I tried to make it through 55 pages but.....

[Bullet123]

could not so here is my take on the latest drama

Is pressing restoration?

IT DOES NOT MATTER ...If you can not definitively distinguish between a pressed and a non pressed specimen then it is impossible to classify books in either category. This is not something new in the hobby so there are already hundreds of thousands of question marks out there. that horse is out of the barn!

 

What it will do to the census?

Do you think that, with the amount of money involved, that people have not already been engaged in the crack and press game? I only joined this hobby approximately 3 yrs ago and the crack and resubmit skewing of the census was the hot topic back then. Has all of sudden something changed there?

 

I am confused by the people who thumb their noses at the BSD's and the quote "investors/not collectors" in the hobby and think their fools for paying ridiculous multiples for books yet are now crying because the census will now become deluged with NM pressed books and thereby downgrade the value of their own collections YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS PEOPLE!!

 

Am I missing any points here

[Tango 'n Cash]

IT DOES NOT MATTER ...If you can not definitively distinguish between a pressed and a non pressed specimen then it is impossible to classify books in either category.

 

But this statement is not true in 100% of pressed books so it does matter.

[tilleycs]

Am I missing any points here

 

Only that this is about the 9 millionth post on the subject.

[Red Hook]

It's the 9 millionth post for a reason.

[FFB]

Well then, I guess it doesn't matter whether trimming is restoration, or whether wet cleaning is restoration. As long as it can't always be detected, then it must not be restoration! Especially if it's a widespread occurrence! And so CGC should make the problem worse by jumping into that niche of the market with both feet!

 

could not so here is my take on the latest drama

Is pressing restoration?

IT DOES NOT MATTER ...If you can not definitively distinguish between a pressed and a non pressed specimen then it is impossible to classify books in either category. This is not something new in the hobby so there are already hundreds of thousands of question marks out there. that horse is out of the barn!

 

What it will do to the census?

Do you think that, with the amount of money involved, that people have not already been engaged in the crack and press game? I only joined this hobby approximately 3 yrs ago and the crack and resubmit skewing of the census was the hot topic back then. Has all of sudden something changed there?

 

I am confused by the people who thumb their noses at the BSD's and the quote "investors/not collectors" in the hobby and think their fools for paying ridiculous multiples for books yet are now crying because the census will now become deluged with NM pressed books and thereby downgrade the value of their own collections YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS PEOPLE!!

 

Am I missing any points here

[Bullet123]

trimming can be detected. wet cleaning can be detected. I am sure that there are examples of books that have beat the system but that will always be the case.

[FFB]

trimming can be detected. wet cleaning can be detected. I am sure that there are examples of books that have beat the system but that will always be the case.

 

Pressing can also be detected! Or are you saying that you can't still see the heavy crease on the back cover of the 9.2 here (look at enlarged pictures of both back covers, lower left corner)?

 

Captain Midnight 41 - CGC 7.0

Captain Midnight 41 - CGC 9.2

[nearmint]

trimming can be detected. wet cleaning can be detected. I am sure that there are examples of books that have beat the system but that will always be the case.

 

Pressing can also be detected! Or are you saying that you can't still see the heavy crease on the back cover of the 9.2 here (look at enlarged pictures of both back covers, lower left corner)?

 

Captain Midnight 41 - CGC 7.0

Captain Midnight 41 - CGC 9.2

 

I can't see it. I really, really want to see it, but even comparing the pics side by side and noting exactly where the crease was before it was pressed, I just can't see it on the 9.2 copy.

[BassGMan]

trimming can be detected. wet cleaning can be detected. I am sure that there are examples of books that have beat the system but that will always be the case.

 

Pressing can also be detected! Or are you saying that you can't still see the heavy crease on the back cover of the 9.2 here (look at enlarged pictures of both back covers, lower left corner)?

