Cole Schave collection: face jobs?

[Boba]

I miss Kenny

 

Pretty sure he's tired of people in the forums spreading misinformation, overreacting to restoration, and trashing his profession so he has mostly given up on this place. I don't blame him.

 

I hope you're wrong, but I really wouldn't be surprised if you're not.

It must be tough - being on both sides of a thing.

On one hand you're passionate about what you do and on the other, there are people who hate it and you have to defend yourself all the time.

 

I think we need to start taking the restoration craft a bit more seriously. I mean they're restoring King James Bibles and that's ok with the historians.

I think restoring funny books doesn't herald the end of the world.

 

I'm pretty sure he's just really busy.

 

(thumbs u

[mschmidt]

I don't think anyone hates restoration, but most collectors hate undisclosed restoration. They like it even less when the company that restores the books is the same company that grades the books but then decline to be truthful about what they've done to the book by including that information on the label.

 

Do they also dislike it when a certain poster can't seem to grasp that it's not one company that's both restoring & grading the books?

 

Oh ... wait - was this you beating the dead horse about CGC not putting a pressing notation on the label when books come from CCS again? If so, keep fighting that good fight - I'm sure CGC will change their stance on this any day now. I mean, why wouldn't they be in favor of a practice created specifically to put their sister company at a disadvantage in the marketplace?

[fantastic_four]

I miss Kenny

 

Pretty sure he's tired of people in the forums spreading misinformation, overreacting to restoration, and trashing his profession so he has mostly given up on this place. I don't blame him.

 

I hope you're wrong, but I really wouldn't be surprised if you're not.

It must be tough - being on both sides of a thing.

On one hand you're passionate about what you do and on the other, there are people who hate it and you have to defend yourself all the time.

 

I think we need to start taking the restoration craft a bit more seriously. I mean they're restoring King James Bibles and that's ok with the historians.

I think restoring funny books doesn't herald the end of the world.

 

I'm pretty sure he's just really busy.

 

(thumbs u

 

Back in July when someone posting in this thread was spreading misinformation about leaf casting, he PM'ed me expressing his utter disdain for the vein of conversation pervading the forum related to restoration and how he thought it was pointless to even bother posting. He did post later that same day, and he hasn't posted since. Last time I PM'ed him was two months ago and he hasn't even read it yet, so I presume he's just avoiding this place entirely. He might be busy, but his attitude over the last year clearly demonstrates he's tired of the general feeling the forum displays towards his craft.

[drbanner]

But we're getting into even slipperier slope territory with blue labels and CGC COI if cleaning is removing stains previously thought to be unremovable using techniques allowed in blue labels.

I thought CGC would label all books restored in house as restored (purple label), and that CGC considers any wet cleaning (whether aqueous or solvent based) to be restoration?

 

If that's not the case, the slippery slope is more of a precarious precipice...

 

[mysterio]

But we're getting into even slipperier slope territory with blue labels and CGC COI if cleaning is removing stains previously thought to be unremovable using techniques allowed in blue labels.

I thought CGC would label all books restored in house as restored (purple label), and that CGC considers any wet cleaning (whether aqueous or solvent based) to be restoration?

 

If that's not the case, the slippery slope is more of a precarious precipice...

 

 

This depends on A) whether CCS did the work, and B) the type of cleaning used, I would guess.

[mschmidt]

So these books are getting washed and pressed and showing up in blue label holders?

 

Hmmm. Very interesting.

 

I really hesitate to ask this but is it possible the CGC is simple missing these things ? If truly restored books are sitting in blue CGC labels we have a problem. This is a topic that Paul Litch should look into.

 

Missing them, or again redefining what is restoration based on what is "detectable"? If books are being cleaned in some undetectable way by someone who doesn't work at CCS, and the covers are shrinking either as a side effect of this process or through a different process, then this is potentially a new issue. If CCS is cleaning them then shouldn't that be disclosed as restoration?

 

At this point, CGC can't really win, can they? ::

 

If the 9.0 copy of the book still had the dirt/staining/whatever it is on the back, people would be complaining that it was a gift grade, due to CGC colluding with CCS.

 

Now that it doesn't, it immediately means it's been wet-cleaned and put in a blue label slab, due to CGC colluding with CCS.

 

I think the next step is to just post up scans of random blue label CGC books, claim that they've been trimmed, and blame it on Matt slipping Litch $20 as he stands by his side, telling him how the books should grade out. Because, you know, unless Litch actually comes into this thread & confirms that this isn't how it works, how do we really know?

[joeypost]

But we're getting into even slipperier slope territory with blue labels and CGC COI if cleaning is removing stains previously thought to be unremovable using techniques allowed in blue labels.

