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

[THE_BEYONDER]

only a small percentage of books are probably improvable through just pressing.

 

Only a small percentage of books are financially reasonable to press. I could probably pull hundreds of books from my collection that would go up in grade if pressed.

 

What makes you think non color-breaking creases, spine stress and bends are rarer than their color-breaking counterparts?

[skybolt]

 

 

Here's what I think will happen if pressing books continues and vintage 7.0's turn into 9.2's. Some comic dealers will make out like bandits by pressing their entire collections and selling them at premiums to ordinary unknowing collectors.

 

please, let's not exaggerate the issue (it's already serious enough).

 

pressing ain't gonna turn a whole collection of books from 7.0's to 9.2's. it;s possible that SOME books in the collection could benefit from pressing but certainly NOT the majority, let alone ALL the books.

 

pressing can't remove color-breaking spine stresses.

 

pressing won't repair tears.

 

pressing won't replace missing pieces.

 

pressing can't remove dirt.

 

pressing doesn't remove water stains.

 

pressing won't replace lost gloss.

 

pressing won't replace loss of color.

 

ETC.

 

 

it lessens the appearance of creases, wrinkles, indentations and waviness.

 

so only a small percentage of books are probably improvable through just pressing. and then, the improvement may be minor.

 

i have to admit that the Church books (while the list of improved books appears huge - there were afterall 20,000 books in the collection) got some pretty big jumps in grade and it makes one wonder if pressing was the only form of resto that wasn't detected.....

 

That's what scares me. This business is run by the major dealers and companies, and they seem to be making the rules as we go along. The reason why I started to amass large collection of CGC graded books is because I figured that maybe we can finally have a set of rules that will last a couple of generations. I don't want the powers that be to tell me that tear seals are a no-no today, but change their mind 2 years later if suits their pockets. We have to come up with universal grading guidelines and stick with them. Even if a book (i.e. Action Comics #1) goes up by a 0.5 grade when pressed, then that's just another book that will be considered restored by future generations.

[1962]

Good insight. With all of this continuous ranting over pressing, people seem to forget that most books are not candidates for pressing because of the type of defects they have, this is especially true with GA books. Also while I agree that some of the books on Arty's Church list of resubmits have undoubtedley been pressed( obviously the Captain Midnight 41 7.0 to 9.2 is the best example) I am very confident that some of them haven't been, because of the type of defects that they have.

 

An example of this is the Sensation 87 MH which used to be a CGC 9.2(old label) and is now listed as a new label 9.0. I used to own that book and from the front it looks much better than a 9.2! Unfortunately on the back cover, there are 2 very small tears which is why the book got only a 9.2. I eventually sold that book and while I do not know for sure where the book went after the sale I can't believe that anyone would think that pressing that book would have gotten rid of the tears, it's simply not going to happen. Instead some well meaning collector, probably did not look at the back cover very closely and just decided that from the front cover that the book was undergraded the first time and therefore a resubmit was made and this time the dealer/collector lost!

 

As a side note on the resubmit game which I believe is more bothersome is if you check the census for this particular issue it will show one book at 9.2 and another at 9.0. It's the same freakin book being listed twice! Another example is the Sensation 84 MH which I also used to own as a 9.4 old label. I now recently saw it listed on Heritage as a new label 9.4. Sure enough if you check the census on this book there are only two books graded overall for this issue and they are both 9.4. I understand that CGC cannot catch all resubmits especially when the old label is not sent in, but for cryin out loud both the 84 and 87 are the MH books. Certainlly some procedure can be set up for these type of pedigree books, so they are not counted twice in the census.

[skybolt]

Good insight. With all of this continuous ranting over pressing, people seem to forget that most books are not candidates for pressing because of the type of defects they have, this is especially true with GA books. Also while I agree that some of the books on Arty's Church list of resubmits have undoubtedley been pressed( obviously the Captain Midnight 41 7.0 to 9.2 is the best example) I am very confident that some of them haven't been, because of the type of defects that they have.

