• 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.

'PLANET COMICS' (is deserving of its own thread)
29 29

Started by Paul © ® ⚽️💙™,

6,186 posts in this topic

Artboy99

Artboy99

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Ricksneatstuff said:

I finally got around to scanning my Planet 17. LOVE :x

It is one of the medium to dark coloration copies, which I am into. I have seen a unicorn or two out there with the super deep colors but this one will do just fine for me. This is a pretty accurate depiction of the coloration. 

 

fc scan.jpg

very dark!

17 is one of my favorites. I have seen all sorts of various colorations on 17:

Planet17comparison_zps74e31bb3.jpg

Here is mine:

Planet17_zps7e68f8c9.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Artboy99

Artboy99

Posted
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Ricksneatstuff said:

I really covet that upper right coloration with the deep red

belongs to our very own Flex Mentallo. That deep red really makes it stand out.

Edited by Artboy99
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Artboy99

Artboy99

Posted
Posted
Just now, Ricksneatstuff said:

Yeah, he has some amazing Planets. They will be lining the interior of the coffin one day. 

as long as I know where that will be I am ok with that... :whistle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zolnerowich

Zolnerowich

Posted
Posted

Very curious, up through #16, the cover colors were consistently vibrant, with minimal variation across individual copies. It seems starting with #17, things started to go haywire at the printing press. 

This is all speculation of course, but I'll speculate anyhow: Planet 17 has a cover date of March 1942. This means it hit the stands 1-2 months before that. The indicia in #17 doesn't say anything about its "on sale" date, but the inside front cover of #16 states "THE NEXT ISSUE OF PLANET COMICS (No. 17, MARCH) WILL BE ON SALE AT YOUR NEWSSTAND JAN. 10th."

No doubt with the attack on Pearl Harbor occurring one month before the on-sale date of Planet 17, the Fiction House publishers suddenly had to deal with war rations on paper, and probably ink too, leading to increasing unpredictability and dropping quality control on our cherished Fiction House line of comics.

The interesting question is why was the printing quality at Fiction House affected so much more than at the other publishers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Artboy99

Artboy99

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Zolnerowich said:

Very curious, up through #16, the cover colors were consistently vibrant, with minimal variation across individual copies. It seems starting with #17, things started to go haywire at the printing press. 

This is all speculation of course, but I'll speculate anyhow: Planet 17 has a cover date of March 1942. This means it hit the stands 1-2 months before that. The indicia in #17 doesn't say anything about its "on sale" date, but the inside front cover of #16 states "THE NEXT ISSUE OF PLANET COMICS (No. 17, MARCH) WILL BE ON SALE AT YOUR NEWSSTAND JAN. 10th."

No doubt with the attack on Pearl Harbor occurring one month before the on-sale date of Planet 17, the Fiction House publishers suddenly had to deal with war rations on paper, and probably ink too, leading to increasing unpredictability and dropping quality control on our cherished Fiction House line of comics.

The interesting question is why was the printing quality at Fiction House affected so much more than at the other publishers?

My guess would be cost. I assume that the cost of purchasing inks, papers, etc went up during those times and to maintain a similar level of cost to produce Fiction House didn't splurge whereas other publishers may have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ricksneatstuff

Ricksneatstuff

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Artboy99 said:

My guess would be cost. I assume that the cost of purchasing inks, papers, etc went up during those times and to maintain a similar level of cost to produce Fiction House didn't splurge whereas other publishers may have.

Another very common issue with FH books, even more than other publishers in my experience, is the little chip/tear at the upper edge of the spine.  I realize this is a common issue with GA books but I see it even more with FH than others.  I’ve had a lot of 9.2 looking 8.5s because of that little tear. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Artboy99

Artboy99

Posted
Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, Ricksneatstuff said:

Another very common issue with FH books, even more than other publishers in my experience, is the little chip/tear at the upper edge of the spine.  I realize this is a common issue with GA books but I see it even more with FH than others.  I’ve had a lot of 9.2 looking 8.5s because of that little tear. 

I agree, I have lots of high grade copies with that tear you describe. As it is production related I don't think it is considered when they grade although I am not 100% certain.

Some of my examples:

PlanetComics45rawVFfront_zps01ebb3a5.jpg

PlanetComics41CGC85_zps2470c699.jpg

PlanetComics35CGC7_5_zps443fae0a.jpg

The other common defect is the chip out of the bottom near the spine:

PlanetComics27raw80_zpsf8c6dfef.jpg

PlanetComics25raw70_zps92f126a8.jpg

 

Edited by Artboy99
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zolnerowich

Zolnerowich

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, Ricksneatstuff said:

Another very common issue with FH books, even more than other publishers in my experience, is the little chip/tear at the upper edge of the spine.  I realize this is a common issue with GA books but I see it even more with FH than others.  I’ve had a lot of 9.2 looking 8.5s because of that little tear. 

 

3 minutes ago, Artboy99 said:

I agree, I have lots of high grade copies with that tear you describe. As it is production related I don't think it is considered when they grade although I am not 100% certain.

Some of my examples:

PlanetComics45rawVFfront_zps01ebb3a5.jpg

PlanetComics41CGC85_zps2470c699.jpg

Interesting. I'd never realized that before. Then again, most of my Planets have so many chips and dings, I wouldn't have ever noticed a tiny chip at the top of the spine! Wish I could breathe that high grade air, but it makes me dizzy! 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Flex Mentallo

Flex Mentallo

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Zolnerowich said:

Very curious, up through #16, the cover colors were consistently vibrant, with minimal variation across individual copies. It seems starting with #17, things started to go haywire at the printing press. 

Page count and physical dimensions were definitely affected by the exigencies of WW2. The variations in cover inks begin earlier than #17. Here is my #12 for example - once again, it's the reds. Though not especially apparent with my copy of  this issue, the other factor seems to me to be, that when the colors are deep, and really pop, then the degree to which they do so is concomitant with what I'd suggest is the original and intended state. I think #4 is the first issue to show a massive variation in color states, whereas #2 is one of the few issues where the colors remain relatively consistent, barring environmental or storage factors. It's all been debated, endlessly. As for explanations, there are various theories, none proven as far as I know.

Planet Comics #12 CGC 6.5.jpg

Edited by Flex Mentallo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Artboy99

Artboy99

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Flex Mentallo said:

Page count and physical dimensions were definitely affected by the exigencies of WW2. The variations in cover inks begin earlier than #17. Here is my #12 for example - once again, it's the reds. Though not especially apparent with my copy of  this issue, the other factor seems to me to be, that when the colors are deep, and really pop, then the degree to which they do so is concomitant with what I'd suggest is the original and intended state. I think #4 is the first issue to show a massive variation in color states, whereas #2 is one of the few issues where the colors remain relatively consistent, barring environmental or storage factors. It's all been debated, endlessly. As for explanations, there are various theories, none proven as far as I know.

Planet Comics #12 CGC 6.5.jpg

Flex: so many Fiction House color discussions we have had! :cloud9:

Not to debunk your theory on issue 2, but my copy has very strong colors, they are just different tones than the darker blue versions. The yellows are vibrant as are the greens, the blue is a different tone than the dark blue I see on many others.

PlanetComics2front_zpsffd05a1c.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
29 29
Go to topic listing