Cole Schave collection: face jobs?

[gaz973]

What depressed me was not the DD#7, but rather this statement from bomber-bob:

"... if you ever ever [sic] owned books from certain pedigrees that have outstanding color you can see a deterioration in the color after a pressing.

It's a subtle thing, only noticeable in hand, but that sharp brightness, fresh off the stand look is diminished. I can only imagine that multiple pressings will completely destroy the freshness factor."

 

This is the first I've heard of this, and I've handled 1000's of high grade books, both pressed and not pressed. There has been no discernible difference or pattern that I've been able to see.

 

If you're going to feel like dying every time someone says something that may or may not be true about a comic book, you might want to hang out in the GA forum where people are more respectful of weaker hearts.

 

I stand by my statement. I've probably had 300 Pedigree submissions.

The few that I pressed lost 'some' of that brightness. I submit for my personal collection. I love the books, I stare at them. I know the difference.

I had a friend that submitted a non-ped but still beautiful copy of ASM 129 for pressing. First book he ever pressed. He said the same thing. The yellows were not quite as yellow. BTW, he got the grade he wanted.

 

You need to find a different person to press your books.

 

Yeah, I'll call wildly_fanciful_statement on that statement unless he's getting them pressed by BHooks.

 

 

Again, I stand by my statement. Call me a liar, I can't prove it to you anyway. Before the Shaves, if I told you I've seen covers shrink, you'd probably say no way. We've seen examples of White Mountain cover dates having a subtle smearing effect, again you would probably say no way. I'm not lobbying against pressing. I'm not calling anybody out. It's not even a big deal. I'm just saying I think it happens.

 

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that it doesn't happen unless you're getting your books pressed by someone who is completely clueless as to what they're doing.

There is no way that a book fades color when it's pressed. Ink smear, yes. Color fade, no.

 

I'm not calling you a liar, I think you're seeing what you want to see or believing what you want yourself to believe.

Pushing an agenda? Perhaps. But I don't think you're a liar.

 

So would you say that the shrunken covers were also pressed by someone who is completely clueless as to what they're doing?

[rjrjr]

CCS needs to adhere by a different set of rules than everyone else simply because they're owned by the same parent company as CGC.

The CGIC already plays by a different set of rules than everybody else. Fact is, they make the rules, they interpret the rules, they can change the rules on a whim, and it all happens behind the magic curtain with no oversight. Yippee...

 

Prove it.

 

Seriously, show us the smoking gun - the undeniable proof that CGC is giving preferential treatment to books coming from CCS. You've made this particular claim over & over again in both this & other threads, yet you've provided nothing factual to actually back it up.

 

I get that you're upset that CCG acquired CCS - that, in your mind, this set the stage for a grand conflict of interest wherein Nelson not only presses books at CCS, but then walks them down to the CGC grading room & instructs the graders as to how the books should be graded. It doesn't matter what CGC, CCS nor Mark Zaid says, because, in your mind, things are a certain way, facts or reality be damned.

 

But ... just out of curiosity - what is it that you expect to accomplish from continuing to push these false assumptions?

 

 

Do you honestly believe a book that is damaged in pressing by CCS is going to be downgraded by CGC? Can you imagine the outrage that would bring from the submitter? Of course CGC is going to grade those books the same or better, otherwise the pressing service performed was meaningless, regardless of whether or not the books are damaged in the process.

 

I find it easier to believe that CCS and CGC would have a closer working relationship than a completely isolated relationship as you are espousing. It is in the best interest of the company for that working relationship to exist.

 

I feel that I need to add that I don't know that CGC/CCS did this with these books. But the fact that the relationship is there and the possibility exists is something that the community should be discussing.

[Elysium Treasures-migratio]

[THE_BEYONDER]

The truth is out there....

 

 

What this thread needs is some JC input. Where on earth has Vince gone?

[drbanner]

But the fact that the relationship is there and the possibility exists is something that the community should be discussing.

Good idea.

[Jeffro.]

The Tin Foil hat is strong in this thread.

[fantastic_four]

 

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that it doesn't happen unless you're getting your books pressed by someone who is completely clueless as to what they're doing.

There is no way that a book fades color when it's pressed. Ink smear, yes. Color fade, no.

 

I'm not calling you a liar, I think you're seeing what you want to see or believing what you want yourself to believe.

Pushing an agenda? Perhaps. But I don't think you're a liar.

 

 

In this thread, if I gave the name of the presser, then I would be pushing an agenda. No agenda, I probably shouldn't have mentioned it. Still, I stand by my statement.

