Cole Schave collection: face jobs?

[fantastic_four]

How about the facejobs? If it wasn't for these boards raising these issues this kind of krap would be rampant.

 

What about them?

[originalisbest]

It's also disturbing that Matt Nelson's only comment was

 

What you’re seeing here is a result of the cover shrinking from exposure to humidity, and happens most often on early Silver Age Marvels because they were printed so poorly. The sides of the cover can shrink, although the top and bottom covers will not.

 

Something's wrong.

Yes, something's wrong...what we're seeing here is not due to "exposure to humidity" as if someone left the books outside of CGC's office in the humid Florida air for a month, it's a result of the improper application of moisture, heat, and pressure to these books by someone who didn't know what they were doing.

 

Matt placing blame on these screwups because the books "were printed so poorly" is just a Red Herring. As can be seen throughout this thread in the "before" pictures, the books looked great before being screwed around with.

 

You purposely misunderstand him, I think. "Poor" printing as it relates to stability of the paper, not the physical/aesthetic quality of the finished product.

[originalisbest]

Not sure what you expect them to say that could possibly please you.

 

There is nothing. This thread is like 2004 all over again when all the hubbub about pressing originally began around here, only now some people will be condemning any book with the interior poking out on the right and assume it's pressed. Guilty until proven innocent with no actual way to prove any book innocent just as there's no way to prove a book guilty of having been pressed in the first place lacking before-and-after scans. I have never once heard anyone complain in these forums about the way CGC grades these books with pokethrough on the right until this thread associated that pokethrough with pressing.

 

Hmm. I find I have to agree with you, ff.

[fantastic_four]

Matt placing blame on these screwups because the books "were printed so poorly" is just a Red Herring. As can be seen throughout this thread in the "before" pictures, the books looked great before being screwed around with.

 

He's not wrong though--pokethrough on the right is more prevalent on Silver Age books. Does anyone have scans of Bronze or newer books with pokethrough on the right? I'll browse through some books tonight and see if I find any.

[Silver Surfer]

How about the facejobs? If it wasn't for these boards raising these issues this kind of krap would be rampant.

 

What about them?

 

Oh nothing that was just a bunch of hubub.

[batman_fan]

It's both disturbing and surreal to see this develop, and to see/read people's responses.

 

The notion that plays like this would have happened without certification are looking more and more laughable.

 

This is especially the case when see gamers repeatedly trying their hand at pressing the same book multiple times for the sake of an incremental grade increase, paying zero regard to what they are doing to the book in the process.

 

For anyone who still can't fully understand why this would concern the community, the sad reality is that this could happen to any one of us.

 

We are all a before and after scan away from watching our prized books being discussed, examined under magnified levels of scrutiny, harsh criticism, ridiculed, and devalued, and we have to thank all the gravy train joyriders turning CGC into a wreckers yard where joyrides driven too rough go to die in a slab.

 

What I think is even funnier is the people that say trimming will never be accepted. Ultimately, it the number in the upper corner is bigger, its all good. (thumbs u

[originalisbest]

It's both disturbing and surreal to see this develop, and to see/read people's responses.

 

The notion that plays like this would have happened without certification are looking more and more laughable.

 

This is especially the case when see gamers repeatedly trying their hand at pressing the same book multiple times for the sake of an incremental grade increase, paying zero regard to what they are doing to the book in the process.

 

For anyone who still can't fully understand why this would concern the community, the sad reality is that this could happen to any one of us.

 

We are all a before and after scan away from watching our prized books being discussed, examined under magnified levels of scrutiny, harsh criticism, ridiculed, and devalued, and we have to thank all the gravy train joyriders turning CGC into a wreckers yard where joyrides driven too rough go to die in a slab.

 

 

What I think is even funnier is the people that say trimming will never be accepted. Ultimately, it the number in the upper corner is bigger, its all good. (thumbs u

 

Scary truth: Without before and after scans, microtrimming is likely still with us on some level. Doesn't mean it will be accepted, if/when it is discovered. I still laugh when viewing e. gerber's priceguide ad in the mid 80's, among the restorative techniques offered was a nice trim "for that fresh new look."

[batman_fan]

skypinkblu, regarding Church's collection, stacks, sheer numbers and the weight required for a "press" --

 

 

"The collection consisted of between 18,000 and 22,000 comic books" (so, your stacks of a mere 100, even over 15 years, might not be an accurate basis for comparison. And while books from the top of Church's stacks might not appear pressed, generally, the older, '38 through early '40s books nearer the bottom would be.)

