• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Second Action 1 9.0 to hit the census

Started by Gotham Kid,

723 posts in this topic

ciorac

ciorac

Posted
Posted
stacking is not pressing as it is defined today.

 

And pressing is not resto as it is defined today.

 

But who is the definer of what restoration is? The average joe collector or the big time dealers? I for one think that pressing is restoration. I also agree that the line on restoration has become too blurred and with the huge amounts of money being tossed around for big books it is going to be too tempting for someone not to start dabbling in methods of restoration that are not detectable. mess we have already seen this happen with micro trimming :eek:

 

Collectors of all types have voted with their wallets. Dealers who are known to press books still do great business. CGC, who has never considered pressing resto, and now actively presses, still receives more submissions than they can handle.

 

People love to rant about pressing, but so few have changed their buying habits as a result of their opinions, that the argument has become moot.

 

(thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrBedrock

MrBedrock

Posted
Posted
stacking is not pressing as it is defined today.

 

And pressing is not resto as it is defined today.

And today is not yesterday, or tomorrow...as it is defined...um...today?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
eman13

eman13

Posted
Posted
stacking is not pressing as it is defined today.

 

And pressing is not resto as it is defined today.

And today is not yesterday, or tomorrow...as it is defined...um...today?

but yesterday as it is defined today was today as it is defined yesterday,

today was defined tomorrow when it was defined yesterday,

and tomorrow as it is defined today will be today as it is defined tomorrow.

....

....

so..... yah :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrBedrock

MrBedrock

Posted
Posted
stacking is not pressing as it is defined today.

 

And pressing is not resto as it is defined today.

And today is not yesterday, or tomorrow...as it is defined...um...today?

but yesterday as it is defined today was today as it is defined yesterday,

today was defined tomorrow when it was defined yesterday,

and tomorrow as it is defined today will be today as it is defined tomorrow.

....

....

so..... yah :D

hm
Link to comment
Share on other sites
batman_fan

batman_fan

Posted
Posted
there is restoration and then there is "restoration"...

 

untouched does not equal unrestored (or is it vice versa)....

 

edgar church books were "pressed" for years (under stacks of heavy books)....do we say those books are "untouched" just because it was a 10 ft stack of comics that pressed them vs a pressing machine that accomplishes the same results, just faster...

 

now, color touch, cleaning with chemicals, etc...I see that as "restoration".... wonderbreading a book to remove dirt is trying to restore it to a previous condition, but it is not "restoration" as defined (generally) by our hobby...

 

just my 2c

 

Hey Rick

 

That 10ft stack myth has been put to bed several times, it is not true. Also the myth that tightly packed boxes or stacked books in a Florida garage is equal to pressing has also been shown to be false.

 

the church books were in stacks and were "pressed" by the weight... not sure what myth was put to bed, but chuck told me they were stacked 10 ft high in some instances and that absolutely will help flatten a book (or maintain its flatness)

 

I have received damaged comics (new) from diamond, that were rolled over, etc and have placed under a 40 pound box of backing boards and the book was significantly flattened back out...so again, no myth, but practical application...

 

now, will that type of weight pressing eliminate non color breaking creases, probably not, but it absolutely will "press" a book

 

I am going to call BS on the Chuck story. For the neighborhood Church lived in, his ceilings upstairs were 8 ft. For his basement, it should be no more than 8 ft (maybe less). If he stacked the books floor to ceiling, it is 9 ft best case assuming he stacked the books between the rafters which I seriously doubt. Do an experiment, take a bunch of 90s junk and try to make a 10ft stack and then ask yourself "would this guy that was so careful with his books store them this way"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimjum12

jimjum12

Posted
Posted
there is restoration and then there is "restoration"...

 

untouched does not equal unrestored (or is it vice versa)....

 

edgar church books were "pressed" for years (under stacks of heavy books)....do we say those books are "untouched" just because it was a 10 ft stack of comics that pressed them vs a pressing machine that accomplishes the same results, just faster...

 

now, color touch, cleaning with chemicals, etc...I see that as "restoration".... wonderbreading a book to remove dirt is trying to restore it to a previous condition, but it is not "restoration" as defined (generally) by our hobby...

 

just my 2c

 

Hey Rick`

That 10ft stack myth has been put to bed several times, it is not true. Also the myth that tightly packed boxes or stacked books in a Florida garage is equal to pressing has also been shown to be false.

