There's a Restored 9.4 Tec 33 Blowing up on Ebay

[lou_fine]

Both the Batman #1 shown in the link and the fridge magnets just plain scream out loud- FAKE !!!!!!

 

This is not always the case. I had a Bat 1 that was dead mint in every way except missing the back cover. Married a back cover and sold it long ago for a small fraction of what it sold for later when somebody got it into a 9.2 slab (and it may have been upgraded since then)

 

From the front if looked just as "fake" as that one despite needing nothing at all done to the front cover or the interior

 

 

Right. Our point of reference is not seeing what the books looked like 75 years ago. It's what the books look like today, after years of preservation.

 

I've seen some SA books with snow white covers and pages. They look 'fake' but aren't. That effect is probably increased on a GA book.

 

Yes, I guess no more so than the beautiful 'Tec 35 posted earlier which was restored the traditional way by Matt and CCS:

 

Curious what everyone things about this book. Its a copy I have owned for 15 years and had it restored a few years ago by Matt and Kenny (CCS).

 

 

So, should the restorers be restoring the book to something as pure and fresh looking as if it had just came out yesterday, or should their appearance be limited to newsstand fresh plus 75+ years of fine aging in an almost museum like controlled environment.

 

Anything beyond that and it's really nothing more than a "fake".

[gino2paulus2]

Both the Batman #1 shown in the link and the fridge magnets just plain scream out loud- FAKE !!!!!!

 

This is not always the case. I had a Bat 1 that was dead mint in every way except missing the back cover. Married a back cover and sold it long ago for a small fraction of what it sold for later when somebody got it into a 9.2 slab (and it may have been upgraded since then)

 

From the front if looked just as "fake" as that one despite needing nothing at all done to the front cover or the interior

 

 

Right. Our point of reference is not seeing what the books looked like 75 years ago. It's what the books look like today, after years of preservation.

 

I've seen some SA books with snow white covers and pages. They look 'fake' but aren't. That effect is probably increased on a GA book.

 

Yes, I guess no more so than the beautiful 'Tec 35 posted earlier which was restored the traditional way by Matt and CCS:

 

Curious what everyone things about this book. Its a copy I have owned for 15 years and had it restored a few years ago by Matt and Kenny (CCS).

 

 

So, should the restorers be restoring the book to something as pure and fresh looking as if it had just came out yesterday, or should their appearance be limited to newsstand fresh plus 75+ years of fine aging in an almost museum like controlled environment.

 

Anything beyond that and it's really nothing more than a "fake".

 

I would like to substitute the word fake with unnatural for the time period. I stated in Ankurs maxing out thread that I thought it was paramount that he had the before and after pics. The yellows on his 35 are beautiful and they appear natural and matched to what his book were prior to the resto with maybe a little cleaning. The Bats #1 9.6 looks unnatural to me. Then again like I stated that could just be a photoshop job on CCs part who knows. I would like to see the before and after pics on this book. That would be neat then at least we would know what had to be recreated for it to look like this.

[lou_fine]

The Bats #1 9.6 looks unnatural to me. Then again like I stated that could just be a photoshop job on CCs part who knows.

 

Yes, the 9.6 copy definitely looks unnatural and almost like a "glow in the dark" version as opposed to the 9.4 copy which simply looks much more clean and natural to me.

[gino2paulus2]

The Bats #1 9.6 looks unnatural to me. Then again like I stated that could just be a photoshop job on CCs part who knows.

 

Yes, the 9.6 copy definitely looks unnatural and almost like a "glow in the dark" version as opposed to the 9.4 copy which simply looks much more clean and natural to me.

 

100% agreed the look of that 9.4 seems spot on

[VintageComics]

Does anyone have a pic from 1939 and 1940 to show what actual, newsstand fresh GA books looked like?

 

I don't think many people know what the looked like. My guess is that they would look unnatural to most of us.