 

In Chuck's words:

 

"I've often been asked what when through my mind when I first realized that I had stumbled across the greatest accumulation of Golden Age comics ever discovered. Frankly, even after 25 years have gone by, it still gives me chills to think about staring at that huge closet stacked to the rafters (we can assume stacks numbering in the thousands, not stopping at 100) with mint Golden Age comics. "

 

That whole Church books were in big stacks so they are all pressed BS has long since been dispelled. Not even remotely close to the pressure, temperature, and humidity of pressing.

[drbanner]

...pokethrough on the right is more prevalent on Silver Age books.

Right, especially after someone screwed them up by trying to squeeze that extra 0.2 out of them once, twice, thrice, and more...

[originalisbest]

skypinkblu, regarding Church's collection, stacks, sheer numbers and the weight required for a "press" --

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/deconstructing-roy-lichtenstein/6834299310/

 

"The collection consisted of between 18,000 and 22,000 comic books" (so, your stacks of a mere 100, even over 15 years, might not be an accurate basis for comparison. And while books from the top of Church's stacks might not appear pressed, generally, the older, '38 through early '40s books nearer the bottom would be.)

 

In Chuck's words:

 

"I've often been asked what when through my mind when I first realized that I had stumbled across the greatest accumulation of Golden Age comics ever discovered. Frankly, even after 25 years have gone by, it still gives me chills to think about staring at that huge closet stacked to the rafters (we can assume stacks numbering in the thousands, not stopping at 100) with mint Golden Age comics. "

 

That whole Church books were in big stacks so they are all pressed BS has long since been dispelled. Not even remotely close to the pressure, temperature, and humidity of pressing.

 

Well, not that I distrust the validity of your rebuttal, but you wouldn't care to flesh it out a little bit for us? Like a for instance: can you, absent any before/after scans, conclusively tell when a book has been pressed and when it has not? Also: am I understanding you, that a book kept unmoved at the bottom of a 7-foot high stack of books for approximately 40 years, would not have a pressed appearance?

 

Thus far, I am unconvinced.

[Silver Surfer]

Sure books shrink naturally over time, yeah that's it, everything is fine nothing to see here.

[thehumantorch]

It's both disturbing and surreal to see this develop, and to see/read people's responses.

 

The notion that plays like this would have happened without certification are looking more and more laughable.

 

This is especially the case when see gamers repeatedly trying their hand at pressing the same book multiple times for the sake of an incremental grade increase, paying zero regard to what they are doing to the book in the process.

 

For anyone who still can't fully understand why this would concern the community, the sad reality is that this could happen to any one of us.

 

We are all a before and after scan away from watching our prized books being discussed, examined under magnified levels of scrutiny, harsh criticism, ridiculed, and devalued, and we have to thank all the gravy train joyriders turning CGC into a wreckers yard where joyrides driven too rough go to die in a slab.

 

It's also disturbing that Matt Nelson's only comment was

 

What you’re seeing here is a result of the cover shrinking from exposure to humidity, and happens most often on early Silver Age Marvels because they were printed so poorly. The sides of the cover can shrink, although the top and bottom covers will not.

 

and Plitch's only comment was

 

Over the years, CGC has seen a number of books with the covers falling short of the right edge, especially early Marvel issues. Sometimes it occurs naturally over time or possibly from printing, and other times from pressing or restoration.

 

We consider all factors (including those above) when determining the grade of each book. As normal, when the grading team looked at these books we did not know who submitted them or if they were submitted before; we did not know if they were pressed; we grade the book that is in front of us. We feel the grades on these books are justified. All of the graders who saw these books were uniform in their grades.

 

Humidity causes shrinkage and graders grade the book in front of them and the grades are justified. The comments just don't address our concerns and instead seem to be designed to calm the waters.

 

Something's wrong.

 

Sorry your concerns weren't addressed. Mine were? Not sure what you expect them to say that could possibly please you.

 

And that's the problem. What if there is nothing that they could say that would please us?

[Dano]

skypinkblu, regarding Church's collection, stacks, sheer numbers and the weight required for a "press" --

 

 

"The collection consisted of between 18,000 and 22,000 comic books" (so, your stacks of a mere 100, even over 15 years, might not be an accurate basis for comparison. And while books from the top of Church's stacks might not appear pressed, generally, the older, '38 through early '40s books nearer the bottom would be.)