 

the church books were in stacks and were "pressed" by the weight... not sure what myth was put to bed, but chuck told me they were stacked 10 ft high in some instances and that absolutely will help flatten a book (or maintain its flatness)

 

I have received damaged comics (new) from diamond, that were rolled over, etc and have placed under a 40 pound box of backing boards and the book was significantly flattened back out...so again, no myth, but practical application...

 

now, will that type of weight pressing eliminate non color breaking creases, probably not, but it absolutely will "press" a book

 

I am going to call BS on the Chuck story. For the neighborhood Church lived in, his ceilings upstairs were 8 ft. For his basement, it should be no more than 8 ft (maybe less). If he stacked the books floor to ceiling, it is 9 ft best case assuming he stacked the books between the rafters which I seriously doubt. Do an experiment, take a bunch of 90s junk and try to make a 10ft stack and then ask yourself "would this guy that was so careful with his books store them this way"

 

..... what other way was there to store them back then ? GOD BLESS....

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
batman_fan

batman_fan

Posted
Posted
there is restoration and then there is "restoration"...

 

untouched does not equal unrestored (or is it vice versa)....

 

edgar church books were "pressed" for years (under stacks of heavy books)....do we say those books are "untouched" just because it was a 10 ft stack of comics that pressed them vs a pressing machine that accomplishes the same results, just faster...

 

now, color touch, cleaning with chemicals, etc...I see that as "restoration".... wonderbreading a book to remove dirt is trying to restore it to a previous condition, but it is not "restoration" as defined (generally) by our hobby...

 

just my 2c

 

Hey Rick`

That 10ft stack myth has been put to bed several times, it is not true. Also the myth that tightly packed boxes or stacked books in a Florida garage is equal to pressing has also been shown to be false.

 

the church books were in stacks and were "pressed" by the weight... not sure what myth was put to bed, but chuck told me they were stacked 10 ft high in some instances and that absolutely will help flatten a book (or maintain its flatness)

 

I have received damaged comics (new) from diamond, that were rolled over, etc and have placed under a 40 pound box of backing boards and the book was significantly flattened back out...so again, no myth, but practical application...

 

now, will that type of weight pressing eliminate non color breaking creases, probably not, but it absolutely will "press" a book

 

I am going to call BS on the Chuck story. For the neighborhood Church lived in, his ceilings upstairs were 8 ft. For his basement, it should be no more than 8 ft (maybe less). If he stacked the books floor to ceiling, it is 9 ft best case assuming he stacked the books between the rafters which I seriously doubt. Do an experiment, take a bunch of 90s junk and try to make a 10ft stack and then ask yourself "would this guy that was so careful with his books store them this way"

 

..... what other way was there to store them back then ? GOD BLESS....

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

 

I recall but could be remembering incorrectly that they were stored on shelves in the basement in stacks maybe 2ft or so high. I know in the 70s I stored mine in stacks about a foot high on a shelf in my closet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimjum12

jimjum12

Posted
Posted

I kept mine in stacks also ..... in a dresser drawers. I'm not sure where you can find it.... but I have seen photos of the cabinets in the Church house (empty.... of course) and I don't remember shelves..... but then, I wasn't exactly scrutinizing. I was more interested in reading the info. It very well may have been on these boards. I wouldn't mind seeing them again if someone had a link. GOD BLESS.....

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
G.A.tor

G.A.tor

Posted
Posted

I have no idea. Certainly not past chuck to exaggerate. But I've seen closets of comics packed tight and high.

Really doesn't matter, the point is weight of any consequence will flatten paper ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
adamstrange

adamstrange

Posted
Posted

In the Photojournal Gerber reports Chuck as saying the books were stacked floor to the ceiling.

 

Here's the basement in question. Perhaps a forensic scientist can extrapolate the height?

 

EdgarsClosetWatermarked002.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
batman_fan

batman_fan

Posted
Posted
In the Photojournal Gerber reports Chuck as saying the books were stacked floor to the ceiling.

 

Here's the basement in question. Perhaps a forensic scientist can extrapolate the height?

 

EdgarsClosetWatermarked002.jpg

 

Maximum height would be 7ft, I would guess the ceiling height at about 7ft 6inches if it is 7ft. The neighborhood he lived in had utility basements not meant as living space and typically had lower ceilings. I remember seeing a picture of the inside of the closet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VintageComics

VintageComics

Posted
Posted
In the Photojournal Gerber reports Chuck as saying the books were stacked floor to the ceiling.

