Cole Schave collection: face jobs?

[jimbo_707]

A few (I think!) indisputable points:

 

1. Nearly all collectors prefer books without page fanning and would prefer the lower grade (pre-press) books to the higher grade (post-press) books shown in this thread.

 

2. Because CGC doesn't downgrade for page fanning, dealers have been having books pressed multiple times, which for SA Marvels appears likely to result in page fanning.

 

3. Although Matt Nelson indicates his shop is taking steps to avoid page fanning, other pressers may not follow suit. At this point, with CGC not downgrading for page fanning, they have no clear incentive to.

 

The (disputable) conclusion:

 

Unless CGC changes its policy on page fanning, increasing numbers of high-grade SA Marvels that do not currently have this defect will eventually have it pressed into them.

 

I would like to argue for using a term other than fanning. There is a difference between when each page sticks out slightly more than the one behind it as spine roll is introduced (what has traditionally been called fanning) and what we're seeing here, i.e. all of the interior pages still positioned more or less correctly with respect to each other but sticking out beyond the cover.

 

I think I had been using the term prolapsed pages, but really the defect is of the cover, not the pages, so it should simply be described as what it is, a shrunken cover.

[Bomber-Bob]

However, on the topic of pressed shrinkage, it seems they are not willing to work with us or offer a grading solution.

 

I've seen plenty of books with shorter covers - JIM #83 and FF #12 seem to be the most common books (possibly the same roll of paper used back in the day?) that exhibit that problem. I remember constant threads over the years with people specifically asking if the books were trimmed.

 

What would the grading solution be, especially if they've already graded books like this in the past?

 

The CGC solution for tape ignored the fact that they already graded books like this in the past. I don't think that fact alone should prevent a grading solution.

Analogous to the the telltale signs of the reverse spine rolls, I believe there are telltale signs for the pressed shrinkage. It's been mentioned that 'naturally' this only occurs on miswrapped books = the 2cent 'ARVEL' effect.

[500Club]

Here's a Facejob that is comparable to those identified as being Wilson-ized a few months back.

 

some points of observation regarding book traceability.

 

– Acquired June 16, 2013 via Heritage Auctions.

 

– Remanufactured using the Facejob technique.

 

– Certified anew August 14, 2013.

 

– Liquidated by Eides Entertainment via eBay September 8, 2013.

 

This facejobbed collectable appeared after the CGC reverse spine-roll proclamation, post investigative study concerning the Wilsonization of Avengers #1 et al.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just as an aside....

If CCS pressed this, after having the Wilson's send in all those books for analysis, just to copy their technique,.....

Well played. well played.

 

AND after telling everyone in CG that the Reverse Spine Roll technique would be penalized as a bad press

Well played. well played.

[MrBedrock]

Am I the only one that went through all of the offerings from this collection in the last Pedigree auction?

 

While the scans are no longer available on the Pedigree website, the shrunken covers were on a high proportion of the SA that was pressed and graded recently. Essentially all of the books that were part of the 119771... submission suffered from exposed interior pages. It wasn't a problem with the books from the collection that had been graded awhile ago.

All 68 of them?

 

No, Richard, many of Cole's books were slabbed and graded much earlier.

 

The 119771 submission included JIM #83, 88, and 93, TOS #39, Avengers #4, and ASM #10 and 14, among others.

I'm sorry if these questions sound inane but in the interest of getting it close to exact...about how many books were in this submission and what percentage of them had shrinkage?

 

Without current access to the scans, I can't answer you except with estimates: I recall seeing about a dozen books from this submission, and they all had shrunken covers.

 

I looked through all of the books before the auction was taken down, and this is what I found:

 

67 books listed as being from the Cole Schave collection (I'm not sure if I missed one, or if one just wasn't in the auction)

 

51 books were from the 119771 submission:

- 1197715001 - 5008, 1197715013 - 5025 (Express tier)

- 1197716001 - 6029 (Walk-through tier)

- 1197717001 (Standard tier)

 

The other 16 were from other submissions.

