Cole Schave collection: face jobs?

[Timely]

Post 'em up.

 

If shrunken covers are as common as table salt how come posters were so puzzled until Matt Nelson confirmed "cover shrink" and explained the years involved?

How come the term doesn't appear in the Grading Guide glossary or Overstreet definitions?

How old is this hobby?

I have no idea if these covers shrunk or if it's just the way the books were assembled and originally cut. (I'm not posting these to defend the Costanza'd books. I'm posting them to point out that many books show similar traits.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All of these books exhibit a normal look that are not out of proportion.

[fantastic_four]

While it's true that the thread has its fair share of melodrama and overstatement (hey, it's the Boards), it's also the case that CCS pressing of a series of dozens of early high grade Marvels caused their covers to shrink to a degree rarely seen under natural circumstances, and to the point that the books look worse for having been pressed. It's also the case that the books were graded as if this marked loss in eye appeal through cover shrinkage had never happened.

 

Everything up to the grading aspect I'm in complete agreement with. I hope that Matt does stop doing this--and that's the primary reason I've posted in this thread at all given that I'm mostly out of collecting and rarely post in CG these days--but I agree with the people pointing out that his responses suggest he might keep doing it. Hopefully he does err on the side of caution in the future, though, and this is the last we see of it.

 

It's the severity people are assigning to the defect where the hyperbole begins that I'm still having trouble putting into a balanced perspective. Note that this is coming from someone who has been avoiding left-edge miscuts and 1/16" right-edge pokethrough for over a decade. I get the aesthetic difference, I just don't get the severity people are assigning to it--although it admittedly is a bit difficult to translate descriptors like "ruined," "travesty," or "raped" into a numerical grade deduction.

[VintageComics]

cause these are plucked from the ether excuses that are only interested in protecting the gravy train and not the hobby or the books themselves.

 

Another personal attack without any substance.

 

So you are saying that covers don't shrink or are you saying that you didn't know that covers shrink - because just going by Ghost Town's scans it's obvious that they do shrink. As I clearly said to varying degrees.

 

Nobody is trying to keep a gravy train going. Nobody is trying to protect this new pressing technique. Some people (like me) just don't want to throw out the baby with the bath water.

[skypinkblu]

Thanks, that's what I was seeing as I placed my ruler over the screen, the page exposure is much less.

 

. I'm also wondering if we would have to know if a book was pressed in order to compare it?

 

It would be interesting if we had guaranteed unpressed books to compare that showed

Shrinkage"

 

I don't think I've seen those examples.

 

[Ghost Town]

Of course there have been plenty of early SA Marvels showing a tiny bit of the interior pages, but not nearly to the degree seen along the entire length of the spine on the Cole Schave books after pressing. As pointed out long ago in the thread and apparent with Barton's terrific ASMs 15,27,28, and 33, a tiny bit of interior page exposure is common with early SA Marvels that have some front-to-back cover miswrapping. They are easily distinguished from these members of the 119771... certification series, however:

I'm not disagreeing with you, by the way. I think what happened to the Cole Schave books is scary stuff.

 

The books you've pointed out have been particularly egregious examples of the Costanza effect. But I think too many books are being lumped together and some books are being scarlet-lettered that may not deserve it. For example, with the books comicwiz just posted, look at the JIM #83, ASM #9, and FF #12. I'm not suggesting those books weren't pressed, but their pages could have been peeking through the same way ever since they left the printer.

[Bronty]

Incredible books. However, I don't want to disappoint you but these are no where near the extent of a Constanza. Yes, a lot of books have a moderate peekaboo on the right edge, so what. The Constanzas are much larger and exagerated.

 

Talk in terms of exact numbers here, because my eyes tell me to describe the Costanzas as "much worse" is itself an exaggeration. They're absolutely, positively worse than most pokethrough I see. Most of the Costanzas look to be 2/16" to 3/16", whereas Ghost Town's appear to be 1/16" to 2/16". And just the fact that I'm having to go to sixteenths of an inch is indicative of how slight these differences are.