 

Captain Midnight 41 - CGC 7.0

Captain Midnight 41 - CGC 9.2

 

I can't see it. I really, really want to see it, but even comparing the pics side by side and noting exactly where the crease was before it was pressed, I just can't see it on the 9.2 copy.

 

After looking really hard, I think I can see it. But if looking at this 9.2 for the first time without the knowledge of the "before" scan, is this barely noticable crease evidence of pressing? Or could it just be some kind of a small crease or light fold? I know this copy has been pressed, but I mean in other instances where a crease like on this 9.2 is noticed. If we do not have a "before" scan for comparison, how do we even know anything has been fixed? Is every kind of light, hard to notice crease or fold now going to be suspect to having been pressed? I remember when every book that was not cut perfectly square seemed to have been scrutinized on the boards here for possible trimming. But I guess pressing speculation is still in vogue at the moment.

[FFB]

trimming can be detected. wet cleaning can be detected. I am sure that there are examples of books that have beat the system but that will always be the case.

 

Pressing can also be detected! Or are you saying that you can't still see the heavy crease on the back cover of the 9.2 here (look at enlarged pictures of both back covers, lower left corner)?

 

Captain Midnight 41 - CGC 7.0

Captain Midnight 41 - CGC 9.2

 

I can't see it. I really, really want to see it, but even comparing the pics side by side and noting exactly where the crease was before it was pressed, I just can't see it on the 9.2 copy.

 

You have to look at the magnified scan by clicking on the picture of the back cover. The line where the crease used to be is clearly visible and goes right through the C in "Curtiss."

[burntboy]

trimming can be detected. wet cleaning can be detected. I am sure that there are examples of books that have beat the system but that will always be the case.

 

Pressing can also be detected! Or are you saying that you can't still see the heavy crease on the back cover of the 9.2 here (look at enlarged pictures of both back covers, lower left corner)?

 

Captain Midnight 41 - CGC 7.0

Captain Midnight 41 - CGC 9.2

 

I can't see it. I really, really want to see it, but even comparing the pics side by side and noting exactly where the crease was before it was pressed, I just can't see it on the 9.2 copy.

 

i had no problem seeing it, but PERHAPS that was because i knew what to look for.

 

in the absence of the scan of the 7.0 version of this book, i'm not certain that the "pressing" would be detectable. you might be able to ascertain the mark, but i'm not sure you wouldn't consider it to be "a very slight non color-breaking crease".

 

and if CGC truly doesn't know from whence the books come, OR whether they have been graded before, i'm not sure it's detectable as a major crease that has been pressed out.............

[Red Hook]

The large image is of the 7.0....the image in the inset box is the 9.2...with the contrast and brightness adjusted to make the crease more visible.

 

[nearmint]

trimming can be detected. wet cleaning can be detected. I am sure that there are examples of books that have beat the system but that will always be the case.

 

Pressing can also be detected! Or are you saying that you can't still see the heavy crease on the back cover of the 9.2 here (look at enlarged pictures of both back covers, lower left corner)?

 

Captain Midnight 41 - CGC 7.0

Captain Midnight 41 - CGC 9.2

 

I can't see it. I really, really want to see it, but even comparing the pics side by side and noting exactly where the crease was before it was pressed, I just can't see it on the 9.2 copy.

 

You have to look at the magnified scan by clicking on the picture of the back cover. The line where the crease used to be is clearly visible and goes right through the C in "Curtiss."

 

I don't know, maybe it's my monitor, but I am looking at the magnified scan, and the C in "Curtiss" looks completely normal. I don't see any evidence remaining of the crease.

[Norrin_Radd]

I don't know, maybe it's my monitor, but I am looking at the magnified scan, and the C in "Curtiss" looks completely normal. I don't see any evidence remaining of the crease.

 

"Too fine an eye for creases will find them everywhere."

[Red Hook]

Nice work in the staple area too, on the back.....inset is the 7.0.

