Okay boys and girls, we get to see how "dead" Marvel Comics 1 is

[cousin itt]

Here's an animated gif that is centered around the black slug. I scaled each image as needed so the black slug would be the same size in every image (87 pixels), and rotated a few frames to try to get the black background to line up as much as possible. What I think is clear is that the other black line art moves a lot relative to both the NOV and the black slug, but those two seem to be stationary relative to each other, except for, y'know, when they aren't.

[VintageComics]

The indicia black stripe moves too. The stripe in the 2nd example is to the right of the word "Vol." and does not cover the word "Published." The 3rd example is dead on where it should be. Oddly, the 2nd example also shows a separation in the middle of the text (P..........ublications).

 

 

The 1st (Oct) and 3rd (Nov) example have the 1939 indicia correct. The 3rd one is my old copy.

 

It looks like in the 2nd (Nov) example the entire 1st line from 'Vol .... right to the P' in 'Publications' has moved left - so the blackout line is in the correct spot but the first half of that line has moved left.

 

Do you remember where you got the 2nd indicia from?

[cousin itt]

I wonder if there's any connection to the broken indicia and the placement of the NOV?

[Ameri]

The indicia black stripe moves too. The stripe in the 2nd example is to the right of the word "Vol." and does not cover the word "Published." The 3rd example is dead on where it should be. Oddly, the 2nd example also shows a separation in the middle of the text (P..........ublications).

 

 

The 1st (Oct) and 3rd (Nov) example have the 1939 indicia correct. The 3rd one is my old copy.

 

It looks like in the 2nd (Nov) example the entire 1st line from 'Vol .... right to the P' in 'Publications' has moved left - so the blackout line is in the correct spot but the first half of that line has moved left.

 

Do you remember where you got the 2nd indicia from?

 

The 2nd example was from a copy owned by a New Jersey collector who lent it to Microcolor for filming back in the 90's.

[Ameri]

Regarding your question about the red hair...the Marvel Omnibus shows a Human Torch with red hair whereas Marvel 1s do not. The issue was that the hair might have been intended to be red. However, one of the threads you supplied had a comment about the Human Torch stories in the Oct and Nov editions and the Torch is blonde in both.

This is where I'm confused. The hair may have been intended to be red, but that change was not reflected in the actual printed material. That's demonstrable. The Torch has blonde hair in the November copies, except for one panel where it's red.

 

Is this discussion based solely on the red hair in the Omnibus printing 60+ years later? Because it seems fairly evident that the Omnibus coloring is based on the intent, and not reflective of the original printing.

 

I stand corrected. The Torch is non-flame in only 3 panels of Marvel 1. Two show blonde, but 1 absolutely shows red. From an original copy:

 

 

 

[VintageComics]

In that top right panel, Sardo is talking to someone and calling them Red when he says "OK - Red -"

 

Is he talking to the Torch?

[Ameri]

Red is one of Sardo's henchman. Ha ha, maybe that's why the colorist got it mixed up and gave the Torch red hair. Good catch!

[stock_rotation]

It looks like in the 2nd (Nov) example the entire 1st line from 'Vol .... right to the P' in 'Publications' has moved left - so the blackout line is in the correct spot but the first half of that line has moved left.

Funny! I was going to write something about this; it's why I was asking for photos of indicias. It's about as close to proof as you're likely to get that DiceX's stamp theory is correct. I know there was discussion back in '09 that it looked like a stamp due to being able to read through the overprint, but this really kind of proves it.

 

What you're looking at in that second photo is a prepress error that required an entire new plate to be burned for the interior. Notice that it's not just the first line that's off-- there's a gap running thrugh the center of the text, splitting some words in half. The reason there is a gap is due to how type was set at the time. You could photoset type, but you couldn't do a line of text wider than about 4 inches. So if you wanted a 6 inch indica, you had to do it in two pieces. The prepress person would assemble the two pieces before burning the plate. It's L shaped because you couldn't rely on the prepress person reading the text to determine which side went on the left and which went on the right-- so you would make the text in blocks that could only be assembled in one way, like a puzzle or Tetris.