 

Maybe they are slight on a ruler but so what? I mean a couple of spine ticks that barely register on that ruler are the difference between a 9.0 and a 9.4 so it seems disingenuous to say that they are physically small defects. So is virtually every defect at the grade levels shown here. The ghost town examples are no doubt the most noticeable examples he could quickly find. He can answer this better than I butted say he's showing the most extreme 10% in his collection. Virtually all of the cole schave books have this appearance, and to a greater degree than the ghost town books.

 

I don't want every book I consider buying from this point forward to look like this. I don't want another uneven playing field. I don't want to have these books pressed and repressed yet again by buyers and sellers until they are pancakes. I don't want this BS, basically, and I'm sure I'm not alone. I personally won't buy any books that look like the a have books because I don't want to reward this type of manipulation and I don't like the appearance of the books themselves.

[VintageComics]

Does anyone have examples like this that aren't slabbed? To make the case fully, you have to consider potential effects of the slabbing process. Exactly how are the books oriented when they're inserted into the inner well? More examples of non-slabbed books with this apparent structural issue would make this consideration less pertinent, if not totally moot.

 

It has nothing to do with the well and everything to do with the fact that covers on many SA books change size after production.

[fantastic_four]

cause these are plucked from the ether excuses that are only interested in protecting the gravy train and not the hobby or the books themselves.

 

Another personal attack without any substance.

 

So you are saying that covers don't shrink or are you saying that you didn't know that covers shrink - because just going by Ghost Town's scans it's obvious that they do shrink. As I clearly said to varying degrees.

 

Nobody is trying to keep a gravy train going. Nobody is trying to protect this new pressing technique. Some people (like me) just don't want to throw out the baby with the bath water.

 

In my case, bias irritates me. I often get lit up to cut through bias on topics that interest me, and comic book grading, restoration, and restoration detection interests me greatly.

[drbanner]

I have no idea if these covers shrunk or if it's just the way the books were assembled and originally cut. (I'm not posting these to defend the Costanza'd books. I'm posting them to point out that many books show similar traits.)

 

All of these books exhibit a normal look that are not out of proportion.

(thumbs u

 

What about this? This book was graded 2 weeks after this thread started.

 

[Ghost Town]

So you are saying that covers don't shrink or are you saying that you didn't know that covers shrink - because just going by Ghost Town's scans it's obvious that they do shrink. As I clearly said to varying degrees.

Roy, I don't think my books show or prove that the covers shrink. They just just show that many books from that time period have interior pages that extend beyond the covers. I think it's far more likely that they left the printer looking that way.

[fantastic_four]

Incredible books. However, I don't want to disappoint you but these are no where near the extent of a Constanza. Yes, a lot of books have a moderate peekaboo on the right edge, so what. The Constanzas are much larger and exagerated.

 

Talk in terms of exact numbers here, because my eyes tell me to describe the Costanzas as "much worse" is itself an exaggeration. They're absolutely, positively worse than most pokethrough I see. Most of the Costanzas look to be 2/16" to 3/16", whereas Ghost Town's appear to be 1/16" to 2/16". And just the fact that I'm having to go to sixteenths of an inch is indicative of how slight these differences are.

 

Maybe they are slight on a ruler but so what? I mean a couple of spine ticks that barely register on that ruler are the difference between a 9.0 and a 9.4 so it seems disingenuous to say that they are physically small defects. So is virtually every defect at the grade levels shown here. The ghost town examples are no doubt the most noticeable examples he could quickly find. He can answer this better than I butted say he's showing the most extreme 10% in his collection. Virtually all of the cole schave books have this appearance, and to a greater degree than the ghost town books.

 

I don't want every book I consider buying from this point forward to look like this. I don't want another uneven playing field. I don't want to have these books pressed and repressed yet again by buyers and sellers until they are pancakes. I don't want this BS, basically, and I'm sure I'm not alone. I personally won't buy any books that look like the a have books because I don't want to reward this type of manipulation and I don't like the appearance of the books themselves.

 

You don't like the aesthetic difference with a shrunken cover, and that's a preference I've long shared. Your reaction to the manipulation makes absolute sense and I find it to be natural--and I disbelieve anyone who tells me that the manipulation DOESN'T bug them. How could it not? It bugs me on many levels. The upcoming level it's about to bug me on is I'm planning on selling some books over the next year, and thanks to the way the market has gone, I now have to decide if I want to play the CPR game. A decade ago when I bought these books the game barely existed.