 

I've recounted this conversation many times, but when the Vancouver books came to market a CGC grader told me that had no idea how fresh a GA book could look. They thought they'd already seen and experienced white, fresh books with the Church collection.

 

The Vancouver books were a step above and the grader's paradigm had changed.

 

It's nearly impossible for us to imagine early DC's and Timely's sitting row upon row, newsstand fresh with bright colors, sharp corners and edges and bone white pages.

[VintageComics]

So, should the restorers be restoring the book to something as pure and fresh looking as if it had just came out yesterday, or should their appearance be limited to newsstand fresh plus 75+ years of fine aging in an almost museum like controlled environment.

 

Isn't the point of restoration to restore it back to it's previous state?

 

I would think newsstand fresh would be the goal, as as close as possible - obviously taking into account the wishes of the owner.

[path4play]

So, should the restorers be restoring the book to something as pure and fresh looking as if it had just came out yesterday, or should their appearance be limited to newsstand fresh plus 75+ years of fine aging in an almost museum like controlled environment.

 

Isn't the point of restoration to restore it back to it's previous state?

 

I would think newsstand fresh would be the goal, as as close as possible - obviously taking into account the wishes of the owner.

 

I'm watching a movie right now that has a scene of a New York street - looks pretty real to me (even rain drops on the taxi cab) but there is just something that makes me think its actually been restored on a studio lot.

 

I worked in the newspaper industry for twelve years, and have seen papers come directly off the press, bundled and delivered to the newsstand - the way they were handled I doubt they would meet the virtually unbreathed on requirements of a 9.6 - but I don't claim to be a grading expert.

 

I do get your point however, it seems everyone here has a slightly different opinion on exactly where the line is drawn (pun intended).

 

 

[VintageComics]

I'm watching a movie right now that has a scene of a New York street - looks pretty real to me (even rain drops on the taxi cab) but there is just something that makes me think its actually been restored on a studio lot.

 

I worked in the newspaper industry for twelve years, and have seen papers come directly off the press, bundled and delivered to the newsstand - the way they were handled I doubt they would meet the virtually unbreathed on requirements of a 9.6 - but I don't claim to be a grading expert.

 

I do get your point however, it seems everyone here has a slightly different opinion on exactly where the line is drawn (pun intended).

 

 

I would think that the papers in the middle of the stacks would be closer to 'Mint' than the outside ones.

 

As far as restoring, I think newsstand fresh could be the goal if the owner wanted to spend the bucks...but what nesstand fresh is is maybe tough to establish for a 1940 book unless we see some pics.

 

I do think books should be penalized if they differ from the originals.

[path4play]

I'm watching a movie right now that has a scene of a New York street - looks pretty real to me (even rain drops on the taxi cab) but there is just something that makes me think its actually been restored on a studio lot.

 

I worked in the newspaper industry for twelve years, and have seen papers come directly off the press, bundled and delivered to the newsstand - the way they were handled I doubt they would meet the virtually unbreathed on requirements of a 9.6 - but I don't claim to be a grading expert.

 

I do get your point however, it seems everyone here has a slightly different opinion on exactly where the line is drawn (pun intended).

 

 

I would think that the papers in the middle of the stacks would be closer to 'Mint' than the outside ones.

 

As far as restoring, I think newsstand fresh could be the goal if the owner wanted to spend the bucks...but what nesstand fresh is is maybe tough to establish for a 1940 book unless we see some pics.

 

I do think books should be penalized if they differ from the originals.

 

 

I'm kind of feeling like we are all Deckard working as Replicant Hunters.

 

 

[woowoo]

Does anyone have a pic from 1939 and 1940 to show what actual, newsstand fresh GA books looked like?[/b]I don't think many people know what the looked like. My guess is that they would look unnatural to most of us.

 

I've recounted this conversation many times, but when the Vancouver books came to market a CGC grader told me that had no idea how fresh a GA book could look. They thought they'd already seen and experienced white, fresh books with the Church collection.

