Cole Schave collection: face jobs?

[drbanner]

Just for kicks, take a look at the high grade early Marvels offered in the upcoming Pedigree auction, taking note of the appearance of the 1197/1198 books as compared to the others. It's like a Sesame Street "One of these is not like the Others" segment. In one camp you have old-school high grade, in the other you have CGC-manufactured high grade. It's like night and day.

[mysterio]

Obviously Matt has too big of a fan base to put any pressure on him via the these Boards.

Bob, I think we can still put pressure on Matt and CGC on the boards. In fact, I think it'll help the situation with the Costanza'd books.

 

But I also think it would fair to use a bit more caution with the books posted. For example, the last Spideys you pointed out were graded before this thread even started. And as somebody else pointed out, I don't think the ASM #17 is a clear cut case of cover shrinkage. No doubt, the other books are disturbing.

 

Matt did say CSS was trying to address the issue. I'm curious to see any books that have been through the CSS/CGC mill after this whole issue came to light. I know some of the Don and Maggie and Dr. Fate books might have gone through the treatment. But from a very quick look on my part, I don't see much on the Cole Schave level.

 

The ComicConnect Hulk #1 7.0 was on that level. A scan was posted earlier but I can't find it now.

[Ghost Town]

Obviously Matt has too big of a fan base to put any pressure on him via the these Boards.

Bob, I think we can still put pressure on Matt and CGC on the boards. In fact, I think it'll help the situation with the Costanza'd books.

 

But I also think it would fair to use a bit more caution with the books posted. For example, the last Spideys you pointed out were graded before this thread even started. And as somebody else pointed out, I don't think the ASM #17 is a clear cut case of cover shrinkage. No doubt, the other books are disturbing.

 

Matt did say CSS was trying to address the issue. I'm curious to see any books that have been through the CSS/CGC mill after this whole issue came to light. I know some of the Don and Maggie and Dr. Fate books might have gone through the treatment. But from a very quick look on my part, I don't see much on the Cole Schave level.

 

The ComicConnect Hulk #1 7.0 was on that level. A scan was posted earlier but I can't find it now.

Yeah, that wasn't good. But it was also graded before this thread started.

 

 

[Bomber-Bob]

 

But I also think it would fair to use a bit more caution with the books posted. For example, the last Spideys you pointed out were graded before this thread even started. And as somebody else pointed out, I don't think the ASM #17 is a clear cut case of cover shrinkage. No doubt, the other books are disturbing.

 

 

Having just received notice from Doug Schmell about an upcoming Grand Auction I took a peek. Immediately I saw many Constanza-ish looking books.

My point of displaying them here is .....

1) The Costanza effect was not limited to the Cole Shave collection. It is more widespread than I realized and is not the result of a single 'accident'.

2) This auction showed many examples of both an old school graded book with a new 'modern' look. Hence the Spidey 16 example. Is this the desirable look we want for our high grade books ?

 

You have a wonderful high grade collection and I understand your concerns. It's possible your collection may suffer some undeserved devaluation. Trust me, I have some concerns with my collection also. However, I think the most important thing we, as a community, can do is to get this to STOP. The risk to our collections be damned, we need to get this out in the open. Sorry.

[VintageComics]

The 8.0 from the scan looks great and better then the peek-through 9.6!

 

Cover translucency is mostly a creation of scan lighting. It almost NEVER exists in the real world. Pretty much any light-colored cover can display translucency under the right scanner settings.

 

Thanks for the info. I hardly ever sell comics and nothing ever in this price range (because I don't own any) or a good scanner. So I have relatively NO scanner/comics expirience.

 

Unfortuanetly I haven't bought any comics in a few years either except for the occasional cheap/used TPB strictly for reading.

 

You can view the effect yourself without a scanner with only a lamp--hold a light-colored cover under almost any light source and tilt it around, and you can eventually see through the cover a bit. I've only tried this myself with Silver Age books such as the one you were commenting on...not sure if it happens with cover stocks from later ages. Last book I remember looking at translucency with like that was my raw copy of X-Men #8 which has a white background.

 

I believe that the translucent effect happens because of the white interleaving paper. White reflects light, and when you look at a cover with an interleaving paper behind it, whatever is on the interior cover tends to reflect outward as though the interleaving paper is exaggerating that effect.

 

I believe that translucent effect is reduced when the interleaving paper is removed or not present.

 

 

[jimjum12]

The 8.0 from the scan looks great and better then the peek-through 9.6!

 

Cover translucency is mostly a creation of scan lighting. It almost NEVER exists in the real world. Pretty much any light-colored cover can display translucency under the right scanner settings.

 

Thanks for the info. I hardly ever sell comics and nothing ever in this price range (because I don't own any) or a good scanner. So I have relatively NO scanner/comics expirience.

 

Unfortuanetly I haven't bought any comics in a few years either except for the occasional cheap/used TPB strictly for reading.