I thought CGC would label all books restored in house as restored (purple label), and that CGC considers any wet cleaning (whether aqueous or solvent based) to be restoration?

 

If that's not the case, the slippery slope is more of a precarious precipice...

 

 

This depends on A) whether CCS did the work, and B) the type of cleaning used, I would guess.

I agree. if it was aqueous it would have exhibited telltale signs it was. Not saying it could not slip past CGC, but I would not rule a wet wash out. In that case it goes way beyond a simple press.

[VintageComics]

Back in July when someone posting in this thread was spreading misinformation about leaf casting, he PM'ed me expressing his utter disdain for the vein of conversation pervading the forum related to restoration and how he thought it was pointless to even bother posting. He did post later that same day, and he hasn't posted since. Last time I PM'ed him was two months ago and he hasn't even read it yet, so I presume he's just avoiding this place entirely. He might be busy, but his attitude over the last year clearly demonstrates he's tired of the general feeling the forum displays towards his craft.

 

I used to talk to Kenny from time to time and he's also expressed his disdain to me as well.

 

I'm a glutton for punishment (as most can tell ) and don't mind getting tangled up in large debates because the goal is to learn and get to the bottom of things beyond anything else but there is a level of unreasonable logic in online debates and most can't be bothered to reply to it. It takes up a lot of time and you get the feeling that not only are you getting nowhere, you are sliding backwards at times.

 

I think that sort of unreasonable conflict is the main reason many, if not most long time posters no longer post here.

[mysterio]

So these books are getting washed and pressed and showing up in blue label holders?

 

Hmmm. Very interesting.

 

I really hesitate to ask this but is it possible the CGC is simple missing these things ? If truly restored books are sitting in blue CGC labels we have a problem. This is a topic that Paul Litch should look into.

 

Missing them, or again redefining what is restoration based on what is "detectable"? If books are being cleaned in some undetectable way by someone who doesn't work at CCS, and the covers are shrinking either as a side effect of this process or through a different process, then this is potentially a new issue. If CCS is cleaning them then shouldn't that be disclosed as restoration?

 

At this point, CGC can't really win, can they? ::

 

If the 9.0 copy of the book still had the dirt/staining/whatever it is on the back, people would be complaining that it was a gift grade, due to CGC colluding with CCS.

 

Now that it doesn't, it immediately means it's been wet-cleaned and put in a blue label slab, due to CGC colluding with CCS.

 

 

Not sure I follow. If the book still had staining it wouldn't have gotten into a 9.0 holder in all likelihood, or we would be having a different discussion if it had. I'll agree that if it was still stained and graded 9.0 that would be a problem.

 

If the staining was removed by cleaning, and most seem to think that this was a particularly effective cleaning as it removed difficult stains, then it would appear as though something might have gotten past CGC in one form or another. Collusion with CCS is one possibility there.

[mschmidt]

So these books are getting washed and pressed and showing up in blue label holders?

 

Hmmm. Very interesting.

 

I really hesitate to ask this but is it possible the CGC is simple missing these things ? If truly restored books are sitting in blue CGC labels we have a problem. This is a topic that Paul Litch should look into.

 

Missing them, or again redefining what is restoration based on what is "detectable"? If books are being cleaned in some undetectable way by someone who doesn't work at CCS, and the covers are shrinking either as a side effect of this process or through a different process, then this is potentially a new issue. If CCS is cleaning them then shouldn't that be disclosed as restoration?

 

At this point, CGC can't really win, can they? ::

 

If the 9.0 copy of the book still had the dirt/staining/whatever it is on the back, people would be complaining that it was a gift grade, due to CGC colluding with CCS.

 

Now that it doesn't, it immediately means it's been wet-cleaned and put in a blue label slab, due to CGC colluding with CCS.

 

 

Not sure I follow. If the book still had staining it wouldn't have gotten into a 9.0 holder in all likelihood, or we would be having a different discussion if it had. I'll agree that if it was still stained and graded 9.0 that would be a problem.

 

If the staining was removed by cleaning, and most seem to think that this was a particularly effective cleaning as it removed difficult stains, then it would appear as though something might have gotten past CGC in one form or another. Collusion with CCS is one possibility there.

 

Which is exactly my point - if the back of the 9.0 looked the same as the back of the 7.5, it's a problem. That it doesn't is suddenly another problem.

 

It's all wild speculation being thrown around & treated as fact.

 

The simple explanation is that this book wasn't wet/solvent cleaned (which is why it's in a blue label slab) - it's pure insanity to think you can diagnose the presence a solvent cleaning based on a before & after scan.