 

An example of this is the Sensation 87 MH which used to be a CGC 9.2(old label) and is now listed as a new label 9.0. I used to own that book and from the front it looks much better than a 9.2! Unfortunately on the back cover, there are 2 very small tears which is why the book got only a 9.2. I eventually sold that book and while I do not know for sure where the book went after the sale I can't believe that anyone would think that pressing that book would have gotten rid of the tears, it's simply not going to happen. Instead some well meaning collector, probably did not look at the back cover very closely and just decided that from the front cover that the book was undergraded the first time and therefore a resubmit was made and this time the dealer/collector lost!

 

As a side note on the resubmit game which I believe is more bothersome is if you check the census for this particular issue it will show one book at 9.2 and another at 9.0. It's the same freakin book being listed twice! Another example is the Sensation 84 MH which I also used to own as a 9.4 old label. I now recently saw it listed on Heritage as a new label 9.4. Sure enough if you check the census on this book there are only two books graded overall for this issue and they are both 9.4. I understand that CGC cannot catch all resubmits especially when the old label is not sent in, but for cryin out loud both the 84 and 87 are the MH books. Certainlly some procedure can be set up for these type of pedigree books, so they are not counted twice in the census.

 

Why did you sell these books? I own 6 Sensation Comics that are graded between 7.0 and 8.5.

[1962]

Like most collectors I sold them to finance other purchases.

[burntboy]

only a small percentage of books are probably improvable through just pressing.

 

Only a small percentage of books are financially reasonable to press. I could probably pull hundreds of books from my collection that would go up in grade if pressed.

 

What makes you think non color-breaking creases, spine stress and bends are rarer than their color-breaking counterparts?

 

and i'm guessing you have thousands of books thereby making those hundreds a small percentage.......(WAY small)........

 

but you're correct in that it is probably better to also state that the percentage is also held down by the number of books where it would make sense to press them financially. just like on that "pressers" work sheet where it seems as though it was being contemplated NOT to press certain books due to the end result low grade on relatively inexpensive books..................

 

i just want folks to focus on the likely reality as opposed to thinking that everythings gonna get pressed if CGC goes through with this.........

[tth2]

pressing can't remove color-breaking spine stresses.

 

Harry, good post. However, looking carefully at some of the known press & resub jobs has been a revelation to me, because I've now realized that what would normally be a color-breaking spine stress or crease is not color-breaking if there's no color to break (i.e., white back covers and white front covers). I had never really thought hard about this before, but since CGC grades back covers just as hard as they grade front covers, I wonder if that's where the big jumps from pressing can be made.

[FFB]

pressing can't remove color-breaking spine stresses.

 

Harry, good post. However, looking carefully at some of the known press & resub jobs has been a revelation to me, because I've now realized that what would normally be a color-breaking spine stress or crease is not color-breaking if there's no color to break (i.e., white back covers and white front covers). I had never really thought hard about this before, but since CGC grades back covers just as hard as they grade front covers, I wonder if that's where the big jumps from pressing can be made.

 

Also in high-dollar mid-grade books. Just because a 6.0 can't be pressed up to a 9.4 doesn't mean that it isn't financially beneficial to press it up to a 7.5 or so -- which is possible in a LOT of cases.

[tth2]

As a side note on the resubmit game which I believe is more bothersome is if you check the census for this particular issue it will show one book at 9.2 and another at 9.0. It's the same freakin book being listed twice! Another example is the Sensation 84 MH which I also used to own as a 9.4 old label. I now recently saw it listed on Heritage as a new label 9.4. Sure enough if you check the census on this book there are only two books graded overall for this issue and they are both 9.4. I understand that CGC cannot catch all resubmits especially when the old label is not sent in, but for cryin out loud both the 84 and 87 are the MH books. Certainlly some procedure can be set up for these type of pedigree books, so they are not counted twice in the census.