 

I didn't save any scans, but I don't recall seeing any of the 119771 books that did not have a shrunken cover.

 

Thanks. That's exactly what I wanted to know. (thumbs u

[DeliBebek]

I can understand if everyone hated a particular defect and then someone started introducing the defect for a grade bump but the fact that nobody really complained about it before should be taken into account in my opinion.

 

Roy, I remember earlier this year passing on an Avengers 1 with a fanned right edge. It was just too pronounced, too strong, I didn't like it. I didn't 'complain' about it because I hardly ever saw this defect to this degree(size and quantity) until recently. Now, suddenly, they seem abundant.

 

I didn't like it either, but I too hadn't given it much thought until that thread started the discussion.

 

I remember when I bought my first new Chrysler minivan I thought it was unique. Then I started seeing them everywhere.

 

Exactly the same thing here, IMO. Now that people have been made aware of fanned pages, they jump out at the viewer when scrolling through a bunch of scans.

 

If there were a library with scans and with dates of grading, it would be easy to see if the number of peekaboo's increased in higher grades.recently

 

library would help ID stolen books...help verify the census...

 

and the graders need never see it, so they could stay impartial.

 

Yes, I understand I'm fantasizing,

The technology is available to compare scans digitally, narrowing the pool before human eyes even have to look at them. It requires scanning each book before the grading process, or before the pressing process if that's included, as well as afterward. For the grading service, the before and after scanning has the added benefit of reducing the liability of the service in the rare event that a submitter claims damages by the service.

 

The startup cost for introducing that sort of system into the process makes that step difficult to take. However, in the end it's about consumer confidence and an optimal amount of transparency between the grading service and its purveyors. It's worth doing.

[slym2none]

As fantasticfour has pointed out in this thread, the uprising of butthurt has come about because of the role of recent pressings in the shrunken-cover "beyond a certain degree" amount. If pressing had no role in the appearance of a shrunken cover book with pages peeking out, you wouldn't (and didn't) ever hear "boo" about what a travesty has befallen such books. Not a peep.

 

This is wrong in two ways. First, there is justifiable discomfort over the fact that recent CCS pressing work is causing the covers of early SA Marvels to shrink to an unprecedented degree. Second, there is justifiable discomfort over the fact that CGC refuses to consider the fruits of bad press jobs in the form of markedly shrunken covers and impacted staples as being defects worthy of numerical downgrade.

 

If you think that collectors have seen a slew of early SA Marvels before with this much of the interior pages showing, then you're in denial. That this ugly defect is being caused by poor pressing and is being ignored by CGC when assigning grades adds to the recognition that this is a new and significant problem worthy of discussion.

 

It's your business if you think the shrunken 9.6 version of JIM #93 in the first post is nicer than the unpressed 9.2 version of the book, but I bet you'd be in the minority.

 

Bob don't even bother with this guy. We keep repeating the above highlighted issue but its being avoided like the plague. Personally I think that shrinking or tightening of the covers is a handy solution/technique when your stretching the life out of the paper around the staples to achieve these twisted covers. However, I doubt that anyone involved with pressing these books would ever want to admit that now.

 

Certainly, don't bother reading my replies; don't even bother. You look much more dignified with your fingers in your earholes.

 

Better than having one's head up one's .

 

Sneak a peek in the mirror as soon as you remove yours. Soap'll help (maybe.)

 

You took that awfully personal. I never mentioned you, was only referring to how dignified one looks with their fingers in their ears versus having one's head up one's .

 

But nice to know where you stand.

 

(thumbs u

 

 

 

-slym

[fantastic_four]

A few (I think!) indisputable points:

 

1. Nearly all collectors prefer books without page fanning and would prefer the lower grade (pre-press) books to the higher grade (post-press) books shown in this thread.

 

2. Because CGC doesn't downgrade for page fanning, dealers have been having books pressed multiple times, which for SA Marvels appears likely to result in page fanning.