[namisgr]

I'm sure CGC will change their stance on this any day now. I mean, why wouldn't they be in favor of a practice created specifically to put their sister company at a disadvantage in the marketplace?

 

It's certainly a conflicted view to, on the one hand, consider pressing to be an innocuous treatment unworthy of continued consideration, and on the other hand consider it to be sufficiently negatively impactful to place CCS at a competitive disadvantage if they ever disclosed it.

[Silver Surfer]

So these books are getting washed and pressed and showing up in blue label holders?

 

Hmmm. Very interesting.

 

I really hesitate to ask this but is it possible the CGC is simple missing these things ? If truly restored books are sitting in blue CGC labels we have a problem. This is a topic that Paul Litch should look into.

 

Missing them, or again redefining what is restoration based on what is "detectable"? If books are being cleaned in some undetectable way by someone who doesn't work at CCS, and the covers are shrinking either as a side effect of this process or through a different process, then this is potentially a new issue. If CCS is cleaning them then shouldn't that be disclosed as restoration?

 

At this point, CGC can't really win, can they? ::

 

If the 9.0 copy of the book still had the dirt/staining/whatever it is on the back, people would be complaining that it was a gift grade, due to CGC colluding with CCS.

 

Now that it doesn't, it immediately means it's been wet-cleaned and put in a blue label slab, due to CGC colluding with CCS.

 

I think the next step is to just post up scans of random blue label CGC books, claim that they've been trimmed, and blame it on Matt slipping Litch $20 as he stands by his side, telling him how the books should grade out. Because, you know, unless Litch actually comes into this thread & confirms that this isn't how it works, how do we really know?

 

I'm not suggesting any dubious conspiracy but why can't you just look at this with an open mind and wait for some facts before hunkering in? I think it's good that we are noticing the work that is being done on these books as information is power. Since you brought it up, the "slipping" of $20 does sound ridiculous but how about taking a $8k book and making it into a $20k book for resale? I hope the removal of the foxing was done with some cutting edge non-restorative technology as that would be exciting news. However, if it's not then we may have an ugly situation like we have never seen on these boards before. Also, I'm not sure anyone from CCS would be too willing to hand out trade secrets on techniques and that is totally understable.

[mschmidt]

So these books are getting washed and pressed and showing up in blue label holders?

 

Hmmm. Very interesting.

 

I really hesitate to ask this but is it possible the CGC is simple missing these things ? If truly restored books are sitting in blue CGC labels we have a problem. This is a topic that Paul Litch should look into.

 

Missing them, or again redefining what is restoration based on what is "detectable"? If books are being cleaned in some undetectable way by someone who doesn't work at CCS, and the covers are shrinking either as a side effect of this process or through a different process, then this is potentially a new issue. If CCS is cleaning them then shouldn't that be disclosed as restoration?

 

At this point, CGC can't really win, can they? ::

 

If the 9.0 copy of the book still had the dirt/staining/whatever it is on the back, people would be complaining that it was a gift grade, due to CGC colluding with CCS.

 

Now that it doesn't, it immediately means it's been wet-cleaned and put in a blue label slab, due to CGC colluding with CCS.

 

I think the next step is to just post up scans of random blue label CGC books, claim that they've been trimmed, and blame it on Matt slipping Litch $20 as he stands by his side, telling him how the books should grade out. Because, you know, unless Litch actually comes into this thread & confirms that this isn't how it works, how do we really know?

 

I'm not suggesting any dubious conspiracy but why can't you just look at this with an open mind and wait for some facts before hunkering in? I think it's good that we are noticing the work that is being done on these books as information is power. Since you brought it up, the "slipping" of $20 does sound ridiculous but how about taking a $8k book and making it into a $20k book for resale? I hope the removal of the foxing was done with some cutting edge non-restorative technology as that would be exciting news. However, if it's not then we may have an ugly situation like we have never seen on these boards before. Also, I'm not sure anyone from CCS would be too willing to hand out trade secrets on techniques and that is totally understable.

 

You don't find it slightly hypocritical to say "wait for some facts" when everyone seems to have decided this book was solvent cleaned & CGC either missed it or let it slide because it came from CCS - even though there's no proof for any of this?

[pickycollector]

I'm sure CGC will change their stance on this any day now. I mean, why wouldn't they be in favor of a practice created specifically to put their sister company at a disadvantage in the marketplace?

 

It's certainly a conflicted view to, on the one hand, consider pressing to be an innocuous treatment unworthy of continued consideration, and on the other hand consider it to be sufficiently negatively impactful to place CCS at a competitive disadvantage if they ever disclosed it.

Bingo!

