Cole Schave collection: face jobs?

[Rip]

If only the person who worked on these books could come here and answer all of the pertinent questions.

Did Susan Cicconi ever post?

 

It would be interesting to read an actual museum-trained professional conservator's take on the phenomenon.

 

Unless "the person who worked on these books" has a habit of documenting all the elements involved during treatment procedures, odds are they'd be speculating at best or offering CYA explanations at worst.

 

She's a really nice person to talk with and she's certainly aware of this thread. I need to talk to her today, so I'll ask.

[THE_BEYONDER]

If only the person who worked on these books could come here and answer all of the pertinent questions.

Did Susan Cicconi ever post?

 

It would be interesting to read an actual museum-trained professional conservator's take on the phenomenon.

 

Unless "the person who worked on these books" has a habit of documenting all the elements involved during treatment procedures, odds are they'd be speculating at best or offering CYA explanations at worst.

 

I thought the new resto-expert (Kent I believe) at CGC was museum trained. Maybe he could comment as well.

[fantastic_four]

If only the person who worked on these books could come here and answer all of the pertinent questions.

Did Susan Cicconi ever post?

 

It would be interesting to read an actual museum-trained professional conservator's take on the phenomenon.

 

Unless "the person who worked on these books" has a habit of documenting all the elements involved during treatment procedures, odds are they'd be speculating at best or offering CYA explanations at worst.

 

I thought the new resto-expert (Kent I believe) at CGC was museum trained. Maybe he could comment as well.

 

Anyone sporting a Fu Manchu is just as likely to kick your as to answer your questions.

 

[Bomber-Bob]

Another 1197 submission:

ASM#1 CGC 7.5

 

Read the description. "exact cover alignment"

 

That whole description is infuriating. Epic Huckster.

 

Doug is the ultimate salesman. Honestly, I think 7.5 is too high for that book.

Look at the size of the Marvel chip that's missing.

[fantastic_four]

Another 1197 submission:

ASM#1 CGC 7.5

 

Read the description. "exact cover alignment"

 

That whole description is infuriating. Epic Huckster.

 

Doug is the ultimate salesman. Honestly, I think 7.5 is too high for that book.

Look at the size of the Marvel chip that's missing.

 

That's CGC downgrading less for production defects. There's no defect I hate them doing that more for than chipping.

[DeliBebek]

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

What you're calling grain and what the linked webpage calls grain are very misleading about what's going on in the production of paper. The article admits that the grain isn't within the fibers, but a phenomenon of the paper's manufacture.

 

The article points out that the movement of the slurry through the wringer and the ensuring stream of paper through the dryer was more likely to maximize the tensile qualities of the paper in that direction, crediting that part of the process with the creation of what it calls "grain." The article you linked to also says that the fibers are virtually random in their orientation. The photograph illustrates this well.

 

The tensile characteristics of the paper have been maximized in one direction, not in the other. It is much more likely that the paper can shrink in the direction it has been pulled through the wringer, the dryer and the printing press. It is more likely it can expand in the direction perpendicular to that movement.

 

As we agreed earlier, the direction of this maximizing, if you will, is in the up-down axis of a comic book, based on the way it's printed. Shrinking would occur from top to bottom, not side to side. The clay in the covers would inhibit such shrinking, but there is less clay in the interior pages, which is why they are generally more supple.

 

I don't know why DiceX was saying that paper fibers are woven. Paper isn't a textile.

 

We have the entire internet at our disposal. There is no reason to have such an insular argument over issues that a five-minute Google session can shed great light on.

[Bomber-Bob]

Another 1197 submission:

ASM#1 CGC 7.5

 

Read the description. "exact cover alignment"

 

That whole description is infuriating. Epic Huckster.

 

Doug is the ultimate salesman. Honestly, I think 7.5 is too high for that book.

Look at the size of the Marvel chip that's missing.

 

That's CGC downgrading less for production defects. There's no defect I hate them doing that more for than chipping.

 

That's yet another scam, way of playing the system. You have a book with a corner ding and an impact chip missing. Press the ding and now you have a stand alone production default chip. Point is CGC is guessing on so too many flaws. A flaw is a flaw whether it's a common Marvel problem or not.

[fantastic_four]

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

What you're calling grain and what the linked webpage calls grain are very misleading about what's going on in the production of paper. The article admits that the grain isn't within the fibers, but a phenomenon of the paper's manufacture.

 

The article points out that the movement of the slurry through the wringer and the ensuring stream of paper through the dryer was more likely to maximize the tensile qualities of the paper in that direction, crediting that part of the process with the creation of what it calls "grain." The article you linked to also says that the fibers are virtually random in their orientation. The photograph illustrates this well.

 

The tensile characteristics of the paper have been maximized in one direction, not in the other. It is much more likely that the paper can shrink in the direction it has been pulled through the wringer, the dryer and the printing press. It is more likely it can expand in the direction perpendicular to that movement.

 

As we agreed earlier, the direction of this maximizing, if you will, is in the up-down axis of a comic book, based on the way it's printed. Shrinking would occur from top to bottom, not side to side. The clay in the covers would inhibit such shrinking, but there is less clay in the interior pages, which is why they are generally more supple.

 

I don't know why DiceX was saying that paper fibers are woven. Paper isn't a textile.

 

We have the entire internet at our disposal. There is no reason to have such an insular argument over issues that a five-minute Google session can shed great light on.

 

That's a good suggestion--try Googling the word "grain" and you'll find that the usage of the word you're bemoaning is covered in every definition I could find, including the one Google itself offers:

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=grain&oq=grain&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.909j0j7&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8#es_sm=122&espv=210&q=grain+definition&safe=active

[Timely]

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.

 

 

Um, I never said anything about expansion.

[Ogami]

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

Exactly right. (thumbs u

 

Roy - if nothing else, you are prolific.

 

I'm optimistic to the point where my girlfriend repeatedly brands me a pollyana, but Roy's willingness to carry a torch to change the minds of the most pessimistic people around here puts me to shame. I believe that anyone can achieve or understand anything they're willing to put their minds and wills towards, but when someone clearly is closed off to an idea or an achievement, I leave them alone with one exception--I sometimes persist with people who are clearly so smart that I feel they should know better to fall into the mental trap they've fallen into. Roy doesn't give up as early or as easily as I do and repeatedly tries to penetrate their defenses. I can't decide whether to be in pity or awe of his willingness to constantly engage the face of myopic pessimism.

 

My horoscope clearly states that I was born on the 'day of tenacity'. I've said it multiple times on here, I'm like a pit bull when I get locked onto something and it's a gift when used properly but a curse when I don't stop and I should know better.

 

Where's Park when I need him.

 

 

Take my hand, Roy. We will run to that magical place where Park awaits with cucumber sandwiches and semi sweet tea.

[InvstmntComcSuply]

I'm not sure why you would want to call the phenomena something else when everyone in the industry refers to it as 'grain'?

 

You are mistaking my agreement that the grain runs vertically in the pages of the comic for something else.

[Park]

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

Exactly right. (thumbs u

 

Roy - if nothing else, you are prolific.

 

I'm optimistic to the point where my girlfriend repeatedly brands me a pollyana, but Roy's willingness to carry a torch to change the minds of the most pessimistic people around here puts me to shame. I believe that anyone can achieve or understand anything they're willing to put their minds and wills towards, but when someone clearly is closed off to an idea or an achievement, I leave them alone with one exception--I sometimes persist with people who are clearly so smart that I feel they should know better to fall into the mental trap they've fallen into. Roy doesn't give up as early or as easily as I do and repeatedly tries to penetrate their defenses. I can't decide whether to be in pity or awe of his willingness to constantly engage the face of myopic pessimism.

 

My horoscope clearly states that I was born on the 'day of tenacity'. I've said it multiple times on here, I'm like a pit bull when I get locked onto something and it's a gift when used properly but a curse when I don't stop and I should know better.

 

Where's Park when I need him.

 

 

 

 

Fifty bucks, hippie. Seventy five and...wait...what are we talking about again?

[Old Fashion PB and J]

This thread gets worst every time I click on it. Don't buy the books that were destroyed. Don't shop with people who are selling these books, as they obviously can't understand that CGC is not grading these correctly. Money Talks, BS Walks. The second dealers are having issues selling these, or are having them sent back, the situation will be addressed.

+1

 

Sounds like a plan.

grab one at a convention, say what happened to this book? And then hand it back. But do it when it's busy.

[Comicopolis]

Another 1197 submission:

ASM#1 CGC 7.5

 

Read the description. "exact cover alignment"

 

That whole description is infuriating. Epic Huckster.

 

Doug is the ultimate salesman. Honestly, I think 7.5 is too high for that book.

Look at the size of the Marvel chip that's missing.

 

That's CGC downgrading less for production defects. There's no defect I hate them doing that more for than chipping.

 

That's yet another scam, way of playing the system. You have a book with a corner ding and an impact chip missing. Press the ding and now you have a stand alone production default chip. Point is CGC is guessing on so too many flaws. A flaw is a flaw whether it's a common Marvel problem or not.

 

This plus a gazillion.

 

A book not getting downgraded because it has a 'production' flaw is ridiculous.

[Timely]

Another 1197 submission:

ASM#1 CGC 7.5

 

Read the description. "exact cover alignment"

 

That whole description is infuriating. Epic Huckster.

 

Doug is the ultimate salesman. Honestly, I think 7.5 is too high for that book.

Look at the size of the Marvel chip that's missing.

 

That's CGC downgrading less for production defects. There's no defect I hate them doing that more for than chipping.

 

That's yet another scam, way of playing the system. You have a book with a corner ding and an impact chip missing. Press the ding and now you have a stand alone production default chip. Point is CGC is guessing on so too many flaws. A flaw is a flaw whether it's a common Marvel problem or not.

 

This plus a gazillion.

 

A book not getting downgraded because it has a 'production' flaw is ridiculous.

 

But it was downgraded, just not enough to your liking.

[Comicopolis]

Another 1197 submission:

ASM#1 CGC 7.5

 

Read the description. "exact cover alignment"

 

That whole description is infuriating. Epic Huckster.

 

Doug is the ultimate salesman. Honestly, I think 7.5 is too high for that book.

Look at the size of the Marvel chip that's missing.

 

That's CGC downgrading less for production defects. There's no defect I hate them doing that more for than chipping.

 

That's yet another scam, way of playing the system. You have a book with a corner ding and an impact chip missing. Press the ding and now you have a stand alone production default chip. Point is CGC is guessing on so too many flaws. A flaw is a flaw whether it's a common Marvel problem or not.

 

This plus a gazillion.

 

A book not getting downgraded because it has a 'production' flaw is ridiculous.

 

But it was downgraded, just not enough to your liking.

 

I apologize for having higher standards.

[Timely]

Another 1197 submission:

ASM#1 CGC 7.5

 

Read the description. "exact cover alignment"

 

That whole description is infuriating. Epic Huckster.

 

Doug is the ultimate salesman. Honestly, I think 7.5 is too high for that book.

Look at the size of the Marvel chip that's missing.

 

That's CGC downgrading less for production defects. There's no defect I hate them doing that more for than chipping.

 

That's yet another scam, way of playing the system. You have a book with a corner ding and an impact chip missing. Press the ding and now you have a stand alone production default chip. Point is CGC is guessing on so too many flaws. A flaw is a flaw whether it's a common Marvel problem or not.

 

This plus a gazillion.

 

A book not getting downgraded because it has a 'production' flaw is ridiculous.

 

But it was downgraded, just not enough to your liking.

 

I apologize for having higher standards.

 

No need to apologize. If you feel 7.0 or 6.5 is right grade, more power to you! I'm not saying the 7.5 grade is the one I would have chosen either. I'm just stating a fact that it was downgraded. That chip did not get a free pass.

[THE_BEYONDER]

If only the person who worked on these books could come here and answer all of the pertinent questions.

Did Susan Cicconi ever post?

 

It would be interesting to read an actual museum-trained professional conservator's take on the phenomenon.

 

Unless "the person who worked on these books" has a habit of documenting all the elements involved during treatment procedures, odds are they'd be speculating at best or offering CYA explanations at worst.

 

I thought the new resto-expert (Kent I believe) at CGC was museum trained. Maybe he could comment as well.

 

Anyone sporting a Fu Manchu is just as likely to kick your as to answer your questions.

 

 

[VintageComics]

No need to apologize. If you feel 7.0 or 6.5 is right grade, more power to you! I'm not saying the 7.5 grade is the one I would have chosen either. I'm just stating a fact that it was downgraded. That chip did not get a free pass.

 

Exactly. CGC doesn't ignore defects, they just don't grade some defects the way others would...which, surprise surprise, has been going on since the dawn of the hobby.

 

The truth is that most people will always disagree over how to grade something.

[VintageComics]

This thread gets worst every time I click on it. Don't buy the books that were destroyed. Don't shop with people who are selling these books, as they obviously can't understand that CGC is not grading these correctly. Money Talks, BS Walks. The second dealers are having issues selling these, or are having them sent back, the situation will be addressed.

+1

 

Sounds like a plan.

grab one at a convention, say what happened to this book? And then hand it back. But do it when it's busy.

 

Since we're fine tuning this, do you have a particular dealer mind?