Action Comics #2 CGC 9.4

[Tri-Color Brian]

I tend to be one of the non-purists when it comes to cleaned books. I see nothing wrong with water-cleaning a book and pressing it. heck, I don't see anything wrong with a little writing or unprofessional color touch either. I buy books for their appearance, not PURITY of essence. Here's a couple examples...one has been cleaned and pressed, the other hasn't...which would you want to own? Which should be more valuable? I think (at least from my perspective), that this is a no brainer question...and no purple or green or chartreuse label is needed.

 

 

 

 

[MrBedrock]

I just got in a collection of big logo golden age DC. Most are mid-grade with very nice paper but many have a sticker with the original owners name stuck right in the middle of the cover, right in the middle of the art. Purists would say "leave the sticker there.It has historical significance. It is the way it is and should remain for eternity!" Unfortunately most of those same purists wouldn't want these books because they have a big sticker in the middle of the cover. If the stickers were properly removed the books would be much more presentable and desirable to a vast majority of collectors. Properly removing the stickers would involve using chemicals. They would be restored. In this perverse market they would be considered to have a lower value being restored even though more people would consider buying them without the sticker than with. It just doesn't make much sense.

 

What I find amazing is a collector who, after taking care with his newsstand comics so obviously cherishing them, decides to put a sticker on the worst place on the comic. I can understand drawing tits on Lois Lane, before this.

I think I have told this story before...

In 1990, about six months after we opened, an old man came into a friend's shop here in Houston. The man had a collection of Batman comics to sell...Batman 1-50 and Detectives from about 70 - 130. The later issues were gorgeous but he had written his name on each and every one of them. "Denny Cobb" right in the middle of the cover!

 

My friend called me and we decided to make an offer together and split the collection. We spent a while grading and pricing all of them to figure out what a fair offer would be but we had trouble with the fact that the name was there, how much to deduct and so forth. We finally arrived at a number and made Mr. Cobb and offer. we negotiated a little more and a deal was agreed upon. At this point my friend said to Mr. Cobb, "I sure wish you hadn't written your name on all of these. We could have offered you a whole lot more."

 

Without hesitation Mr. Cobb said, "If I hadn't written my name on them there wouldn't be any books for you to buy. The other kids would have stolen them."

 

So I guess those unsightly names and stickers can be attractive after all.

[woowoo]

I tend to be one of the non-purists when it comes to cleaned books. I see nothing wrong with water-cleaning a book and pressing it. heck, I don't see anything wrong with a little writing or unprofessional color touch either. I buy books for their appearance, not PURITY of essence. Here's a couple examples...one has been cleaned and pressed, the other hasn't...which would you want to own? Which should be more valuable? I think (at least from my perspective), that this is a no brainer question...and no purple or green or chartreuse label is needed.

 

 

 

 

Top 1 for me

[Point Five]

Great story!

 

 

[Tri-Color Brian]

I tend to be one of the non-purists when it comes to cleaned books. I see nothing wrong with water-cleaning a book and pressing it. heck, I don't see anything wrong with a little writing or unprofessional color touch either. I buy books for their appearance, not PURITY of essence. Here's a couple examples...one has been cleaned and pressed, the other hasn't...which would you want to own? Which should be more valuable? I think (at least from my perspective), that this is a no brainer question...and no purple or green or chartreuse label is needed.

 

 

 

 

Top 1 for me

 

You picked correctly...that's my copy... (thumbs u

[Tri-Color Brian]

I always wondered why kids did that...now it makes sense. I always thought it was some kind of pride thing, but it was actually their own form of ADT security.

[nearmint]

Herby really didn't want his comics stolen...

 

 

[Tri-Color Brian]

Gotta love those Herby Skogland books...that should be a pedigree.

[Cat-Man_America]

I tend to be one of the non-purists when it comes to cleaned books. I see nothing wrong with water-cleaning a book and pressing it. heck, I don't see anything wrong with a little writing or unprofessional color touch either. I buy books for their appearance, not PURITY of essence. Here's a couple examples...one has been cleaned and pressed, the other hasn't...which would you want to own? Which should be more valuable? I think (at least from my perspective), that this is a no brainer question...and no purple or green or chartreuse label is needed.

 

 

 

 

True, it's a no brainer based on consensus, but perspective's vary.

 

Disclosure is what 3rd party grading and encapsulation is all about. Appearance is certainly a factor in respect to desirability, but whether one approves of slabbing or not, the trust it provides is what drives the collecting market. This system isn't going anywhere. For reading, grading doesn't matter, but for long term collecting, knowing more about the book and why it looks like it does is important to most folks. My

 

 

[bluechip]

I can't claim to know what people are saying on antiques roadshow, but I've talked with people who collect valuable paper and curate for museums, and they've said there is nothing like the behavior in comics toward resto. At least not in the lower grades. By definition uber high grade collectors are picky. So, in all fields of collecting you will find mint collecting purists who resemble their counterparts in comics. What you don't see to anything approaching the same degree is that same attitude extending to the lower grades, at the same extreme. With, for example, books missing back covers and trimmed from bound vol;umes being called "restored" not because anyone really thinks they're restored but because they acknowledge that the "restored" label means it is viewed as "desecration" and they want to say the trimmed book has also been desecrated/ As if the word "restored" means "bad" and that is also means "anything different that I also think is bad."

 

In most fields, restoration is considered an alteration on the same level as a defect. Bad attempts at restoration often end up damaging a comic. Or it's damage that makes it look better. But still damage. But only in comics, according to the folk I've talked with, do you see people saying that a book can be in "apparent poor" condition. (waiting for somebody to find another field where this occurs in one... two... three..)

 

But whether it occurs elsewhere or not, the vast majority of people find it very strange that anything would be considered less valuable with a dot of intentional color touch repair versus another book with extensive amounts of intentional damage that defaces the book. Or even that a book with color touch in the corner is worth less than a similar book with that corner completely removed.

 

That, in the real world, is seem as bizarre and the fact that it appeals to extremists or that it creates bargains should not be reasons to embrace bizarre valuations, because bizarreness tends to make the vast majority of people think that maybe they should stay away from investing in things where the valuations can get that weird (especially when the history of the hobby shows that today's "unacceptable" was yesterday's "acceptable." And what similar emotion or bargain-based rationalizations might make the acceptable thing I buy today worth far less tomorrow (pressing, etc.)

 

 

[Tri-Color Brian]

When I sell a book I disclose everything I know about it and what I had done to it if anything. I know that doesn't work for everyone, not everyone is as honest as I am, but I still think we get a little carried away determining what is resto and what is not. there are several things that should not be considered resto or even conservation, but that is another argument entirely. However, I understand your point...

[Tri-Color Brian]

I can't claim to know what people are saying on antiques roadshow, but I've talked with people who collect valuable paper and curate for museums, and they've said there is nothing like the behavior in comics toward resto. At least not in the lower grades. By definition uber high grade collectors are picky. So, in all fields of collecting you will find mint collecting purists who resemble their counterparts in comics. What you don't see to anything approaching the same degree is that same attitude extending to the lower grades, at the same extreme. With, for example, books missing back covers and trimmed from bound vol;umes being called "restored" not because anyone really thinks they're restored but because they acknowledge that the "restored" label means it is viewed as "desecration" and they want to say the trimmed book has also been desecrated/ As if the word "restored" means "bad" and that is also means "anything different that I also think is bad."

 

In most fields, restoration is considered an alteration on the same level as a defect. Bad attempts at restoration often end up damaging a comic. Or it's damage that makes it look better. But still damage. But only in comics, according to the folk I've talked with, do you see people saying that a book can be in "apparent poor" condition. (waiting for somebody to find another field where this occurs in one... two... three..)

 

But whether it occurs elsewhere or not, the vast majority of people find it very strange that anything would be considered less valuable with a dot of intentional color touch repair versus another book with extensive amounts of intentional damage that defaces the book. Or even that a book with color touch in the corner is worth less than a similar book with that corner completely removed.

 

That, in the real world, is seem as bizarre and the fact that it appeals to extremists or that it creates bargains should not be reasons to embrace bizarre valuations, because bizarreness tends to make the vast majority of people think that maybe they should stay away from investing in things where the valuations can get that weird (especially when the history of the hobby shows that today's "unacceptable" was yesterday's "acceptable." And what similar emotion or bargain-based rationalizations might make the acceptable thing I buy today worth far less tomorrow (pressing, etc.)

 

 

YOU sound like a reasonable person... (thumbs u

[cheetah]

I tend to be one of the non-purists when it comes to cleaned books. I see nothing wrong with water-cleaning a book and pressing it. heck, I don't see anything wrong with a little writing or unprofessional color touch either. I buy books for their appearance, not PURITY of essence. Here's a couple examples...one has been cleaned and pressed, the other hasn't...which would you want to own? Which should be more valuable? I think (at least from my perspective), that this is a no brainer question...and no purple or green or chartreuse label is needed.

 

 

 

 

It really depends on why you are buying it and what your collecting goals are. I wouldn't choose either one unless I had scrounged around enough to know it would be the best I could get to finish a run (I've got a few Nedors like that). If I had reached that point and found these two, I would take the lower graded but unrestored copy.

[Tri-Color Brian]

I don't think CGC considers water cleaning and pressing restoration...it is now "Conservation" But, my point is it shouldn't be anything at all...because the book is still the book it was when it was new...it just had some dirt and wrinkles removed...and those weren't there when the book was on the stands...so how is it resto? No pieces were added, no color was touched up...

 

ADGMW (and don't get me wrong), I'm not trying to argue with you...I have much respect for your collecting habits...

[Cat-Man_America]

I don't think CGC considers water cleaning and pressing restoration...it is now "Conservation" But, my point is it shouldn't be anything at all...because the book is still the book it was when it was new...it just had some dirt and wrinkles removed...and those weren't there when the book was on the stands...so how is it resto? No pieces were added, no color was touched up...

 

ADGMW (and don't get me wrong), I'm not trying to argue with you...I have much respect for your collecting habits...

 

Cheetah collects nun's apparel, ...I never knew!

[Tri-Color Brian]

[cheetah]

I don't think CGC considers water cleaning and pressing restoration...it is now "Conservation" But, my point is it shouldn't be anything at all...because the book is still the book it was when it was new...it just had some dirt and wrinkles removed...and those weren't there when the book was on the stands...so how is it resto? No pieces were added, no color was touched up...

 

ADGMW (and don't get me wrong), I'm not trying to argue with you...I have much respect for your collecting habits...

 

The nice thing about collecting is that it doesn't really matter what you or anyone else thinks. As long as I like what I collect, all is bueno. If you wanna collect a book, I'm fine with it. If you don't wanna collect a book, I'm fine with it. You don't like what I collect, that's fine, too, coz I probably don't want what you have either...

 

otherwise I would have outbid you for it.

[Bookery]

Let me be clear---no purple, blue or green or whatever, one color for all, 10 point grade system-with restoration lowing the grade number only

 

Yep.

 

All grading is opinion... some informed, some uninformed, but all opinion nonetheless.

Some opinions come from long-term dealers. Some opinions come from a corporate consensus from an ever-changing selection of people we don't know.

 

Personally... MY opinion is with Mitch above. I own a CGC restored 7.0 copy of Amazing Fantasy 15. The book looks spectacular... and everyone who sees it wonders why it's not an "apparent" 9.0, instead of a 7.0. Personally... I have trouble with "apparent" anything, because I can clearly see the restoration, but am asked to pretend that I can't in order to make an 'apparent" assessment. The restoration is primarily marvel-chipping fill and spine-tear seals and reinforcement.

 

In Bookery's imaginary-slabbing system... this book would probably get a final grade of 3.0 or 3.5 (I'd have to see it out of the slab to be sure). I mentally factor in how the book was pretty much before restoration, but take into account the quality of restoration work and time and cost involved (restoration done right is "worth" something after all... it certainly can cost enough). Of course, my 3.0 label would detail everything that's been done to the book, as well as any unseen internal natural damage.

 

So yes... the book "looks" 7.0 or 9.0 or whatever... but I would feel it is comparable in collectibility to a 3.0... with enough details for buyers to make a decision on whether the book is right for their collection.

 

 

 

 

 

[Sqeggs]

I tend to be one of the non-purists when it comes to cleaned books. I see nothing wrong with water-cleaning a book and pressing it. heck, I don't see anything wrong with a little writing or unprofessional color touch either. I buy books for their appearance, not PURITY of essence. Here's a couple examples...one has been cleaned and pressed, the other hasn't...which would you want to own? Which should be more valuable? I think (at least from my perspective), that this is a no brainer question...and no purple or green or chartreuse label is needed.

 

 

 

 

I much prefer the bottom one; it looks more lived in.

[Tri-Color Brian]

In any society, the majority opinion is usually incorrect...