 

It does tend to cloud the issue of assigning an objective grade to the defect, however. That's why I've been pointing out we didn't hear much about this defect prior to this thread and the facejobbing thread--it's the manipulation that's causing people to hate the defect more than it has ever been hated out in the wild without restoration being the cause of it. Litch didn't cause this defect, but he and his graders are bearing the brunt of the blame for not downgrading for it now that people are outraged due to the manipulation.

 

I'm still hoping someone will help shape a perspective on how this defect is any more aesthetically detractive to appearance than a left-edge miswrap. Not from any argumentative perspective--my motivation is always to expand my knowledge, not to "win" a discussion, which is a common but childish thing to strive for--but from a perspective of refining grading. How much should we downgrade for miswraps, and how much should we downgrade for right-edge interior pokethrough?

[fantastic_four]

So you are saying that covers don't shrink or are you saying that you didn't know that covers shrink - because just going by Ghost Town's scans it's obvious that they do shrink. As I clearly said to varying degrees.

Roy, I don't think my books show or prove that the covers shrink. They just just show that many books from that time period have interior pages that extend beyond the covers. I think it's far more likely that they left the printer looking that way.

 

It seems difficult to believe so many books would have pokethrough due to a dull cutting blade given that they were cut after being folded. This is particularly true due to the common pattern of the pokethrough--it usually isn't a straight edge, the innermost pages usually stick out farther than the outermost pages. Something changing with the paper over time makes more sense when the distance the interior pages stick out varies.

 

But if we look at Peter_In_Portugal's book, that does look like a printing issue--specifically an angled right-edge cut with a dullish blade. The tiny hanging shards of paper and very minorly rough pieces protruding from the edge visible suggest it as well. It could be that the amount the interior pages protrude varies, however, so I'd have to see it up close to be sure.

 

[Dale Roberts]

So you are saying that covers don't shrink or are you saying that you didn't know that covers shrink - because just going by Ghost Town's scans it's obvious that they do shrink. As I clearly said to varying degrees.

Roy, I don't think my books show or prove that the covers shrink. They just just show that many books from that time period have interior pages that extend beyond the covers. I think it's far more likely that they left the printer looking that way.

 

Barton is correct. I have seen literally hundreds of books where the pages extend beyond the cover that I know for a fact have never been pressed. I am not saying for a minute that the books originally owned by Bob did not shrink. But I am saying for 100% certain, these types of books existed long before pressing.

[Timely]

I have no idea if these covers shrunk or if it's just the way the books were assembled and originally cut. (I'm not posting these to defend the Costanza'd books. I'm posting them to point out that many books show similar traits.)

 

All of these books exhibit a normal look that are not out of proportion.

(thumbs u

 

What about this? This book was graded 2 weeks after this thread started.

 

 

That book is also within the parameters of something that is not excessive. I would not downgrade this book to 9.4 because of a minor top overhang or the right edge pages slightly protruding.

[comicwiz]

Of course there have been plenty of early SA Marvels showing a tiny bit of the interior pages, but not nearly to the degree seen along the entire length of the spine on the Cole Schave books after pressing. As pointed out long ago in the thread and apparent with Barton's terrific ASMs 15,27,28, and 33, a tiny bit of interior page exposure is common with early SA Marvels that have some front-to-back cover miswrapping. They are easily distinguished from these members of the 119771... certification series, however:

I'm not disagreeing with you, by the way. I think what happened to the Cole Schave books is scary stuff.

 

The books you've pointed out have been particularly egregious examples of the Costanza effect. But I think too many books are being lumped together and some books are being scarlet-lettered that may not deserve it. For example, with the books comicwiz just posted, look at the JIM #83, ASM #9, and FF #12. I'm not suggesting those books weren't pressed, but their pages could have been peeking through the same way ever since they left the printer.

 

Take from those scans what you will, but I posted them because they were tagged "Cole Schave" and to respond to a few people's suggestions that they were no longer accessible through the listings from the Pedigree site. The Google cache feature is your friend.

 

The scarlett letter thing is more a by-product of the activity that is causing the perception problem. Abating or arresting the activity is where the solution to the perception problem that it is causing lies.