 

In Chuck's words:

 

"I've often been asked what when through my mind when I first realized that I had stumbled across the greatest accumulation of Golden Age comics ever discovered. Frankly, even after 25 years have gone by, it still gives me chills to think about staring at that huge closet stacked to the rafters (we can assume stacks numbering in the thousands, not stopping at 100) with mint Golden Age comics. "

 

That whole Church books were in big stacks so they are all pressed BS has long since been dispelled. Not even remotely close to the pressure, temperature, and humidity of pressing.

 

Well, not that I distrust the validity of your rebuttal, but you wouldn't care to flesh it out a little bit for us? Like a for instance: can you, absent any before/after scans, conclusively tell when a book has been pressed and when it has not? Also: am I understanding you, that a book kept unmoved at the bottom of a 7-foot high stack of books for approximately 40 years, would not have a pressed appearance?

 

Thus far, I am unconvinced.

 

Dude, you are tenacious with your protests! Congrats!!!

 

Dan

[originalisbest]

skypinkblu, regarding Church's collection, stacks, sheer numbers and the weight required for a "press" --

 

 

"The collection consisted of between 18,000 and 22,000 comic books" (so, your stacks of a mere 100, even over 15 years, might not be an accurate basis for comparison. And while books from the top of Church's stacks might not appear pressed, generally, the older, '38 through early '40s books nearer the bottom would be.)

 

In Chuck's words:

 

"I've often been asked what when through my mind when I first realized that I had stumbled across the greatest accumulation of Golden Age comics ever discovered. Frankly, even after 25 years have gone by, it still gives me chills to think about staring at that huge closet stacked to the rafters (we can assume stacks numbering in the thousands, not stopping at 100) with mint Golden Age comics. "

 

That whole Church books were in big stacks so they are all pressed BS has long since been dispelled. Not even remotely close to the pressure, temperature, and humidity of pressing.

 

Well, not that I distrust the validity of your rebuttal, but you wouldn't care to flesh it out a little bit for us? Like a for instance: can you, absent any before/after scans, conclusively tell when a book has been pressed and when it has not? Also: am I understanding you, that a book kept unmoved at the bottom of a 7-foot high stack of books for approximately 40 years, would not have a pressed appearance?

 

Thus far, I am unconvinced.

 

Dude, you are tenacious with your protests! Congrats!!!

 

Dan

 

I enjoy being tenacious, but also admit it when my info is wrong! A bit more searching about the Church books, and I see Chuck elsewhere described stacks of 75-100 books high per stack, so my concept of stacks even taller appears to be erroneous?

 

However, I have seen various Church books at cons pre-CGC days, and the various examples I held certainly appeared "properly pressed" according to my perception. Now of course they could have been pressed by various means since discovery in '78, I wasn't there when they were first "unveiled." But, having seen them pre-CGC days, that would appear to counter the main motive (per comicwiz) for having had them pressed in any way.

 

Would like to learn more about why my notion of Church books having a pressed nature when examined in person is wrong -- but not sure an "because I've heard it was disproven long ago" is going to sway me.

[batman_fan]

skypinkblu, regarding Church's collection, stacks, sheer numbers and the weight required for a "press" --

 

 

"The collection consisted of between 18,000 and 22,000 comic books" (so, your stacks of a mere 100, even over 15 years, might not be an accurate basis for comparison. And while books from the top of Church's stacks might not appear pressed, generally, the older, '38 through early '40s books nearer the bottom would be.)

 

In Chuck's words:

 

"I've often been asked what when through my mind when I first realized that I had stumbled across the greatest accumulation of Golden Age comics ever discovered. Frankly, even after 25 years have gone by, it still gives me chills to think about staring at that huge closet stacked to the rafters (we can assume stacks numbering in the thousands, not stopping at 100) with mint Golden Age comics. "

 

That whole Church books were in big stacks so they are all pressed BS has long since been dispelled. Not even remotely close to the pressure, temperature, and humidity of pressing.

 

 

 

Well, not that I distrust the validity of your rebuttal, but you wouldn't care to flesh it out a little bit for us? Like a for instance: can you, absent any before/after scans, conclusively tell when a book has been pressed and when it has not? Also: am I understanding you, that a book kept unmoved at the bottom of a 7-foot high stack of books for approximately 40 years, would not have a pressed appearance?

 

Thus far, I am unconvinced.

 

So does a new book I bought 40 years ago that was never left in a stack 7 feet tall or pressed at 1200lbs, 80% humidity, and 180 degrees but rather stored loosely in a small cardboard box. Somehow you seem to think the only way books can be nice is if they are pressed or stored in huge stacks or tightly packed boxes. Not the case. And FYI, a tightly packed box is going to assert less than 20lbs of pressed.