 

Totally agree, this is another area where CGC are being stupidly negligent or just lazy. Their database shows whether a particular book is a pedigree, so if someone does a resub of a Church book without the label, CGC should be able to do a quick check as to whether they've already graded the Church copy of that issue and remove the prior listing from the census. Of course, they need to be confident that there is only one copy of that book within that pedigree, but if they know there are not multiple copies, or if they compare to their scan of the previously graded book, they should be able to figure it out and clean the prior grade from their census. Again, another case of low-hanging fruit with respect to maintaining the accuracy of the census.

[tth2]

pressing can't remove color-breaking spine stresses.

 

Harry, good post. However, looking carefully at some of the known press & resub jobs has been a revelation to me, because I've now realized that what would normally be a color-breaking spine stress or crease is not color-breaking if there's no color to break (i.e., white back covers and white front covers). I had never really thought hard about this before, but since CGC grades back covers just as hard as they grade front covers, I wonder if that's where the big jumps from pressing can be made.

 

Also in high-dollar mid-grade books. Just because a 6.0 can't be pressed up to a 9.4 doesn't mean that it isn't financially beneficial to press it up to a 7.5 or so -- which is possible in a LOT of cases.

 

Yes, and my guess is that is actually where most of the action has been taking place. I still think there is actually less pressing going on amongst the high grade books than the recent hysteria might lead one to think, but it's the failure of CGC to address the low-hanging fruit issues which I find really frustrating.

[fantastic_four]

Only a small percentage of books are financially reasonable to press.

 

Would it be a good thing or a bad thing if someone were to copiously document the steps required to press a comic in such a way that anyone with a modest amount of concentration, manual dexterity, and attention to detail could do it en masse right in their own home? Pressing would then become financially reasonable for any book in your collection that you feel is worth spending 10 or 20 minutes of your free time on.

 

Would making that information available to the entire hobby make things better or worse?

[THE_BEYONDER]

pressing can't remove color-breaking spine stresses.

 

Harry, good post. However, looking carefully at some of the known press & resub jobs has been a revelation to me, because I've now realized that what would normally be a color-breaking spine stress or crease is not color-breaking if there's no color to break (i.e., white back covers and white front covers). I had never really thought hard about this before, but since CGC grades back covers just as hard as they grade front covers, I wonder if that's where the big jumps from pressing can be made.

 

Big jumps can also come from books that have white back covers, and a FC miswrap.

 

Since there is no color on the spine in these instances, all spine stress can be removed by pressing.

 

Have you ever wondered why alot of the highest graded copies have miswraps to the front cover?

 

Now you know...

[Underdog]

Only a small percentage of books are financially reasonable to press.

 

Would it be a good thing or a bad thing if someone were to copiously document the steps required to press a comic in such a way that anyone with a modest amount of concentration, manual dexterity, and attention to detail could do it en masse right in their own home? Pressing would then become financially reasonable for any book in your collection that you feel is worth spending 10 or 20 minutes of your free time on.

 

Would making that information available to the entire hobby make things better or worse?

 

Is that documentation available?

[burntboy]

Only a small percentage of books are financially reasonable to press.

 

Would it be a good thing or a bad thing if someone were to copiously document the steps required to press a comic in such a way that anyone with a modest amount of concentration, manual dexterity, and attention to detail could do it en masse right in their own home? Pressing would then become financially reasonable for any book in your collection that you feel is worth spending 10 or 20 minutes of your free time on.

 

Would making that information available to the entire hobby make things better or worse?

 

well, that's an interesting question. this is all pure speculation, but i shudder to think what might happen if there were hundreds of amateur pressers out there banging out slightly improved copies of all potential books in all grades.

 

that could have the affect of flooding the market with upper Mid-Grade to HG copies, since there would be no cost (except for the original equipment outlay and then the slabbing). and, hence, financial viability to alter thousands upon thousands of books.

 

i would then hope that CGC got hip and started to note amateur pressing on labels (where detectable) to somewhat offset the potential flood.

 

yup - a scary thought, indeed..............

[fantastic_four]

Is that documentation available?

 

Maybe, but it could be brought together and improved. If you Google around, there is quite a bit out there showing restoration techniques for paper documents that aren't comics. Ze-Man's new thread in the restoration forum on dry pressing also shows some of the basics.

[Aman619]

As a side note on the resubmit game which I believe is more bothersome is if you check the census for this particular issue it will show one book at 9.2 and another at 9.0. It's the same freakin book being listed twice! Another example is the Sensation 84 MH which I also used to own as a 9.4 old label. I now recently saw it listed on Heritage as a new label 9.4. Sure enough if you check the census on this book there are only two books graded overall for this issue and they are both 9.4. I understand that CGC cannot catch all resubmits especially when the old label is not sent in, but for cryin out loud both the 84 and 87 are the MH books. Certainlly some procedure can be set up for these type of pedigree books, so they are not counted twice in the census.

 

Totally agree, this is another area where CGC are being stupidly negligent or just lazy. Their database shows whether a particular book is a pedigree, so if someone does a resub of a Church book without the label, CGC should be able to do a quick check as to whether they've already graded the Church copy of that issue and remove the prior listing from the census. Of course, they need to be confident that there is only one copy of that book within that pedigree, but if they know there are not multiple copies, or if they compare to their scan of the previously graded book, they should be able to figure it out and clean the prior grade from their census. Again, another case of low-hanging fruit with respect to maintaining the accuracy of the census.

 

I agree that CGC needs to keep the census as accurate as possible. BUT - - lets be fair too. They already keep track of 100s of thousands of graded books in there, and there is an built-in accountability problem with books being resubmitted w/o the original labels. CGC cant prevent that and collectors wisely (I think) are afreaid to resubmit them while alerting CGC that you think they made a mistake the first time). So to expect them to monitor auctions and discover the obvious mistakes in the Church books you pointed out is, IMO asking too much. Sure if they had a small staff to do just that, yeah.

 

But CGC just isnt going to expend the manpower at this point to police the census against 'our' efforts to damage it. Lets face it, whom does the census serve? CGC? not really, they just grade books. It serves US the collectors. And WE are the resubmitters who are screwing up the accuracy of the numbers.

 

But - - that doesnt mean it hopeless for all mistakes that exist. What could and SHOULD be done is for CGC to open up a dialogue, maybe here on the boards via a sticky thread in Ask CGC, where facts like those you uncovered as to OBVIOUS duplications, can be posted. CGC can then, at their leisure investigate and decide whether to agree or let the census stand. Treat these instances like Overstreet does with its data.... only a lot more responsive and with more updates...

[tth2]

I agree that CGC needs to keep the census as accurate as possible. BUT - - lets be fair too. They already keep track of 100s of thousands of graded books in there, and there is an built-in accountability problem with books being resubmitted w/o the original labels. CGC cant prevent that and collectors wisely (I think) are afreaid to resubmit them while alerting CGC that you think they made a mistake the first time). So to expect them to monitor auctions and discover the obvious mistakes in the Church books you pointed out is, IMO asking too much. Sure if they had a small staff to do just that, yeah.

 

But CGC just isnt going to expend the manpower at this point to police the census against 'our' efforts to damage it. Lets face it, whom does the census serve? CGC? not really, they just grade books. It serves US the collectors. And WE are the resubmitters who are screwing up the accuracy of the numbers.

 

But - - that doesnt mean it hopeless for all mistakes that exist. What could and SHOULD be done is for CGC to open up a dialogue, maybe here on the boards via a sticky thread in Ask CGC, where facts like those you uncovered as to OBVIOUS duplications, can be posted. CGC can then, at their leisure investigate and decide whether to agree or let the census stand. Treat these instances like Overstreet does with its data.... only a lot more responsive and with more updates...