 

How were you able to see the pedigree books you were referring to in-hand before and after a press, and how can you possibly be sure the colors had faded? It was THAT noticable, i.e. more than a 20% to 40% loss in color?

[fantastic_four]

We may need a description which carries less bias. I'm a purist. I don't mind pressing. I've had books pressed. They are still pure after the process, purely flat as nature intended. They haven't been restored. They are just flat. Purely.

 

You're changing the definition of the word "restore" to not call that process "restoration." My best guess is that you're suggesting that restoration requires the addition of materials--which is splitting hairs. The word "restore" applies whether you're talking about color touch, folding a slightly bent corner that hasn't broken color or fibers back with your finger, dry-cleaning a bit of schmutz with Wonder bread, or pressing with humidity, heat, and pressure. You're returning a book to its previous state, restoring it to the way it originally was--if that wasn't your entire goal, you wouldn't be doing it in the first place. I agree that it's far less notable than color touch or piece replacement, and I don't think it's worthy of a purple label--or whatever the more severe indications are on the new label CGC has come up with and hasn't yet released.

 

People try to avoid using the word "restoration" for purely emotional, political, or in many cases financial reasons. Those aren't the right reasons for changing a definition. Car guys finagle the word "restoration" in similar ways when they knock small dents out of the bodies of cars...but just because you don't leave evidence of work and add nothing doesn't mean you're not restoring an item to a previous state. Here's a dictionary definition of the word "restore":

 

restore [rɪˈstɔː] vb (tr)

1. to return (something, esp a work of art or building) to an original or former condition

2. to bring back to health, good spirits, etc.

3. to return (something lost, stolen, etc.) to its owner

4. to reintroduce or re-enforce to restore discipline

5. to reconstruct (an extinct animal, former landscape, etc.)

 

Pressing clearly matches definiton 1. What you're likely resisting is definition 5--certainly pressing isn't reconstruction like color touch and piece replacement are.

 

When Susan Cicconi started verbally defining pressing as restoration around a decade ago, did you think she was confused? Pushing a liberal tree-hugging agenda in the name of tearing down comic business owners everywhere? I saw her as just using the word "restore" true to its definition.

[Comicopolis]

This thread for about 3,070 posts now...

 

 

 

Did you miss the guy wishing he were dead?

 

It was semi interesting.

 

Yeah - but he only felt that way because a serial killer turned up at his door.

[Comicopolis]

Just replace the word restoration with manipulation and it will cover all bases.

[fantastic_four]

Just replace the word restoration with manipulation and it will cover all bases.

 

I hate that so many in the hobby see restoration like you just described. But I do understand it due to the prevalence of slight, greed-motivated restoration primarily being done for the last decade or three. When I see the skill, dedication, and artistry of a conservator restoring a book from a torn-up state to looking close to the way it did when it was first released, "manipulation" is not at all a word that comes to mind. "Rescuing" is closer to it.

 

[mysterio]

Maybe it is because I haven't finished my coffee yet, but this thread has me depressed this morning. It seems obvious that we should all agree on the central tenets of this thread, that Costanza shrinking of covers due to over/incorrect pressing and RSRs are bad under all circumstances and something needs to be done by CGC to stop rewarding processes that damage books with higher grades even though they look like mess afterwards.

 

Nobody disputes this, or if someone does I missed in in the preceeding 300+ pages.

 

But for the last several days we've been spinning our wheels turning this into another basically generic pressing debate thread that has been rehashed a million times and won't make any progress here either.

 

I'd like to respectfully request that we open a new thread for the debate over regular pressing and move that generic discussion there. Please save this one for the obvious and fairly new issues that everyone sees as a problem, the Costanza and RSRs. Otherwise I fear we run the risk of CGC being able to say "ah, see, there is debate amongst the boardies, and therefore we can let this controversy die down and ignore it." Only with a unified front of disgust against these specific and obviously damaging techniques can we hope to accomplish anything like a label change or significant change in approach to grading.

 

I, for one, don't see the statement released yesterday concerning treating Costanza shrinking as a manufacturing defect as gaining much ground. But if we devolve into infighting about an admittedly related but very different issue (normal pressing) we risk losing our voice over the issue that (I think) matters in this thread.

[fantastic_four]

I'd like to respectfully request that we open a new thread for the debate over regular pressing and move that generic discussion there. Please save this one for the obvious and fairly new issues that everyone sees as a problem, the Costanza and RSRs. Otherwise I fear we run the risk of CGC being able to say "ah, see, there is debate amongst the boardies, and therefore we can let this controversy die down and ignore it."