 

The Vancouver books were a step above and the grader's paradigm had changed.

 

It's nearly impossible for us to imagine early DC's and Timely's sitting row upon row, newsstand fresh with bright colors, sharp corners and edges and bone white pages.

 

 

This is as close as i got

 

[/img]

 

 

 

[lou_fine]

Does anyone have a pic from 1939 and 1940 to show what actual, newsstand fresh GA books looked like?[/b]I don't think many people know what the looked like. My guess is that they would look unnatural to most of us.

 

I've recounted this conversation many times, but when the Vancouver books came to market a CGC grader told me that had no idea how fresh a GA book could look. They thought they'd already seen and experienced white, fresh books with the Church collection.

 

The Vancouver books were a step above and the grader's paradigm had changed.

 

It's nearly impossible for us to imagine early DC's and Timely's sitting row upon row, newsstand fresh with bright colors, sharp corners and edges and bone white pages.

 

 

This is as close as i got

 

[/img]

 

 

 

[woowoo]

Does anyone have a pic from 1939 and 1940 to show what actual, newsstand fresh GA books looked like?[/b]I don't think many people know what the looked like. My guess is that they would look unnatural to most of us.

 

I've recounted this conversation many times, but when the Vancouver books came to market a CGC grader told me that had no idea how fresh a GA book could look. They thought they'd already seen and experienced white, fresh books with the Church collection.

 

The Vancouver books were a step above and the grader's paradigm had changed.

 

It's nearly impossible for us to imagine early DC's and Timely's sitting row upon row, newsstand fresh with bright colors, sharp corners and edges and bone white pages.

 

 

This is as close as i got

 

[/img]

 

 

 

 

They are just so white. I have seen a lot of Sup 12s never this white.

[VintageComics]

I'm kind of feeling like we are all Deckard working as Replicant Hunters.

 

[woowoo]

Just saw this key 9.6.

 

http://www.comicconnect.com./bookDetail.php?id=650366

[path4play]

You Never Miss The Water Until The Well Runs Dry.

 

Just saw this key 9.6.

 

http://www.comicconnect.com./bookDetail.php?id=650366

[Aman619]

I dont understand the discussion about newsstand fresh. Comics were printed just about the same way in the 1940s and they are now... large ink presses, newsprint interiors and glossy cover stock stapled together 1000s at a time.

 

Want to see/know what "newsstand fresh" looked like in 1940? get any new magazine or even normal comic book: it's glossy, bright colors, tight, solid and feells complete in your hand (not like a group of individual paper wraps) with no wear or creasing (mostly).

 

 

But no restorer can duplicate this because they are PAINTING on paper and not running the paper through a press and applying layer on layer (4) of inks laying down halftone dots. A restored comic can never do more than LOOK like the original at arms length.

[Aman619]

found a good scan to compare against. Can you guess which is the original and which is the CC scan?

[lou_fine]

So, should the restorers be restoring the book to something as pure and fresh looking as if it had just came out yesterday, or should their appearance be limited to newsstand fresh plus 75+ years of fine aging in an almost museum like controlled environment.

 

Isn't the point of restoration to restore it back to it's previous state?

 

I would think newsstand fresh would be the goal, as as close as possible - obviously taking into account the wishes of the owner.

 

Yes, I would be in full agreement with your further comments below:

 

 

As far as restoring, I think newsstand fresh could be the goal if the owner wanted to spend the bucks...but what nesstand fresh is is maybe tough to establish for a 1940 book unless we see some pics.

 

I do think books should be penalized if they differ from the originals.

 

As you have said, newsstand fresh should be the goal and books should be penalized for obvious differences from the original artwork.

 

The questions are: What is newsstand fresh in 1940 and how slight are the differences allowed in the various condition grades for EP restored books?

[Bronty]

2nd one is real, yes?

[sacentaur]

Can you guess which is the original and which is the CC scan?

 

A picture (or in this case, two pictures) is worth a thousand words (or endless pages of discussion).