[batman_fan]

skypinkblu, regarding Church's collection, stacks, sheer numbers and the weight required for a "press" --

 

 

"The collection consisted of between 18,000 and 22,000 comic books" (so, your stacks of a mere 100, even over 15 years, might not be an accurate basis for comparison. And while books from the top of Church's stacks might not appear pressed, generally, the older, '38 through early '40s books nearer the bottom would be.)

 

In Chuck's words:

 

"I've often been asked what when through my mind when I first realized that I had stumbled across the greatest accumulation of Golden Age comics ever discovered. Frankly, even after 25 years have gone by, it still gives me chills to think about staring at that huge closet stacked to the rafters (we can assume stacks numbering in the thousands, not stopping at 100) with mint Golden Age comics. "

 

That whole Church books were in big stacks so they are all pressed BS has long since been dispelled. Not even remotely close to the pressure, temperature, and humidity of pressing.

 

Well, not that I distrust the validity of your rebuttal, but you wouldn't care to flesh it out a little bit for us? Like a for instance: can you, absent any before/after scans, conclusively tell when a book has been pressed and when it has not? Also: am I understanding you, that a book kept unmoved at the bottom of a 7-foot high stack of books for approximately 40 years, would not have a pressed appearance?

 

Thus far, I am unconvinced.

 

Dude, you are tenacious with your protests! Congrats!!!

 

Dan

 

I enjoy being tenacious, but also admit it when my info is wrong! A bit more searching about the Church books, and I see Chuck elsewhere described stacks of 75-100 books high per stack, so my concept of stacks even taller appears to be erroneous?

 

However, I have seen various Church books at cons pre-CGC days, and the various examples I held certainly appeared "properly pressed" according to my perception. Now of course they could have been pressed by various means since discovery in '78, I wasn't there when they were first "unveiled." But, having seen them pre-CGC days, that would appear to counter the main motive (per comicwiz) for having had them pressed in any way.

 

Would like to learn more about why my notion of Church books having a pressed nature when examined in person is wrong -- but not sure an "because I've heard it was disproven long ago" is going to sway me.

 

FYI, stacks of that size would be asserting less than 20lbs on the lowest book.

[originalisbest]

It's both disturbing and surreal to see this develop, and to see/read people's responses.

 

The notion that plays like this would have happened without certification are looking more and more laughable.

 

This is especially the case when see gamers repeatedly trying their hand at pressing the same book multiple times for the sake of an incremental grade increase, paying zero regard to what they are doing to the book in the process.

 

For anyone who still can't fully understand why this would concern the community, the sad reality is that this could happen to any one of us.

 

We are all a before and after scan away from watching our prized books being discussed, examined under magnified levels of scrutiny, harsh criticism, ridiculed, and devalued, and we have to thank all the gravy train joyriders turning CGC into a wreckers yard where joyrides driven too rough go to die in a slab.

 

It's also disturbing that Matt Nelson's only comment was

 

What you’re seeing here is a result of the cover shrinking from exposure to humidity, and happens most often on early Silver Age Marvels because they were printed so poorly. The sides of the cover can shrink, although the top and bottom covers will not.

 

and Plitch's only comment was

 

Over the years, CGC has seen a number of books with the covers falling short of the right edge, especially early Marvel issues. Sometimes it occurs naturally over time or possibly from printing, and other times from pressing or restoration.

 

We consider all factors (including those above) when determining the grade of each book. As normal, when the grading team looked at these books we did not know who submitted them or if they were submitted before; we did not know if they were pressed; we grade the book that is in front of us. We feel the grades on these books are justified. All of the graders who saw these books were uniform in their grades.

 

Humidity causes shrinkage and graders grade the book in front of them and the grades are justified. The comments just don't address our concerns and instead seem to be designed to calm the waters.

 

Something's wrong.

 

Sorry your concerns weren't addressed. Mine were? Not sure what you expect them to say that could possibly please you.

 

And that's the problem. What if there is nothing that they could say that would please us?

 

Then we accept it and remain silent, don't accept it and complain vociferously, or take our ball and go home. Probably some other options too, but that should just about cover it.

[originalisbest]

skypinkblu, regarding Church's collection, stacks, sheer numbers and the weight required for a "press" --

 

 

"The collection consisted of between 18,000 and 22,000 comic books" (so, your stacks of a mere 100, even over 15 years, might not be an accurate basis for comparison. And while books from the top of Church's stacks might not appear pressed, generally, the older, '38 through early '40s books nearer the bottom would be.)