 

Several people are making an effort to bump the thread hoping to achieve the opposite effect to the one you're thinking it will have on CGC--they think if the thread stays alive, CGC will be more incented to make a change. I suspect neither point of view is right--they've gotten all they're going to get from this thread, have said what they need to say, and have moved on.

[drbanner]

Is pressing restoration? Yes or No depending on your point of view, but certainly something has been done to the book and when CGC starts to label the books they work on as being "pressed", they will reside in blue labels. So really, no matter your personal definition, the information will be there and may be interpreted to each his own. (thumbs u

[mysterio]

I'd like to respectfully request that we open a new thread for the debate over regular pressing and move that generic discussion there. Please save this one for the obvious and fairly new issues that everyone sees as a problem, the Costanza and RSRs. Otherwise I fear we run the risk of CGC being able to say "ah, see, there is debate amongst the boardies, and therefore we can let this controversy die down and ignore it."

 

Several people are making an effort to bump the thread hoping to achieve the opposite effect to the one you're thinking it will have on CGC--they think if the thread stays alive, CGC will be more incented to make a change. I suspect neither point of view is right--they've gotten all they're going to get from this thread, have said what they need to say, and have moved on.

 

I fear you're correct, but am holding out some hope that a unified message from the boards would have an effect (which in and of itself is probably wildly optimistic).

[drbanner]

I'd like to respectfully request that we open a new thread for the debate over regular pressing and move that generic discussion there. Please save this one for the obvious and fairly new issues that everyone sees as a problem, the Costanza and RSRs. Otherwise I fear we run the risk of CGC being able to say "ah, see, there is debate amongst the boardies, and therefore we can let this controversy die down and ignore it."

 

Several people are making an effort to bump the thread hoping to achieve the opposite effect to the one you're thinking it will have on CGC--they think if the thread stays alive, CGC will be more incented to make a change. I suspect neither point of view is right--they've gotten all they're going to get from this thread, have said what they need to say, and have moved on.

 

I fear you're correct, but am holding out some hope that a unified message from the boards would have an effect (which in and of itself is probably wildly optimistic).

It did for tape as CGC solicited input and ended up revising their decades-old policy on how they handle tape, so they certainly listen to input from the boards (and elsewhere) when revising/updating internal policies. It's not futile to discuss these issues.

[thirdgreenham]

You can find info on a DD7 I believe a Pacific Coast that was pressed from 8.5 to 9.6 after 4-5 tries.

 

As a fan of Pedigrees, to me this is disgusting. First off, no one can convince me this is the same legacy book that was in the Original collection. In this case, the Pedigree status is meaningless.

Also, if you ever ever owned books from certain pedigrees that have outstanding color you can see a deterioration in the color after a pressing.

It's a subtle thing, only noticeable in hand, but that sharp brightness, fresh off the stand look is diminished. I can only imagine that multiple pressings will completely destroy the freshness factor.

This depresses me almost to the point of wishing I were dead.

 

It also demonstrates a flaw in the CGC grading, in that freshness isn't being considered, or considered enough, in grading. Were that loss of freshness properly punished, people would not be trying to press fresh, high-grade, books. The scales need to be adjusted, even if it's jjust a little - enough to make the risk outweigh the reward.

 

c'mon now, this is big news---no need for you to be so understated.

 

[fantastic_four]

I'd like to respectfully request that we open a new thread for the debate over regular pressing and move that generic discussion there. Please save this one for the obvious and fairly new issues that everyone sees as a problem, the Costanza and RSRs. Otherwise I fear we run the risk of CGC being able to say "ah, see, there is debate amongst the boardies, and therefore we can let this controversy die down and ignore it."

 

Several people are making an effort to bump the thread hoping to achieve the opposite effect to the one you're thinking it will have on CGC--they think if the thread stays alive, CGC will be more incented to make a change. I suspect neither point of view is right--they've gotten all they're going to get from this thread, have said what they need to say, and have moved on.

 

I fear you're correct, but am holding out some hope that a unified message from the boards would have an effect (which in and of itself is probably wildly optimistic).

 

They've already heard that unified message. What remains is largely hyperbole not worth their time.

[fantastic_four]

It did for tape as CGC solicited input and ended up revising their decades-old policy on how they handle tape, so they certainly listen to input from the boards (and elsewhere) when revising/updating internal policies. It's not futile to discuss these issues.

 

They've already said they're going to try not to Costanza anymore. The other half-dozen issues various people are wishing for not directly related to shrinkage they're likely ignoring.

[drbanner]

They've already said they're going to try not to Costanza anymore.

Sure they can try, but if it happens they can just press it again to fix it so it's a moot point. If at 1st you don't succeed, press, press again.