 

3. Although Matt Nelson indicates his shop is taking steps to avoid page fanning, other pressers may not follow suit. At this point, with CGC not downgrading for page fanning, they have no clear incentive to.

 

The (disputable) conclusion:

 

Unless CGC changes its policy on page fanning, increasing numbers of high-grade SA Marvels that do not currently have this defect will eventually have it pressed into them.

 

I have seen no evidence that your points 2 and 3 are correct--earlier in the thread Joey clearly stated he has never seen a cover shrink. Nobody has established it happening before very recently. The presser of the Cole Schave books with shrinkage appears to have done something different--my guess is cranking up the heat and humidity higher.

 

Joey, did you ever get a chance to try to duplicate the shrinkage effect?

[fingfangfoom]

Am I the only one that went through all of the offerings from this collection in the last Pedigree auction?

 

While the scans are no longer available on the Pedigree website, the shrunken covers were on a high proportion of the SA that was pressed and graded recently. Essentially all of the books that were part of the 119771... submission suffered from exposed interior pages. It wasn't a problem with the books from the collection that had been graded awhile ago.

All 68 of them?

 

No, Richard, many of Cole's books were slabbed and graded much earlier.

 

The 119771 submission included JIM #83, 88, and 93, TOS #39, Avengers #4, and ASM #10 and 14, among others.

I'm sorry if these questions sound inane but in the interest of getting it close to exact...about how many books were in this submission and what percentage of them had shrinkage?

 

Without current access to the scans, I can't answer you except with estimates: I recall seeing about a dozen books from this submission, and they all had shrunken covers.

 

I looked through all of the books before the auction was taken down, and this is what I found:

 

67 books listed as being from the Cole Schave collection (I'm not sure if I missed one, or if one just wasn't in the auction)

 

51 books were from the 119771 submission:

- 1197715001 - 5008, 1197715013 - 5025 (Express tier)

- 1197716001 - 6029 (Walk-through tier)

- 1197717001 (Standard tier)

 

The other 16 were from other submissions.

 

I didn't save any scans, but I don't recall seeing any of the 119771 books that did not have a shrunken cover.

 

Before I go back to lurking, I'd just like to say thank you to the board members that brought this problem to light. I was going to bid on the Avengers #4 and I didn't notice the exposed pages due to the white cover. I don't know whether I would have won or just made it more expensive for the winner, but I would have been very disappointed if I had won and a Constanza book showed up at my doorstep.

 

I just wanted to take a second and thank you for taking the time to record this information.

 

I too had shown interest in a book, a JIM pedigree copy, however my previously stored scan alerted me early on that the book had been altered.

Since i am currently focused solely on JIM/Thor pedigrees i was not aware the extent of the damage done to other Cole books until Bob started this thread.

 

To those that have spent much time and effort gathering information, before and after scans, thank you as well.

 

To the few that for some reason have no issue with the shrunken covers and the mystifying corresponding grades assigned to books that clearly have lost their visual appeal, feel free to collect and add these books to your personal collections and take them out of circulation. To endlessly post how you don't understand where the problem lies is disingenuous at best and to continually attempt to deflect away from the topic at hand by introducing non related issues calls into question your motives, and, in the end, your character. The books have been structurally altered, it is plain to see, and the eye appeal the books once displayed is lost.

 

To the individual responsible for the damage done to the books, and specifically pedigree copies in general, please stop. You have either made a technical error that you refuse to acknowledge or you have made an error in judgement that unfortunately was rewarded by CGC. How CGC graders came to the final conclusion when visually grading these books in hand i will never know and will not speculate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[drbanner]

To the individual responsible for the damage done to the books, and specifically pedigree copies in general, please stop. You have either made a technical error that you refuse to acknowledge or you have made an error in judgement that unfortunately was rewarded by CGC. How CGC graders came to the final conclusion when visually grading these books in hand i will never know and will not speculate.

This is where the inherent conflict of interest in CGC pressing and grading books all under one roof becomes a real conflict of interest. CGC screwed up pressing these books, and then turned a blind eye to the damage they caused when grading them, taking no responsibility for their actions and the low road as far as doing the right thing. Plausible deniability indeed. If Matt was pressing books in Texas under Classics Inc, it's a whole different ballgame.

 

It wasn't John Wilkes Booth that killed Lincoln, it was the density and high velocity of the chunk of lead.

[thirdgreenham]

I can understand if everyone hated a particular defect and then someone started introducing the defect for a grade bump but the fact that nobody really complained about it before should be taken into account in my opinion.

 

Roy, I remember earlier this year passing on an Avengers 1 with a fanned right edge. It was just too pronounced, too strong, I didn't like it. I didn't 'complain' about it because I hardly ever saw this defect to this degree(size and quantity) until recently. Now, suddenly, they seem abundant.

 

I didn't like it either, but I too hadn't given it much thought until that thread started the discussion.

 

I remember when I bought my first new Chrysler minivan I thought it was unique. Then I started seeing them everywhere.

 

Exactly the same thing here, IMO. Now that people have been made aware of fanned pages, they jump out at the viewer when scrolling through a bunch of scans.

 

If you ever, even for but a moment, thought your Chrysler minivan was unique, then you, sir, are bat-spit crazy.

[joeypost]

A few (I think!) indisputable points:

 

1. Nearly all collectors prefer books without page fanning and would prefer the lower grade (pre-press) books to the higher grade (post-press) books shown in this thread.

 

2. Because CGC doesn't downgrade for page fanning, dealers have been having books pressed multiple times, which for SA Marvels appears likely to result in page fanning.

 

3. Although Matt Nelson indicates his shop is taking steps to avoid page fanning, other pressers may not follow suit. At this point, with CGC not downgrading for page fanning, they have no clear incentive to.

 

The (disputable) conclusion:

 

Unless CGC changes its policy on page fanning, increasing numbers of high-grade SA Marvels that do not currently have this defect will eventually have it pressed into them.

 

I have seen no evidence that your points 2 and 3 are correct--earlier in the thread Joey clearly stated he has never seen a cover shrink. Nobody has established it happening before very recently. The presser of the Cole Schave books with shrinkage appears to have done something different--my guess is cranking up the heat and humidity higher.

 

Joey, did you ever get a chance to try to duplicate the shrinkage effect?

 

Not yet. I have a candidate to work on and will take scans each step of the way.

[THE_BEYONDER]

To the individual responsible for the damage done to the books, and specifically pedigree copies in general, please stop. You have either made a technical error that you refuse to acknowledge or you have made an error in judgement that unfortunately was rewarded by CGC. How CGC graders came to the final conclusion when visually grading these books in hand i will never know and will not speculate.

This is where the inherent conflict of interest in CGC pressing and grading books all under one roof becomes a real conflict of interest. CGC screwed up pressing these books, and then turned a blind eye to the damage they caused when grading them, taking no responsibility for their actions and the low road as far as doing the right thing. Plausible deniability indeed. If Matt was pressing books in Texas under Classics Inc, it's a whole different ballgame.

 

It wasn't John Wilkes Booth that killed Lincoln, it was the density and high velocity of the chunk of lead.

 

[VintageComics]

If you ever, even for but a moment, thought your Chrysler minivan was unique, then you, sir, are bat-spit crazy.

 

I thought the sport version was rare in white.

 

[vane]

Can anyone give me a synopsis (A Run Down) on this thread?

 

What is page fanning?

[thirdgreenham]

If you ever, even for but a moment, thought your Chrysler minivan was unique, then you, sir, are bat-spit crazy.

 

I thought the sport version was rare in white.