[mschmidt]

I'm sure CGC will change their stance on this any day now. I mean, why wouldn't they be in favor of a practice created specifically to put their sister company at a disadvantage in the marketplace?

 

It's certainly a conflicted view to, on the one hand, consider pressing to be an innocuous treatment unworthy of continued consideration, and on the other hand consider it to be sufficiently negatively impactful to place CCS at a competitive disadvantage if they ever disclosed it.

 

If books coming from CCS receive any label notes that books which have received the exact same treatment from someone else (say CFP Comics or the Restoration Lab) don't, it puts CCS at a competitive disadvantage - there's nothing conflicted about that :thumbsup:

[Three-migration]

I miss Kenny

 

Pretty sure he's tired of people in the forums spreading misinformation, overreacting to restoration, and trashing his profession so he has mostly given up on this place. I don't blame him.

 

I hope you're wrong, but I really wouldn't be surprised if you're not.

It must be tough - being on both sides of a thing.

On one hand you're passionate about what you do and on the other, there are people who hate it and you have to defend yourself all the time.

 

I think we need to start taking the restoration craft a bit more seriously. I mean they're restoring King James Bibles and that's ok with the historians.

I think restoring funny books doesn't herald the end of the world.

 

I'm pretty sure he's just really busy.

 

 

I just figured that when CGC makes your name green you just naturally stop mixing with the plebs

[Silver Surfer]

Ironically enough that not "everyone" is suggesting that so maybe you shouldn't be doing the same on the flip side. I don't like the overreaction by some as it deflects from having a decent discussion.

[mschmidt]

Ironically enough that not "everyone" is suggesting that so maybe you shouldn't be doing the same on the flip side. I don't like the overreaction by some as it deflects from having a decent discussion.

 

Fair enough :thumbsup:

[Silver Surfer]

So these books are getting washed and pressed and showing up in blue label holders?

 

Hmmm. Very interesting.

 

I really hesitate to ask this but is it possible the CGC is simple missing these things ? If truly restored books are sitting in blue CGC labels we have a problem. This is a topic that Paul Litch should look into.

 

Missing them, or again redefining what is restoration based on what is "detectable"? If books are being cleaned in some undetectable way by someone who doesn't work at CCS, and the covers are shrinking either as a side effect of this process or through a different process, then this is potentially a new issue. If CCS is cleaning them then shouldn't that be disclosed as restoration?

 

At this point, CGC can't really win, can they? ::

 

If the 9.0 copy of the book still had the dirt/staining/whatever it is on the back, people would be complaining that it was a gift grade, due to CGC colluding with CCS.

 

Now that it doesn't, it immediately means it's been wet-cleaned and put in a blue label slab, due to CGC colluding with CCS.

 

I think the next step is to just post up scans of random blue label CGC books, claim that they've been trimmed, and blame it on Matt slipping Litch $20 as he stands by his side, telling him how the books should grade out. Because, you know, unless Litch actually comes into this thread & confirms that this isn't how it works, how do we really know?

 

I'm not suggesting any dubious conspiracy but why can't you just look at this with an open mind and wait for some facts before hunkering in? I think it's good that we are noticing the work that is being done on these books as information is power. Since you brought it up, the "slipping" of $20 does sound ridiculous but how about taking a $8k book and making it into a $20k book for resale? I hope the removal of the foxing was done with some cutting edge non-restorative technology as that would be exciting news. However, if it's not then we may have an ugly situation like we have never seen on these boards before. Also, I'm not sure anyone from CCS would be too willing to hand out trade secrets on techniques and that is totally understable.

 

You don't find it slightly hypocritical to say "wait for some facts" when everyone seems to have decided this book was solvent cleaned & CGC either missed it or let it slide because it came from CCS - even though there's no proof for any of this?

 

And why are you call me hypocritical? Shouldn't that comment be directed to others? It's misdirected commentary like this that fuels heated pointless debates that get personal. Maybe I should just refer to you as a CGC apologist, how would you like that?

[Three-migration]

I'm sure CGC will change their stance on this any day now. I mean, why wouldn't they be in favor of a practice created specifically to put their sister company at a disadvantage in the marketplace?

 

It's certainly a conflicted view to, on the one hand, consider pressing to be an innocuous treatment unworthy of continued consideration, and on the other hand consider it to be sufficiently negatively impactful to place CCS at a competitive disadvantage if they ever disclosed it.

 

If books coming from CCS receive any label notes that books which have received the exact same treatment from someone else (say CFP Comics or the Restoration Lab) don't, it puts CCS at a competitive disadvantage - there's nothing conflicted about that :thumbsup:

 

Wouldn't putting "Pressed by CCS" on the label be an inexpensive advertisement for lauding the accomplishments of CCS?