 

Aman, you're being way too easy on CGC. I don't think the process would be difficult at all, and they could harness free labor (us).

 

I'm sure their internal database is sortable by pedigree--the information is obviously there, because in the registry when you punch in the serial number of a book the pedigree and page quality all appear. If they linked their census to make the same information publicly available, they could let the public (us) do the policing because people on these boards would be going through the census numbers and pointing out duplicate Church copies, for example, which they could flag to CGC. CGC could then compare scans of the books or against their master list of number of books in the pedigree, and then decide whether or not to remove one copy.

 

I think the census IS a big deal, not just for us but for CGC. Perceived scarcity affects the market for CGC books which in turn affects CGC's business. Maybe for books where there are abundant copies in the census, a few duplicative census entries don't matter, but for some of the rarer books, a duplicative entry makes a big difference and could literally double the population, particularly at higher grades.

 

Again, I'm not asking for CGC to catch everything, it's not possible. I'm just saying there are pretty easy cases that they could be catching, hence my reference to low-hanging fruit.

[Darthdiesel]

I don't think the process would be difficult at all, and they could harness free labor (us).

 

I wouldn't trust the general public (us) to accurately do simple math much less anything that has to do with auditing databases and verification of data. Oh yeah, plus, everyone has an agenda so I wouldn't trust anything anyone submitted Best thing to do is know the flaws of the Census and work around it; buy and sell based on what you know and take the census numbers with a grain of salt...it will never be accurate as long as resubmissions without the label are occurring, and THAT can never be stopped. The census is already inaccurate; any attempt to "correct" this inaccuracy without the labels in hand will just continue to FUBAR the system.

[tth2]

I don't think the process would be difficult at all, and they could harness free labor (us).

 

I wouldn't trust the general public (us) to accurately do simple math much less anything that has to do with auditing databases and verification of data. Oh yeah, plus, everyone has an agenda so I wouldn't trust anything anyone submitted Best thing to do is know the flaws of the Census and work around it; buy and sell based on what you know and take the census numbers with a grain of salt...it will never be accurate as long as resubmissions without the label are occurring, and THAT can never be stopped. The census is already inaccurate; any attempt to "correct" this inaccuracy without the labels in hand will just continue to FUBAR the system.

 

What trust is required? Someone sees that there's a 9.4 and a 9.2 of some GA book, looks up the details of each and notices that both are Church copies. So they send an email to CGC saying the census shows 2 copies of a Church book, CGC checks it records and determines it's the one and the same book, and then deletes the earlier entry from the census.

 

The public does the identification only, not the actual verification. Only CGC can do the verification.

[Aman619]

I don't think the process would be difficult at all, and they could harness free labor (us).

 

I wouldn't trust the general public (us) to accurately do simple math much less anything that has to do with auditing databases and verification of data. Oh yeah, plus, everyone has an agenda so I wouldn't trust anything anyone submitted Best thing to do is know the flaws of the Census and work around it; buy and sell based on what you know and take the census numbers with a grain of salt...it will never be accurate as long as resubmissions without the label are occurring, and THAT can never be stopped. The census is already inaccurate; any attempt to "correct" this inaccuracy without the labels in hand will just continue to FUBAR the system.

 

What trust is required? Someone sees that there's a 9.4 and a 9.2 of some GA book, looks up the details of each and notices that both are Church copies. So they send an email to CGC saying the census shows 2 copies of a Church book, CGC checks it records and determines it's the one and the same book, and then deletes the earlier entry from the census.

 

The public does the identification only, not the actual verification. Only CGC can do the verification.

 

Letting US do the research was my suggestion, by way of a thread here. But Darth is correct in factoring in the 'agenda' factor, especially when you consider that the census is inaccurate precisely DUE to submitter "fraud" by not including labels with resubs.

 

. Correcting the low-hangers as you say should be easy and doable as a start, though.