 

This thread has over 50K views and the people voicing their concerns are doing so at the risk of being labelled misfits, troublemakers, rabble-rousers, and/or a combination of all these things and perhaps much worse in the eyes of those who are waiting for a urine sample to help their decision, or those who don't want to acknowledge the missteps and accept responsibility.

 

With more than a dozen examples for reference, I don't need the results from the urine test to make up my mind, nor do I need my integrity ridiculed or questioned.

 

In other words, if you're lurking, have not posted in this thread or forum before, and are concerned about what is taking place, speak up.

[GACollectibles]

They are easily distinguished from these members of the 119771... certification series, however:

 

 

Note: These are all accessible through Google's cache feature - tagged as "Cole Schave" in the PC listings. These 31 are all I could access through the cache feature. If needed, back these up as I'm not certain how long they will be available.

Ouch, I think I need to visit the chiropractor! You rarely see overflash on both the top and bottom of the book like this...what the heck happened here?

 

That is not such a unique(or potentially manufactured) look. Here I have an OO book, never pressed, that has the exact same characteristics(top & bottom overhang, extended pages), and suspect(without having the TOS in hand) that what you are seeing is the same thing as below- the extended pages are the back half of the book. I'm not saying it wasn't the result of a press on the TOS but you can't discount it happening naturally.

 

[GACollectibles]

That is so consistent among those books that I wonder how much of it MAY be due to the encapsulation process, pressure causing a fanning that wouldn't be present if the books were sitting raw/flat. I'm not discounting pressing/shrinkage, but it may be a combination of things.

 

Do any of these have the defective inner wells that could be putting pressure on the books to exacerbate the issue?

 

They are easily distinguished from these members of the 119771... certification series, however:

 

 

Clarification- I meant shifting of front cover, not fanning of pages

[skypinkblu]

If the extended pages are the back half of the book, couldn't it have been stapled incorrectly? I know I had a Captain American that looked like that, with the back pages sticking out, but I don't think the staples were in the exact center of the book.

[InvstmntComcSuply]

Some Terms used throughout the thread. Often erroneously, but generally accepted as the following:

 

Cover Shrinkage = Costanza = Refers to a shrinkage in the horizontal dimension of the cover stock. Should be clearly evident on the front and back of the book. Interior newsprint pages extend beyond the cover with slightly more exposure at the top. Usually associated with overhang of the coverstock,along the top edge, as if, when the cover shrunk horizontally, there was a corresponding vertical expansion. Newsprint should not be fanned. If this "look" is on the front of the book only, it is likely NOT cover shrinkage and could be...

 

 

Reverse Spine Roll = RSR = Spine Realignment = Facejob = Wilsonized = The act of pressing "out" the original spine of the book and pressing "in" a new spine, to the right of the previous spine. This shifts defects that appeared along the original spine to the now realigned back cover. By performing this press, it rotates all the leaves of the book around the axis of the new spine, creating an unnatural exposed fanning of the newsprint (RSR) displaying on the right side of the front cover only. The rear cover should completely cover the newsprint.

 

 

Fanned pages = When the leaves of a book progressively extrude one beyond the other, rather than line up vertically. Can be a classic Spine Roll or RSR..

 

Pokethrough = Used mostly by fantasticfour. I had initially equated this with Cover Shrinkage, but expect that he may simply be expressing this from a "front cover" view only.

 

 

Visual representation of Cover Shrinkage

 

 

[fantastic_four]

That is so consistent among those books that I wonder how much of it MAY be due to the encapsulation process, pressure causing a fanning that wouldn't be present if the books were sitting raw/flat. I'm not discounting pressing/shrinkage, but it may be a combination of things.

 

Do any of these have the defective inner wells that could be putting pressure on the books to exacerbate the issue?

 

They are easily distinguished from these members of the 119771... certification series, however:

 

 

Clarification- I meant shifting of front cover, not fanning of pages

 

I've not seen this effect even when using a book press to exert hundreds of pounds of force on a comic. It's difficult to imagine the inner well exerting enough force to cause this separation of the interior pages and the cover. Any specific ideas how it could happen?

 

One thing to note is that Matt has already implied that he was responsible for the shrinkage. He did this in two ways--by never denying it, and by saying they are improving their process to ensure shrinkage doesn't happen in the future.