 

In Chuck's words:

 

"I've often been asked what when through my mind when I first realized that I had stumbled across the greatest accumulation of Golden Age comics ever discovered. Frankly, even after 25 years have gone by, it still gives me chills to think about staring at that huge closet stacked to the rafters (we can assume stacks numbering in the thousands, not stopping at 100) with mint Golden Age comics. "

 

That whole Church books were in big stacks so they are all pressed BS has long since been dispelled. Not even remotely close to the pressure, temperature, and humidity of pressing.

 

 

 

Well, not that I distrust the validity of your rebuttal, but you wouldn't care to flesh it out a little bit for us? Like a for instance: can you, absent any before/after scans, conclusively tell when a book has been pressed and when it has not? Also: am I understanding you, that a book kept unmoved at the bottom of a 7-foot high stack of books for approximately 40 years, would not have a pressed appearance?

 

Thus far, I am unconvinced.

 

So does a new book I bought 40 years ago that was never left in a stack 7 feet tall or pressed at 1200lbs, 80% humidity, and 180 degrees but rather stored loosely in a small cardboard box. Somehow you seem to think the only way books can be nice is if they are pressed or stored in huge stacks or tightly packed boxes. Not the case. And FYI, a tightly packed box is going to assert less than 20lbs of pressed.

 

I don't think a book has to be pressed to be nice at all, but I don't assume a book once pressed automatically becomes not nice either. And absent personal knowledge of a book's history, that one can tell how it came about to a "pressed" appearance, IF it has one.

[joecgcmaniac]

It's also disturbing that Matt Nelson's only comment was

 

What you’re seeing here is a result of the cover shrinking from exposure to humidity, and happens most often on early Silver Age Marvels because they were printed so poorly. The sides of the cover can shrink, although the top and bottom covers will not.

 

Something's wrong.

Yes, something's wrong...what we're seeing here is not due to "exposure to humidity" as if someone left the books outside of CGC's office in the humid Florida air for a month, it's a result of the improper application of moisture, heat, and pressure to these books by someone who didn't know what they were doing.

 

Matt placing blame on these screwups because the books "were printed so poorly" is just a Red Herring. As can be seen throughout this thread in the "before" pictures, the books looked great before being screwed around with.

 

+1

 

We're supposed to believe that the cover barely shrank over a 50 year time period, yet in a 4 month time period, the cover shrank that much?

[originalisbest]

skypinkblu, regarding Church's collection, stacks, sheer numbers and the weight required for a "press" --

 

 

"The collection consisted of between 18,000 and 22,000 comic books" (so, your stacks of a mere 100, even over 15 years, might not be an accurate basis for comparison. And while books from the top of Church's stacks might not appear pressed, generally, the older, '38 through early '40s books nearer the bottom would be.)

 

In Chuck's words:

 

"I've often been asked what when through my mind when I first realized that I had stumbled across the greatest accumulation of Golden Age comics ever discovered. Frankly, even after 25 years have gone by, it still gives me chills to think about staring at that huge closet stacked to the rafters (we can assume stacks numbering in the thousands, not stopping at 100) with mint Golden Age comics. "

 

That whole Church books were in big stacks so they are all pressed BS has long since been dispelled. Not even remotely close to the pressure, temperature, and humidity of pressing.

 

Well, not that I distrust the validity of your rebuttal, but you wouldn't care to flesh it out a little bit for us? Like a for instance: can you, absent any before/after scans, conclusively tell when a book has been pressed and when it has not? Also: am I understanding you, that a book kept unmoved at the bottom of a 7-foot high stack of books for approximately 40 years, would not have a pressed appearance?

 

Thus far, I am unconvinced.

 

Dude, you are tenacious with your protests! Congrats!!!

 

Dan

 

I enjoy being tenacious, but also admit it when my info is wrong! A bit more searching about the Church books, and I see Chuck elsewhere described stacks of 75-100 books high per stack, so my concept of stacks even taller appears to be erroneous?

 

However, I have seen various Church books at cons pre-CGC days, and the various examples I held certainly appeared "properly pressed" according to my perception. Now of course they could have been pressed by various means since discovery in '78, I wasn't there when they were first "unveiled." But, having seen them pre-CGC days, that would appear to counter the main motive (per comicwiz) for having had them pressed in any way.

 

Would like to learn more about why my notion of Church books having a pressed nature when examined in person is wrong -- but not sure an "because I've heard it was disproven long ago" is going to sway me.

 

FYI, stacks of that size would be asserting less than 20lbs on the lowest book.

 

If only I had been there in person, I'd know for sure how they looked when first discovered. But I was only about 7, and in the wrong section of the country.