 

The prepress person screwed up when they burned the plate, and they must have discovered the error while on the press. They needed to pull the plate and burn a new one. If they had to burn a new plate, they would have burned the blackout line and the new text on the new plate. That they didn't is extremely strong circumstantial evidence that the blackout line and new text was added after the covers were already printed.

 

Based on what I know about printing (I was in the industry for almost 25 years, 5 as a pressman and the next 20 in prepress), the interiors would have been printed first. 4-color process printing is difficult, so you wouldn't want to print a 4-color cover and then risk destroying some of those press sheets while running black on the interior. You'd run the easiest side first and run plenty of extras.

 

[stock_rotation]

I stand corrected. The Torch is non-flame in only 3 panels of Marvel 1. Two show blonde, but 1 absolutely shows red. From an original copy:

I never noticed that one, so there are two panels where Torch has red hair:

 

[Jaydogrules]

It looks like in the 2nd (Nov) example the entire 1st line from 'Vol .... right to the P' in 'Publications' has moved left - so the blackout line is in the correct spot but the first half of that line has moved left.

Funny! I was going to write something about this; it's why I was asking for photos of indicias. It's about as close to proof as you're likely to get that DiceX's stamp theory is correct. I know there was discussion back in '09 that it looked like a stamp due to being able to read through the overprint, but this really kind of proves it.

 

What you're looking at in that second photo is a prepress error that required an entire new plate to be burned for the interior. Notice that it's not just the first line that's off-- there's a gap running thrugh the center of the text, splitting some words in half. The reason there is a gap is due to how type was set at the time. You could photoset type, but you couldn't do a line of text wider than about 4 inches. So if you wanted a 6 inch indica, you had to do it in two pieces. The prepress person would assemble the two pieces before burning the plate. It's L shaped because you couldn't rely on the prepress person reading the text to determine which side went on the left and which went on the right-- so you would make the text in blocks that could only be assembled in one way, like a puzzle or Tetris.

 

The prepress person screwed up when they burned the plate, and they must have discovered the error while on the press. They needed to pull the plate and burn a new one. If they had to burn a new plate, they would have burned the blackout line and the new text on the new plate. That they didn't is extremely strong circumstantial evidence that the blackout line and new text was added after the covers were already printed.

 

Based on what I know about printing (I was in the industry for almost 25 years, 5 as a pressman and the next 20 in prepress), the interiors would have been printed first. 4-color process printing is difficult, so you wouldn't want to print a 4-color cover and then risk destroying some of those press sheets while running black on the interior. You'd run the easiest side first and run plenty of extras.

 

.....or It could just be a minor printing irregularity that occurred on a 1930's printing press when they were running off a second printing (on which a concerted effort was made to differentiate from the first printing).

 

-J.

[Ameri]

I stand corrected. The Torch is non-flame in only 3 panels of Marvel 1. Two show blonde, but 1 absolutely shows red. From an original copy:

I never noticed that one, so there are two panels where Torch has red hair:

 

 

Wow, I seriously mis-counted. Two panels to left of your panel also shows a red haired Torch. He is non-flame in 15 panels and at least 3 clearly show red hair. He's either white-haired or blonde in the others.

[stock_rotation]

....or It could just be a minor printing irregularity that occurred on a 1930's printing press when they were running off a second printing (on which a concerted effort was made to differentiate from the first printing)

That doesn't even make sense. It's not a "minor printing irregularity". It's an error. You can't correct for that gap on the press. You need to stop printing and create a whole new plate. Which is what happened: the proof of it is that there are extant copies where the gap has been eliminated.

 

If you have to go through the trouble of burning a whole new plate, you would just mask out the line that you're using the stamp to cover up. It's literally as easy as using the prepress equivalent of whiteout (technically called opaquing fluid) over the phototype when you burn the plate. You wouldn't print a line of text and then set up a stamp (or an additional plate) to cover it up during the same production run. That's a Rube Goldberg workflow.

 

If you are using a stamp it's because the press sheet is already printed, and your client does not want the added cost of reprinting that sheet.

[Jaydogrules]

....or It could just be a minor printing irregularity that occurred on a 1930's printing press when they were running off a second printing (on which a concerted effort was made to differentiate from the first printing)

That doesn't even make sense. It's not a "minor printing irregularity". It's an error. You can't correct for that gap on the press. You need to stop printing and create a whole new plate. Which is what happened: the proof of it is that there are extant copies where the gap has been eliminated.

 

If you have to go through the trouble of burning a whole new plate, you would just mask out the line that you're using the stamp to cover up. It's literally as easy as using the prepress equivalent of whiteout (technically called opaquing fluid) over the phototype when you burn the plate. You wouldn't print a line of text and then set up a stamp (or an additional plate) to cover it up during the same production run. That's a Rube Goldberg workflow.

 

If you are using a stamp it's because the press sheet is already printed, and your client does not want the added cost of reprinting that sheet.

 

You're talking about a book that was reprinted in the hundreds of thousands and attempting to make grand conclusions based on comparing (what are indeed minute printing variations) amongst a handful of copies. I can look at 20 copies of most GA books and see similar differences between copies that aren't even reprints (which the "Nov" copies of Marvel 1 are).

 

To say that these statements are grossly speculative, based on nearly 100 year old printing technology are a reach would be a massive understatement.

 

Your explanations of the printing process (again, based on 80 year old technology) are superfically detailed yet still gloss over what remains the most obvious explanation of what happened- the book was simply reprinted.

 

-J.

[VintageComics]

....or It could just be a minor printing irregularity that occurred on a 1930's printing press when they were running off a second printing (on which a concerted effort was made to differentiate from the first printing)

That doesn't even make sense.

 

Most people (seasoned posters) who have dealt with Jaydogrules learn to ignore him eventually.

[VintageComics]

I stand corrected. The Torch is non-flame in only 3 panels of Marvel 1. Two show blonde, but 1 absolutely shows red. From an original copy:

I never noticed that one, so there are two panels where Torch has red hair:

 

 

Wow, I seriously mis-counted. Two panels to left of your panel also shows a red haired Torch. He is non-flame in 15 panels and at least 3 clearly show red hair. He's either white-haired or blonde in the others.

 

Is there anyone who has all of the interior pages of Marvel #1 Torch story scanned or photographed? Would be fun to see them all. I haven't open a copy since I sold my copy years ago.

 

 

[VintageComics]

What you're looking at in that second photo is a prepress error that required an entire new plate to be burned for the interior. Notice that it's not just the first line that's off-- there's a gap running thrugh the center of the text, splitting some words in half. The reason there is a gap is due to how type was set at the time. You could photoset type, but you couldn't do a line of text wider than about 4 inches. So if you wanted a 6 inch indica, you had to do it in two pieces. The prepress person would assemble the two pieces before burning the plate. It's L shaped because you couldn't rely on the prepress person reading the text to determine which side went on the left and which went on the right-- so you would make the text in blocks that could only be assembled in one way, like a puzzle or Tetris.

 

OK, I was so focused on the indicia line with the blackout that I didn't realize that the entire indicia was split with a gap in it down the middle in the second example.

 

 

 

 

So what you're saying is that the typeset for the indicia was done in two halves (left and right) and the left half moved. Is that correct?

 

Funny! I was going to write something about this; it's why I was asking for photos of indicias. It's about as close to proof as you're likely to get that DiceX's stamp theory is correct. I know there was discussion back in '09 that it looked like a stamp due to being able to read through the overprint, but this really kind of proves it.

 

I may still be misunderstanding part of this.

 

It looks like the typeset moved but the blackout line didn't.

 

I understood Dice as saying that there was an additional stamp during production (one on the front cover - the Nov/ Circle, and one on the interior indicia (the blackout line and the new November 1939 date).