 

You can view the effect yourself without a scanner with only a lamp--hold a light-colored cover under almost any light source and tilt it around, and you can eventually see through the cover a bit. I've only tried this myself with Silver Age books such as the one you were commenting on...not sure if it happens with cover stocks from later ages. Last book I remember looking at translucency with like that was my raw copy of X-Men #8 which has a white background.

 

I believe that the translucent effect happens because of the white interleaving paper. White reflects light, and when you look at a cover with an interleaving paper behind it, whatever is on the interior cover tends to reflect outward as though the interleaving paper is exaggerating that effect.

 

I believe that translucent effect is reduced when the interleaving paper is removed or not present.

 

 

I have noticed early silver age Marvels that had cover transluscency that were stored for a long time in home made saran wrap bags. I always thought there was a connection on a chemical level. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

[VintageComics]

I have noticed early silver age Marvels that had cover transluscency that were stored for a long time in home made saran wrap bags. I always thought there was a connection on a chemical level. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

 

You're right, and I wasn't very thorough. Apologies.

 

Yes, the translucency happens when the oils from the interior inks migrate to the cover, creating that oily, halo effect that you see on some books. That halo effect is then exaggerated by the white interleaving paper on slabbed books which causes the interior cover to reflect off the interleaving paper and outward through the cover.

[THE_BEYONDER]

I have noticed early silver age Marvels that had cover transluscency that were stored for a long time in home made saran wrap bags. I always thought there was a connection on a chemical level. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

 

You're right, and I wasn't very thorough. Apologies.

 

Yes, the translucency happens when the oils from the interior inks migrate to the cover, creating that oily, halo effect that you see on some books. That halo effect is then exaggerated by the white interleaving paper on slabbed books which causes the interior cover to reflect off the interleaving paper and outward through the cover.

 

It's called micro chamber paper.

 

Random tangent.

[Ghost Town]

 

But I also think it would fair to use a bit more caution with the books posted. For example, the last Spideys you pointed out were graded before this thread even started. And as somebody else pointed out, I don't think the ASM #17 is a clear cut case of cover shrinkage. No doubt, the other books are disturbing.

 

 

Having just received notice from Doug Schmell about an upcoming Grand Auction I took a peek. Immediately I saw many Constanza-ish looking books.

My point of displaying them here is .....

1) The Costanza effect was not limited to the Cole Shave collection. It is more widespread than I realized and is not the result of a single 'accident'.

2) This auction showed many examples of both an old school graded book with a new 'modern' look. Hence the Spidey 16 example. Is this the desirable look we want for our high grade books ?

 

You have a wonderful high grade collection and I understand your concerns. It's possible your collection may suffer some undeserved devaluation. Trust me, I have some concerns with my collection also. However, I think the most important thing we, as a community, can do is to get this to STOP. The risk to our collections be damned, we need to get this out in the open. Sorry.

No argument about it needing to stop. But it's entirely possible to continue the crusade against the shrunken covers without implicating books that might not deserve it.

 

Taking a don't a give damn attitude towards who might get harmed is not only unnecessary, it's a bit over-the-top.

 

That ASM #16 was graded on 08/22/2013, before this thread even started. Same with the ASM #13. And I'm not defending the way they look at all.

[jimjum12]

I have noticed early silver age Marvels that had cover transluscency that were stored for a long time in home made saran wrap bags. I always thought there was a connection on a chemical level. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

 

You're right, and I wasn't very thorough. Apologies.

 

Yes, the translucency happens when the oils from the interior inks migrate to the cover, creating that oily, halo effect that you see on some books. That halo effect is then exaggerated by the white interleaving paper on slabbed books which causes the interior cover to reflect off the interleaving paper and outward through the cover.

 

It's called micro chamber paper.

 

Random tangent.

 

...Random tangents are where the coolness resonates.... GOD BLESS....

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

[VintageComics]

Random tangent.

 

You haven't seen random tangents on internet threads in your time here since 2003?

[VintageComics]

That ASM #16 was graded on 08/22/2013, before this thread even started. Same with the ASM #13. And I'm not defending the way they look at all.

 

I was offered a book with a Costanza look that was graded nearly 2 years ago.

[Sqeggs]

I don't think anyone is claiming that the technique was invented this summer -- although it may have been. Books graded earlier that appear to be members of the Costanza family may have gotten that way as a result of pressing … or not.

[Ghost Town]

I don't think anyone is claiming that the technique was invented this summer -- although it may have been. Books graded earlier that appear to be members of the Costanza family may have gotten that way as a result of pressing … or not.

True. The only reason I brought up the dates is that Bob was saying the Costanza'd books need to stop. And I wholeheartedly agree. But pointing out books that were graded before this thread started isn't the best way to show that it hasn't stopped.

[Bomber-Bob]

No argument about it needing to stop. But it's entirely possible to continue the crusade against the shrunken covers without implicating books that might not deserve it.