 

 

[Bullet123]

okay so you found one example and lets assume that can show me 10 more examples from great scans with pedigree notations to prove they are indeed the same copy. Heritage alone has auctioned some 50,000 plus books. lets see, 10 out of 50,000 thats .02 % I can live with that kind of error margin.

 

Also, for all you conspiracy theorists out there, how is CGC supposed to know that the crease was not like version #2 in the first place if they never saw the book to begin with. Yes if I saw both versions side by side I can see that the #2 version was improved but how often does that happen.(that you get the hindsight of seeing both books) I would venture to say even less than the .02 %

[Zonker]

Nice work in the staple area too, on the back.....inset is the 7.0.

 

 

Red, (or anyone)

 

What 'work' happened on the staple tears? Undetected tear seals? Or are we now saying pressing can fix this kind of thing as well?

[Red Hook]

I would suspect it was not an actual tear, but a gnarly little creased area and that it got "ironed" out.

[Red Hook]

okay so you found one example and lets assume that can show me 10 more examples from great scans with pedigree notations to prove they are indeed the same copy. Heritage alone has auctioned some 50,000 plus books. lets see, 10 out of 50,000 thats .02 % I can live with that kind of error margin.

 

Also, for all you conspiracy theorists out there, how is CGC supposed to know that the crease was not like version #2 in the first place if they never saw the book to begin with. Yes if I saw both versions side by side I can see that the #2 version was improved but how often does that happen.(that you get the hindsight of seeing both books) I would venture to say even less than the .02 %

 

No problemo, Bullet. You're free to spend your own dough how and where you want. Some of us are just a tougher sell.

[FFB]

okay so you found one example and lets assume that can show me 10 more examples from great scans with pedigree notations to prove they are indeed the same copy. Heritage alone has auctioned some 50,000 plus books. lets see, 10 out of 50,000 thats .02 % I can live with that kind of error margin.

 

Also, for all you conspiracy theorists out there, how is CGC supposed to know that the crease was not like version #2 in the first place if they never saw the book to begin with. Yes if I saw both versions side by side I can see that the #2 version was improved but how often does that happen.(that you get the hindsight of seeing both books) I would venture to say even less than the .02 %

 

The thing is, it's not an "error." They know that book was pressed and they don't put it in a purple label slab. If it were an error, fine, no problem, they made a mistake. But this is their POLICY not to call that restoration.

 

Tell me how this makes sense: If the staples had been removed and the exact same pressing job done (with the original staples being put back into the book afterward), they'd purple slab it. But if the staples are removed, are not cleaned or replaced, but the same staples are just put right back into the book and the book is not pressed, the book will get a green label (and a notation that staples were cleaned/replaced). How the F does staple removal on the other side of the book impact someone's determination as to whether pressing out that crease was "restoration" or not? The exact same defect is being removed in exactly the same way -- by squishing the [#@$%!!!] out of it.

 

As for the number of books where pressing has happened, Arty posted a chart earlier of JUST Edgar Church books that had been resubmitted, most for higher grades with just a few downgrades. There were dozens of JUST Edgar Church books on the list. Several of those books on the list were pressed, as you can see by just going down the list and looking at before and after pictures.

 

I am not saying CGC should guess about whether a book is pressed. But I am saying:

 

1) When they KNOW the book has been pressed, call a spade and spade and note the restoration.

 

2) DO NOT take advantage of your own BS stance on pressing by jumping into the pressing game with both feet to make extra money, and deceive buyers by not disclosing the pressing that you know was done! I am sorry, but anyone who becomes part of the problem by helping others hide restoration from buyers is no better in my mind than someone who restores books and sells them as unrestored. If CGC or its parent company get into the restoration business and start pressing books that they know will be sold as unrestored, then they need to get off their high horse about guys like Comic-Keys and the guy who trimmed the Batman #11 because they will have become part of the same problem. And that would be a real shame, given all of the good they've done for the hobby in the last five years.