 

In your explanation you wrote this:

 

The prepress person screwed up when they burned the plate, and they must have discovered the error while on the press. They needed to pull the plate and burn a new one. If they had to burn a new plate, they would have burned the blackout line and the new text on the new plate. That they didn't is extremely strong circumstantial evidence that the blackout line and new text was added after the covers were already printed.

 

So what you're saying is that the interior cover was printed on more than just one printing occasion: once for the October 1939 copy , once for the November copy with the indicia error burned into the type plate and once for the November copy with the error in the type plate corrected?

 

So the prepress person corrected the typeset problem by fixing the moved indicia but a separate stamp was still used for the blackout line?

 

Based on what I know about printing (I was in the industry for almost 25 years, 5 as a pressman and the next 20 in prepress), the interiors would have been printed first. 4-color process printing is difficult, so you wouldn't want to print a 4-color cover and then risk destroying some of those press sheets while running black on the interior. You'd run the easiest side first and run plenty of extras.

 

That makes sense. And from what I understand about the 4-color printing, it was basically done the same way for decades.

 

 

[Jaydogrules]

....or It could just be a minor printing irregularity that occurred on a 1930's printing press when they were running off a second printing (on which a concerted effort was made to differentiate from the first printing)

That doesn't even make sense.

 

Most people (seasoned posters) who have dealt with Jaydogrules learn to ignore him eventually.

 

Yes, and while you are busy taking your usual personal jabs, you've evidently failed to realize that virtually every other participant in this thread has also either openly doubted or outright disagreed with your speculative musings on the matter (not counting the other "seasoned poster " who has all of 200 posts in 6 years, of course) with a couple boardies even producing visual aids for you, which of course your promptly dimissed once you realized they also did not support your speculative musings, going so far as to call one of them a "cartoon".

 

Classy guy.

 

-J.

[VintageComics]

My 'personal jabs' are just an accumulation of all of the ridiculous things you've said over the years (like White paged comics don't command a premium over non-white paged examples - try to get that one to fly in the GA forum ).

 

And just like maturity is not measured with age, seasoned posters are not measured with post counts.

 

All of the postings in this thread are speculative until an actual, decisive conclusion can be seen and based on what I've read as evidence presented in this thread there are no actual conclusions yet. Just lots of interesting discussion, and the most interesting on the topic in the 12 years I've been here.

 

I don't believe most people reading this thread have come to any real conclusions.

 

You just seem to be interested in pushing your own points and whenever someone disagrees you become dogmatic about your position without offering any real evidence.

 

 

 

 

[Jaydogrules]

My 'personal jabs' are just an accumulation of all of the ridiculous things you've said over the years (like White paged comics don't command a premium over non-white paged examples - try to get that one to fly in the GA forum ).

 

And just like maturity is not measured with age, seasoned posters are not measured with post counts.

 

All of the postings in this thread are speculative until an actual, decisive conclusion can be seen and based on what I've read as evidence presented in this thread there are no actual conclusions yet. Just lots of interesting discussion, and the most interesting on the topic in the 12 years I've been here.

 

I don't believe most people reading this thread have come to any real conclusions.

 

You just seem to be interested in pushing your own points and whenever someone disagrees you become dogmatic about your position without offering any real evidence.

 

 

 

 

Odd. This actually perfectly describes what "you" just did with another one of your typically condescending personal swipes.

 

Healer, heal thyself.

 

-J.

[VintageComics]

You just seem to be interested in pushing your own points and whenever someone disagrees you become dogmatic about your position without offering any real evidence.

 

Odd. This actually perfectly describes what "you" just did with another one of your typically condescending personal swipes.

 

Healer, heal thyself.

 

-J.

 

Sorry J, I currently don't have a position so I have nothing to be dogmatic about.

 

While in previous years I used believe (based on what I was told by others) that they were all one print with a cover change part way through, at this point I'm just curious to learn more about it. As I said in one of the older threads, I don't care either way. Just the facts, ma'am.

 

It also may help shed information on why Superman #1 and Batman #1 have print differences.

 

Have a good one!