Taking a don't a give damn attitude towards who might get harmed is not only unnecessary, it's a bit over-the-top.

 

I've seen many suspicous books recently and the only ones I listed here are from Schmell's auction. I do care about implicating the innocent. I really don't think this thread has gone over the top. We should also feel responsibility to the innocent buyers who are not aware of this manipulation and truly think they are buying something original. The fact that true collectors like you and I are arguing about this is not accomplishing anything, just adding to the sideshow. I had high hopes for this thread accomplishing something but alas, nada. Don't worry, I won't post any more pics.

[jimbo_707]

That ASM #16 was graded on 08/22/2013, before this thread even started. Same with the ASM #13. And I'm not defending the way they look at all.

 

I was offered a book with a Costanza look that was graded nearly 2 years ago.

I think it's safe to say that cover shrinkage has been going on as long pressing with moisture has been going on.

 

It's the nature of the material used for the covers. You can't expect to add heat and moisture and not have shrinkage.

 

I believe that a small amount of shrinkage occurs every time a book is pressed with moisture. In most cases, it's probably too slight to be readily apparent. I know that pressing was going on during the 90s, but I think they used to call the presses dry presses or dry mount presses back then, so I don't know that pre-humidifying the books was always part of the equation. If it was, covers were shrinking even back then, I guarantee it.

 

There is more newsprint to be seen now along the right edges of books - books from all eras - than there was 15 years ago. I believe it's more noticeable to me because I was out of the hobby from 2003 to 2012, when the CPR craze was ramping up.

 

Most likely, the process parameters at CCS were changed over the summer in an attempt to reduce the cycle time and push more books through the system. Instead of letting a book cure in, say, a 90% humidity environment for 8 hours, somebody probably had the bright idea to crank the humidity up to 100% a cut the cure time down to 4 hours (or whatever). That change in the process increased the shrinkage, but the shrinkage was never zero.

 

 

[jimbo_707]

PS - Having worked as a cost reduction engineer for the better part of a decade, I know how profiteers think.

 

CCS is not trying to get shrinkage to zero. They are trying to reduce it to something more palatable. Zero shrinkage would mean either not pressing at all or pressing with such a conservative process (probably sans humidity) that the benefits would be minimal and the cycle times great.

[Bomber-Bob]

 

Most likely, the process parameters at CCS were changed over the summer in an attempt to reduce the cycle time and push more books through the system. Instead of letting a book cure in, say, a 90% humidity environment for 8 hours, somebody probably had the bright idea to crank the humidity up to 100% a cut the cure time down to 4 hours (or whatever). That change in the process increased the shrinkage, but the shrinkage was never zero.

 

 

A good point. What we are seeing is a result of trying to decrease the cycle time. I remember when Matt first started doing onsite pressing he mentioned he was working on ways to reduce the process time. If you are correct, fat chance they will go back to the old cycle times, unless they note a serious decrease in business.

[joeypost]

That ASM #16 was graded on 08/22/2013, before this thread even started. Same with the ASM #13. And I'm not defending the way they look at all.

 

I was offered a book with a Costanza look that was graded nearly 2 years ago.

I think it's safe to say that cover shrinkage has been going on as long pressing with moisture has been going on.

 

It's the nature of the material used for the covers. You can't expect to add heat and moisture and not have shrinkage.

 

I believe that a small amount of shrinkage occurs every time a book is pressed with moisture. In most cases, it's probably too slight to be readily apparent. I know that pressing was going on during the 90s, but I think they used to call the presses dry presses or dry mount presses back then, so I don't know that pre-humidifying the books was always part of the equation. If it was, covers were shrinking even back then, I guarantee it.

 

There is more newsprint to be seen now along the right edges of books - books from all eras - than there was 15 years ago. I believe it's more noticeable to me because I was out of the hobby from 2003 to 2012, when the CPR craze was ramping up.

 

Most likely, the process parameters at CCS were changed over the summer in an attempt to reduce the cycle time and push more books through the system. Instead of letting a book cure in, say, a 90% humidity environment for 8 hours, somebody probably had the bright idea to crank the humidity up to 100% a cut the cure time down to 4 hours (or whatever). That change in the process increased the shrinkage, but the shrinkage was never zero.

 

 

Excessive moisture is most likely the catalyst for the shrinkage. Same way a water or moisture damaged book warps or shrinks as it dries out. Only difference here is the book is in a very controlled environment allowing the shrinkage to be uniform or almost uniform.

[fantastic_four]

I think it's safe to say that cover shrinkage has been going on as long pressing with moisture has been going on.

 

No it isn't, at least not with any identifiable consistency.

 

It's the nature of the material used for the covers. You can't expect to add heat and moisture and not have shrinkage.

 

Yes you can. As Joeypost pointed out and as many have pointed out about Matt's pressing until this year, they've both been doing it for years without seeing shrinkage. It's almost certainly excessive humidity that Matt has been trying recently. I've seen no evidence of this prior to this year or even the summer of this year.