 

 

[VintageComics]

To the few that for some reason have no issue with the shrunken covers and the mystifying corresponding grades assigned to books that clearly have lost their visual appeal, feel free to collect and add these books to your personal collections and take them out of circulation. To endlessly post how you don't understand where the problem lies is disingenuous at best and to continually attempt to deflect away from the topic at hand by introducing non related issues calls into question your motives, and, in the end, your character. The books have been structurally altered, it is plain to see, and the eye appeal the books once displayed is lost.

 

 

This portion of your post is not an accurate characterization of what "the few" have been saying. It's an emotional attack on a few people who would rather have a discussion on the topic than a witch burning or a finger pointing session. And to be fair to witches and fingers, if they deserve to be burned then by all means go ahead, but nobody has endlessly posted a lack of understanding or anything disingenuous. If anything, everyone has repeatedly been saying how they don't agree with the practice of damaging books to increase grades but a few have agreed that they can also understand how it came to be.

 

I just spent a few minutes flipping through old scans of books I've sold through the years and many Marvels from '63 - '68 have either the effect of fanned pages (most common in '67 - '68 books although I have noticed that it's common on ASM #1 and the 1968 1st issue books as well), or overhang / peekthrough (common on most 60's Marvels).

 

The fact that someone understands why the books turned out the way they did, why the grades turned out the way they did and why this has never been brought up before even though it existed to varying degrees doesn't necessarily mean that they are OK with it. I'm quite sure everyone in this thread would prefer the books were not shrunken.

 

Since CGC apparently can't differentiate between a cover that shrinks naturally over 40 years or one that shrank because a book was pressed improperly (short of scanning all books and comparing them) the only solution I see is that whoever did the pressing job just not repeat what they did.

 

Is there another solution I'm missing?

[namisgr]

Can anyone give me a synopsis (A Run Down) on this thread?

 

What is page fanning?

 

See an example in the first post.

[VintageComics]

Analogous to the the telltale signs of the reverse spine rolls, I believe there are telltale signs for the pressed shrinkage. It's been mentioned that 'naturally' this only occurs on miswrapped books = the 2cent 'ARVEL' effect.

 

I can't remember who posted that but I disagree that it only occurs on miswrapped books (ie. 2cent 'ARVEL' effect).

 

I've seen "peek through" naturally occur on DC books as well as perfectly centered Marvels.

 

Cover shrinkage is a direct result of the paper used on the cover stock, not how the cover is attached to the comic or how it is wrapped.

 

 

[fantastic_four]

Analogous to the the telltale signs of the reverse spine rolls, I believe there are telltale signs for the pressed shrinkage. It's been mentioned that 'naturally' this only occurs on miswrapped books = the 2cent 'ARVEL' effect.

 

I can't remember who posted that but I disagree that it only occurs on miswrapped books (ie. 2cent 'ARVEL' effect).

 

I've seen "peek through" naturally occur on DC books as well as perfectly centered Marvels.

 

Cover shrinkage is a direct result of the paper used on the cover stock, not how the cover is attached to the comic or how it is wrapped.

 

It should have nothing at all to do with the wrap. The books were assembled, and then trimmed after assembly. The miswrap would have already been in place before the final trim. Those books made by the "arvel omics roup" just have covers that are about 1/8" to 1/4" wider than they should have been with the extra 1/8" to 1/4" wrapped over to the spine and back. This defect is far more distracting from an aesthetic perspective because it noticeably interferes with the cover graphics.

 

Also note that three books that are likely to have natural cover shrinkage posted by Ghost_Town, Peter_In_Portugal, and glasgap earlier in the thread all have 3/32" to 1/8" right-edge shrinkage yet none of them are miswrapped on the left.

[VintageComics]

Also note that three books that are likely to have natural cover shrinkage posted by Ghost_Town, Peter_In_Portugal, and glasgap earlier in the thread all have 3/32" to 1/8" right-edge shrinkage yet none of them are miswrapped on the left.

 

After going through my personal scans of inventory of books that I've sold over the years, I can now see many books where people might point a finger and say "is that a Schave / "peekthrough" book? Eww!" and yet nobody would have batted an eye a month ago.