 

Chuck's quote exactly from here (last paragraph): :

 

The sellers accepted my first offer with only two conditions. They required that my payment had to be in cash, and that I also had to clean out the "closet." It was at that point that they walked me to a walk-in closet that separated a back office from the hallway at the bottom of the stairs. When they opened the door to the closet, I was astounded to see that it was completely filled with ceiling-high stacks of even more old comics. There were even comics stuffed all the way up into the floor joists! It was at this point that I finally grasped that I had stumbled into an unbelievably wonderful collection of old comics.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimjum12

jimjum12

Posted
Posted

This would indicate that they were stored in two separate areas....as he saw the floor to joist books AFTER he had already made an offer. GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tth2

tth2

Posted
Posted
In the Photojournal Gerber reports Chuck as saying the books were stacked floor to the ceiling.

 

Here's the basement in question. Perhaps a forensic scientist can extrapolate the height?

 

EdgarsClosetWatermarked002.jpg

Where's the cedar?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimjum12

jimjum12

Posted
Posted
In the Photojournal Gerber reports Chuck as saying the books were stacked floor to the ceiling.

 

Here's the basement in question. Perhaps a forensic scientist can extrapolate the height?

 

EdgarsClosetWatermarked002.jpg

Where's the cedar?

 

..... between Chuck's legs ? GOD BLESS....

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus) (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
batman_fan

batman_fan

Posted
Posted
Ok, basic math time (just cuz I'm bored)

6 ga comics =1 inch=1.7 pound (approx)

7 feet is 84" = 140 pounds (approx)

 

Now convert it to lbs/in^2 and compare to the force used in pressing. You can also do a simple little experiment and apply the two pressures to the hood of you car and see which leave a bigger impression.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nearmint

nearmint

Posted
Posted
there is restoration and then there is "restoration"...

 

untouched does not equal unrestored (or is it vice versa)....

 

edgar church books were "pressed" for years (under stacks of heavy books)....do we say those books are "untouched" just because it was a 10 ft stack of comics that pressed them vs a pressing machine that accomplishes the same results, just faster...

 

now, color touch, cleaning with chemicals, etc...I see that as "restoration".... wonderbreading a book to remove dirt is trying to restore it to a previous condition, but it is not "restoration" as defined (generally) by our hobby...

 

just my 2c

 

Hey Rick`

That 10ft stack myth has been put to bed several times, it is not true. Also the myth that tightly packed boxes or stacked books in a Florida garage is equal to pressing has also been shown to be false.

 

the church books were in stacks and were "pressed" by the weight... not sure what myth was put to bed, but chuck told me they were stacked 10 ft high in some instances and that absolutely will help flatten a book (or maintain its flatness)

 

I have received damaged comics (new) from diamond, that were rolled over, etc and have placed under a 40 pound box of backing boards and the book was significantly flattened back out...so again, no myth, but practical application...

 

now, will that type of weight pressing eliminate non color breaking creases, probably not, but it absolutely will "press" a book

 

I am going to call BS on the Chuck story. For the neighborhood Church lived in, his ceilings upstairs were 8 ft. For his basement, it should be no more than 8 ft (maybe less). If he stacked the books floor to ceiling, it is 9 ft best case assuming he stacked the books between the rafters which I seriously doubt. Do an experiment, take a bunch of 90s junk and try to make a 10ft stack and then ask yourself "would this guy that was so careful with his books store them this way"

 

..... what other way was there to store them back then ? GOD BLESS....

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

 

I recall but could be remembering incorrectly that they were stored on shelves in the basement in stacks maybe 2ft or so high. I know in the 70s I stored mine in stacks about a foot high on a shelf in my closet.

 

The water-damaged pulps were stored on shelves. I've never heard or read that the comics were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nearmint

nearmint

Posted
Posted
Ok, basic math time (just cuz I'm bored)

6 ga comics =1 inch=1.7 pound (approx)

7 feet is 84" = 140 pounds (approx)

 

Now convert it to lbs/in^2 and compare to the force used in pressing. You can also do a simple little experiment and apply the two pressures to the hood of you car and see which leave a bigger impression.

 

Wouldn't length of time also need to be factored in? The Church books were stacked for decades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing