Cole Schave collection: face jobs?

[InvstmntComcSuply]

The grain acts as a stabilizing force maintaining the shape of the paper. By weakening the grain, the paper loses strength and contracts horizontally and expands vertically. Since every example shows the same horizontal shrinkage without any vertical shrinkage, it is clearly damage to the grain of the coverstock.

Paper is made from wood pulp, a slurry of cellulose that is pressed to squeeze the water out of it. The cellulose fibers are oriented in every possible direction. This is what holds the paper together. There is no grain.

 

Only hand made paper has a random orientation of paper fibers that you are describing. Virtually every mass produced paper has a grain where the fibers become aligned due to the manufacturing process.

So is this why a sheet of paper is easier to rip one direction than the other?

 

I never noticed that to be the case.

 

How paper is made

It is why paper rips fairly straight with the grain and jagged across the grain.

 

Real easy to see by ripping paper towels

I know what you're saying, but the word "grain" isn't really the term you want. It's misleading and inaccurate to say that grain in newsprint is responsible for a change in size of the printed product.

Grain adds dimensional stability. Whatever pressing process they are performing is weakening the grain. There is no other reason for consistent shrinkage in one direction only. I linked a paper early in the thread which explained it. Here is another: About Paper Grain . First paragraph of this one: How to make paper by hand

[VintageComics]

It's not complicated. It's simple. This thread is about the Constanza'd books. If you want to talk about unicorns, or whatever it is you're attempting to discuss....create a new thread. You know, like you told those talking about pressing to do.

 

I didn't tell people not to talk about pressing, I asked people who are devolving the discussion into the same pressing argument using attacks and fallacious arguments to not do so in this thread so we could keep it on track.

 

Discussing miscuts, paper fibers, how the books are manufactured and how they aged is all directly related to better understanding the Costanza books and how they turned out this way.

 

It's like reverse engineering CGC's grading standards without any input from CGC.

 

Do you not see the relationship?

 

It's amazing that some people would rather throw a nuke at the source than discuss it. Actually, it isn't. I was just trying to be diplomatic when I said that.

 

 

[VintageComics]

I think he is talking about the fanned pages? Its pretty obvious that a lot of these books suffer from being slightly twisted off center.

 

Does the blade that cuts the comics come straight down and cut the whole book at the same time, like a big pair of nippers would do, or does it swing down like the blade of a manual paper cutter? If the blade starts cutting at one end, the cover could be slipping slightly - the blade, especially a dull blade, could be pulling on it slightly as the blade travels the length of the book. That would be especially true if the book weren't tightly clamped all the way across during the cutting process.

 

Here is the definitive answer from DiceX who worked at a plant that produces magazine and comics (and has used the same methods since the 1930's). This was posted back in the thread:

 

 

If the cutting blade is perfectly horizontal to the table

 

 

Yes - is the blade perfectly horizontal to the table, or is it angled? Does the blade chop through the paper, contacting each wrap all at the same time (horizontal,) or slice it, with the blade contacting the paper at one end first and slicing to the other end?

 

 

 

-slym

 

Ahh, I understand your question now.

Yes, the blade is perfectly square with the table and makes contact with the entire surface of the book at the same time and pushes it's way through the paper from top to bottom.

 

 

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.

 

 

[Timely]

The grain acts as a stabilizing force maintaining the shape of the paper. By weakening the grain, the paper loses strength and contracts horizontally and expands vertically. Since every example shows the same horizontal shrinkage without any vertical shrinkage, it is clearly damage to the grain of the coverstock.

Paper is made from wood pulp, a slurry of cellulose that is pressed to squeeze the water out of it. The cellulose fibers are oriented in every possible direction. This is what holds the paper together. There is no grain.

 

Only hand made paper has a random orientation of paper fibers that you are describing. Virtually every mass produced paper has a grain where the fibers become aligned due to the manufacturing process.

So is this why a sheet of paper is easier to rip one direction than the other?

 

I never noticed that to be the case.

 

How paper is made

It is why paper rips fairly straight with the grain and jagged across the grain.

 

Real easy to see by ripping paper towels

I know what you're saying, but the word "grain" isn't really the term you want. It's misleading and inaccurate to say that grain in newsprint is responsible for a change in size of the printed product.

 

Interlocking fibers. As the moisture evaporates, the fibers slightly contract. On a sheet of paper all these micro-sized contractions add up. You can visually see the difference when compared to the cover. The cover does not shrink due to the clay coating keeping the fibers in place.

[Speedy-D]

 

It is possible that it was trimmed, but considering CGC's hypersensitivity to trimmed books, and the fact that the Airboy would raise eye brows just based on appearance, I'd have to lean towards production. I'd have a hard time believing a macro trim would slip by.

 

 

I've never seen comics being made, but is it possible that some books had covers that didn't quite reach the edge of a comic before even before trimming stage, so that one edge of the cover never got a production trim, e.g. if that cover was at the edge of a sheet of covers? Or was there always excess to be trimmed off?

 

(I'd still consider it a defect worthy of a penalty; I've never agreed with CGC giving a free pass to manufacturing defects.)

 

Yes, that is exactly what I thought (and explained) earlier. I think some covers are miscut before being attached to the book so that the cutter blades never reach them in the final trim process.

 

And what, a large collection of these got graded at the same time, in the 1197 batch?

 

No, this is another perfect example of how the conversation is veering off course and wires get crossed because there are so many different conversations going on.

 

We are now specifically talking about the Airboy comic a few pages back with a badly miscut cover, where the cover is uniformly 1/4" shorter than the rest of the book. The airboy is a 117....book. It's not related to the 1197 batch.

 

We are not talking about Costanza books (although it was initially thought to be a Costanza book).

 

See how it gets complicated?

 

Yeah man, that's too complicated. It's not gonna work, having two very similar, overlapping conversations in a single thread. If the goal is to be understood, it's unlikely to be achieved.

[VintageComics]

Roy, it's the interior that is changing "drastically" to the cover. The cover is the only stable part of this equation. Over time (time being 30 minutes or less) the interior pages start to dry out (meaning they loose the minimal humidity that is trapped in the paper fibers) & the interior shrinks. Since the cover is clay-coated, the humidity affects it differently and it remains relatively the same size.

 

Clay coated or clay impregnated?

 

So you are saying that you think the interiors are expanding horizontally and shrinking vertically, all at the same rate and that the cover remains static?

 

That goes against everything I've heard and read but I suppose it is possible.

 

Grain adds dimensional stability. Whatever pressing process they are performing is weakening the grain. There is no other reason for consistent shrinkage in one direction only. I linked a paper early in the thread which explained it. Here is another: About Paper Grain . First paragraph of this one: How to make paper by hand

 

So again, interiors are expanding and cover remains static?

 

My understanding was that it was the clay, which is basically mud, is being affected by moisture making the cover less stable when moist than the interior.

 

So in short, my understanding up until now was that moist paper pulp (interior) is more stable than moist paper pulp with clay content (cover) in the same way a linen cloth is more stable than a sheet of mud when moist.

 

 

[Monstro]

Roy you need to know that you are doing a complete disservice to the cause for pressing.

 

If I had invented the practice and my entire carrier was built around the pressing of comics, after reading your mind numbing defense and spin involved with the examples in this thread, I would sell off all my equipment and choose another line of work.

 

You should just let it go. Sorry for being a D.

[comicdonna]

[VintageComics]

Yeah man, that's too complicated. It's not gonna work, having two very similar, overlapping conversations in a single thread. If the goal is to be understood, it's unlikely to be achieved.

 

It's simply attention to detail which is not happening because the thread is too big and the size of the group having the discussion is too broad. I tried to address the book specifically when someone introduced the Airboy book as a possible Costanza but people start jumping posts and the conversation goes off the rails.

 

Then I get blamed for trying to spin the conversation. Love it!

[VintageComics]

Roy you need to know that you are doing a complete disservice to the cause for pressing.

 

If I had invented the practice and my entire carrier was built around the pressing of comics, after reading your mind numbing defense and spin involved with the examples in this thread, I would sell off all my equipment and choose another line of work.

 

You should just let it go. Sorry for being a D.

 

 

But I'm not trying to defend pressing. You are making the assumption that I am trying to defend pressing and missing the entire point of the conversation.

 

I'm simply trying to understand how the covers and interiors changed size. Isn't that what everyone wants to know?

 

 

I have a question: Why are you addressing me when there are other people involved in the same conversation with the same interest?

[fantastic_four]

Roy you need to know that you are doing a complete disservice to the cause for pressing.

 

You're partially right--it's better to mostly ignore the trollers and eternal wearers of tinfoil hats. When you wrestle with a pig, you both get dirty but the pig likes it.

[BEAUMONTS]

[joeypost]

I think he is talking about the fanned pages? Its pretty obvious that a lot of these books suffer from being slightly twisted off center.

 

Does the blade that cuts the comics come straight down and cut the whole book at the same time, like a big pair of nippers would do, or does it swing down like the blade of a manual paper cutter? If the blade starts cutting at one end, the cover could be slipping slightly - the blade, especially a dull blade, could be pulling on it slightly as the blade travels the length of the book. That would be especially true if the book weren't tightly clamped all the way across during the cutting process.

 

Here is the definitive answer from DiceX who worked at a plant that produces magazine and comics (and has used the same methods since the 1930's). This was posted back in the thread:

 

 

If the cutting blade is perfectly horizontal to the table

 

 

Yes - is the blade perfectly horizontal to the table, or is it angled? Does the blade chop through the paper, contacting each wrap all at the same time (horizontal,) or slice it, with the blade contacting the paper at one end first and slicing to the other end?

 

 

 

-slym

 

Ahh, I understand your question now.

Yes, the blade is perfectly square with the table and makes contact with the entire surface of the book at the same time and pushes it's way through the paper from top to bottom.

 

 

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.

 

 

 

Would it be possible that the top book or two would have the room to be skewed ever so slightly compared to the bottom books? If shifting were to occur it would be my guess that the top books would be the more likely candidates. And if so, it would affect the cut on a few books per batch.

[ciorac]

 

Yes, this.

 

 

[fantastic_four]

Would it be possible that the top book or two would have the room to be skewed ever so slightly compared to the bottom books? If shifting were to occur it would be my guess that the top books would be the more likely candidates. And if so, it would affect the cut on a few books per batch.

 

What makes you think multiple books are cut at once? In the videos linked earlier, it looked like each book went through separately. They'd have to in order to be stapled individually.

[joeypost]

Would it be possible that the top book or two would have the room to be skewed ever so slightly compared to the bottom books? If shifting were to occur it would be my guess that the top books would be the more likely candidates. And if so, it would affect the cut on a few books per batch.

 

What makes you think multiple books are cut at once? In the videos linked earlier, it looked like each book went through separately. They'd have to in order to be stapled individually.

 

In some of the videos I have watched the books are assembled, stacked in maybe groups of 50 (stacked) and then trimmed on 3 sides.

[fantastic_four]

Would it be possible that the top book or two would have the room to be skewed ever so slightly compared to the bottom books? If shifting were to occur it would be my guess that the top books would be the more likely candidates. And if so, it would affect the cut on a few books per batch.

 

What makes you think multiple books are cut at once? In the videos linked earlier, it looked like each book went through separately. They'd have to in order to be stapled individually.

 

In some of the videos I have watched the books are assembled, stacked in maybe groups of 50 (stacked) and then trimmed on 3 sides.

 

Were those videos in the thread or did you see that somewhere else?

[Monstro]

Roy you need to know that you are doing a complete disservice to the cause for pressing.

 

If I had invented the practice and my entire carrier was built around the pressing of comics, after reading your mind numbing defense and spin involved with the examples in this thread, I would sell off all my equipment and choose another line of work.

 

You should just let it go. Sorry for being a D.

 

 

But I'm not trying to defend pressing. You are making the assumption that I am trying to defend pressing and missing the entire point of the conversation.

 

I'm simply trying to understand how the covers and interiors changed size. Isn't that what everyone wants to know?

 

 

I have a question: Why are you addressing me when there are other people involved in the same conversation with the same interest?

 

Because you have the loudest voice.

[VintageComics]

Because you have the loudest voice.

 

Or maybe I just have the most questions.

 

So because I have a lot of posts, and this thread is related to pressing, you are assuming I am defending pressing with all of my posts. Correct?

 

 

 

[fantastic_four]

Roy you need to know that you are doing a complete disservice to the cause for pressing.

 

If I had invented the practice and my entire carrier was built around the pressing of comics, after reading your mind numbing defense and spin involved with the examples in this thread, I would sell off all my equipment and choose another line of work.

 

You should just let it go. Sorry for being a D.

 

 

But I'm not trying to defend pressing. You are making the assumption that I am trying to defend pressing and missing the entire point of the conversation.

 

I'm simply trying to understand how the covers and interiors changed size. Isn't that what everyone wants to know?

 

 

I have a question: Why are you addressing me when there are other people involved in the same conversation with the same interest?

 

Because you have the loudest voice.

 

And because fighting eternal cynics is not only useless, it makes you look like you have an agenda. Repeatedly fighting someone with a clear bias ends up making you look biased yourself.