cover that CGC gave a 7.5).

 

The Costanza shrinkage is trickier, but I would think that a similar level of downgrade would be appropriate, or the use of a green label much the same way it is used now for popped staples or other such major defects. If the examples in this thread had been given a green label with cover shrinkage noted that would be fine by me.

[originalisbest]

I'm not so sure the shrinkage isn't just as much a bit of a cover and pages "doing the twist" as it is shrinkage. Which may be why CCS and Joey noted an additional pressing might address the appearance. As Richard noted earlier, dialing back the pressing a bit so it doesn't occur in the first place would be ideal.

 

RSR should absolutely be hammered wherever it's detected -- a green label would be fine by me on those.

[mysterio]

I'm not so sure the shrinkage isn't just as much a bit of a cover and pages "doing the twist" as it is shrinkage. Which may be why CCS and Joey noted an additional pressing might address the appearance. As Richard noted earlier, dialing back the pressing a bit so it doesn't occur in the first place would be ideal.

 

RSR should absolutely be hammered wherever it's detected -- a green label would be fine by me on those.

 

Where is the twist on these? Even on the other examples, while the cover does pop up a bit on the top right corner, I doubt that that slight shift could account for all the changes in the right edge of the cover relative to the pages.

 

 

 

I'm more inclined to think that a press could help these by rehydrating and thus reexpanding the cover stock, but that is purely a guess on my part.

[originalisbest]

You may well be right! It's safe to say it depends on the book. Some might be no problem to fix, some might be fubar.

[Kreton]

I'm not so sure the shrinkage isn't just as much a bit of a cover and pages "doing the twist" as it is shrinkage. Which may be why CCS and Joey noted an additional pressing might address the appearance. As Richard noted earlier, dialing back the pressing a bit so it doesn't occur in the first place would be ideal.

 

RSR should absolutely be hammered wherever it's detected -- a green label would be fine by me on those.

 

Where is the twist on these? Even on the other examples, while the cover does pop up a bit on the top right corner, I doubt that that slight shift could account for all the changes in the right edge of the cover relative to the pages.

 

 

 

I'm more inclined to think that a press could help these by rehydrating and thus reexpanding the cover stock, but that is purely a guess on my part.

 

 

What happens when they dry back out from rehydration? Will the cover stock stay expanded?

[mysterio]

I'm not so sure the shrinkage isn't just as much a bit of a cover and pages "doing the twist" as it is shrinkage. Which may be why CCS and Joey noted an additional pressing might address the appearance. As Richard noted earlier, dialing back the pressing a bit so it doesn't occur in the first place would be ideal.

 

RSR should absolutely be hammered wherever it's detected -- a green label would be fine by me on those.

 

Where is the twist on these? Even on the other examples, while the cover does pop up a bit on the top right corner, I doubt that that slight shift could account for all the changes in the right edge of the cover relative to the pages.

 

 

 

I'm more inclined to think that a press could help these by rehydrating and thus reexpanding the cover stock, but that is purely a guess on my part.

 

 

What happens when they dry back out from rehydration? Will the cover stock stay expanded?

 

Good point, and I have no idea. If the shrinkage happened because of too much moisture and/or heat maybe replacing moisture would allow the paper fibers to reassume their original form or close to it. But, like I said in my original post, I'm purely speculating.

[InvstmntComcSuply]

 

I'm more inclined to think that a press could help these by rehydrating and thus reexpanding the cover stock, but that is purely a guess on my part.

 

That was my assumption of their thought process when they stated that some could be fixed with a light pressing. After Joey said "no problem" there was independent confirmation that normal coverstock can be enlarged. My question though is "will the coverstock of these shrunken covers react in the same manner as undamaged coverstock?" I think it is a stretch to assume that.

[slym2none]

And what happens to the covers that are "rehydrated" to their "normal" size, over time? Will they re-shrink? I know paper is cloth-like, but I can't imagine stretching & shrinking paper with ink on it can't be good in the long run (IMHO.)

 

 

 

-slym

[faster friends]

If you ever shrunk a shirt in the washing, drying process, you would know that no matter what you do, you can never get that shirt to the original size again.

[Comicopolis]

So pressing can shrink covers and unshrink them?

 

Nothing added or taken away then?

[Kreton]

So pressing can shrink covers and unshrink them?

 

Nothing added or taken away then?

 

Does the addition or subtraction have to be permanent?

[Comicopolis]

So pressing can shrink covers and unshrink them?

 

Nothing added or taken away then?

 

Does the addition or subtraction have to be permanent?

 

Good question.

[Davenport]

And what happens to the covers that are "rehydrated" to their "normal" size, over time? Will they re-shrink? I know paper is cloth-like, but I can't imagine stretching & shrinking paper with ink on it can't be good in the long run (IMHO.)

 

-slym

A good point and one I wonder about. And no discussion so far.

 

So what happens to the inks and gloss? They shrink and expand too, same as the underlying paper, behave like genital-tatoos, expanding and shrinking, depending on heat , pressure and wetness of the moment? 'Cause that's how it sounds.

[seanfingh]

 

Who hasn't been waiting for genital tattoos to be discussed in General? My week is made.

[slym2none]

Now this thread is useless without pics...

 

 

 

 

-slym

[Davenport]

Who hasn't been waiting for genital tattoos to be discussed in General? My week is made.

Yeah, maybe I should've went with "Hulk like" behavior.

 

Got my bad metaphor of the day out of the way, at least.

[fantastic_four]

I think the downgrade for RSR should be whatever the current downgrade for a book length crease is, and based on my limited experience with books in my collection that appears to be a 2.5-3.0 downgrade (I have a book that looks 9.4 save for an extremely light book length crease along the spine on the back cover that CGC gave a 7.5).

 

The Costanza shrinkage is trickier, but I would think that a similar level of downgrade would be appropriate, or the use of a green label much the same way it is used now for popped staples or other such major defects. If the examples in this thread had been given a green label with cover shrinkage noted that would be fine by me.

 

If those suggested downgrades are where you're starting from, the conversation's not worth having. I still believe that if Namisgr had never posted about this, we wouldn't have noticed it for months or years--it took a previous owner familiar with the previous state of the books who still had his original scans to recognize the damage. The defect is nowhere in the same galaxy in deserving your recommended downgrades.

[fantastic_four]

I disagree. A consensus does not require the participants use the same methodology to form their opinion, just that they have the same opinion. There has been a clear consensus that RSR and shrinkage have not been handled correctly by CGC.

 

But there's no consensus on how to correctly handle it. I see little reason to think there will be based upon the impassioned reactions pervading the thread.

 

Sure there has. The community put forth several solutions ranging from PLOD through GLOD to significantly larger grade deductions than what is currently being used, if any. Regardless of which was adopted, the community consensus was that CGC should grade these such that it disincentivized the practice throughout all grades, not just the high end. Exactly the way the tape issue was handled.

 

The purpose of grading should have nothing whatsoever with disincentivizing anything--grading is about the aesthetic appeal and functional use of the comic. Consensus can't be reached with that kind of motive behind recommended defect downgrades.