Naphtha for cleaning comics???

[HighRadArt]

I'd use it on a romance comic first. They're kind of built for bleeding in general.

 

It's hard to say but I would sure ask a professional conservator before I tried anything. It strikes me that comics are essentially wood and the wood in our place needs oils to keep from checking completely. I'm not advocating dipping them in oils but I'm thinking on the issues.

 

My car batteries certainly smell so something is coming off of them.

 

I do use Xylene in our adhesives and the xylene I buy from chemical supply houses is very different in grade than xylene from a big box store. We add it to 90% isopropyl alcohol before adhering glasses together with an optically neutral epoxy. It gives the surface "Tooth". It goes in the isopropyl at .05% and you can tell if you don't use it. Given that and given the toxicity of those materials I work with in heavy ventilation, I'm usually pretty cautious. I would suspect that the naptha in a chemical supply and a big box store have their differences as well. One has to ask what the other stuff in the cans is.

 

It's not like I have a dog in a fight. There's no point in fighting on the internet. I'd just err on the side of caution.

 

That's why I asked about hexane. These chemicals are heavily regulated. Plus, I'm curious as to what affect they have on the books.

[MetalPSI]

I don't collect restored, and never had any objection against them until reading some of things I have in this thread.

 

It's shocking to read how a blending agent for fuel that has no business coming into contact with comics, has been used and/or is probably still being used on them. For those that collect restored/conserved graded comics, I'd lobby hard for TPG's to provide voc analysis or a notation of the actual chemical used, or just avoid them altogether.

 

Referring to Naphtha as a "blending agent for fuel" is just fear mongering unless you can demonstrate the negative effects of naphtha on comic books. How exactly does it harm a book?

 

Did you know the ink used to print comics use hydrocarbon resins, alkyd resins and other neat substances as a binder?

 

That's a bit of a stretch saying it's "fear mongering". I don't think anyone is pointing an accusing finger in someone's face and screaming "LIGHTER FLUID".

 

If we break down the common chemistry here, any cleaning agent is going to be harmful in strong dilutions. I think concentrations of what is being used is a more productive way to explain the process.

 

Sulfuric acid does not smell indeed.....in low concentrations. In high concentrations it does, or rather, your nasal passages can definitely perceive something in the air.

[comicwiz]

I don't collect restored, and never had any objection against them until reading some of things I have in this thread.

 

It's shocking to read how a blending agent for fuel that has no business coming into contact with comics, has been used and/or is probably still being used on them. For those that collect restored/conserved graded comics, I'd lobby hard for TPG's to provide voc analysis or a notation of the actual chemical used, or just avoid them altogether.

 

Referring to Naphtha as a "blending agent for fuel" is just fear mongering unless you can demonstrate the negative effects of naphtha on comic books. How exactly does it harm a book?

 

Did you know the ink used to print comics use hydrocarbon resins, alkyd resins and other neat substances as a binder?

 

Could it dry out the hydrogen bonds in the paper?

Could it remove oils from the inks causing them to powder or crack over time?

 

Just spit balling here, but those are the first two issues that come to mind.

 

It hasn't. Naphtha has been used on comic books for over 30 years if not longer. I have yet to see anything relating to this kind of impact (or any negative impact) from its use. Water can do more damage. (I'm off to work)

 

I've seen what Joey is describing on cardbacks, but it needed to be looked at under magnification (I have used a 1000x mag camera, but the piece has since been sold out of my collection). It was also on a foreign cardback, which often do differ in material/stock sourcing from their counterparts.

 

The cracking of inks was visible under magnification, and the reason why I wanted to take a closer look is because you could see with an unaided eye a distinct contrast between the rest of the cardback and an area which appeared to have been worked on to remove a price sticker. The rest of the cardback retained a sheen, and the exposed area had a matted appearance.

 

Another thing that's important to emphasize in your assertion of "fear mongering" is that there isn't a "how to" or 101 on how to use Naphtha/lighter fluid to remove price stickers, so it remains unknown how much people use or apply in their uses. It is also a case where more aggressive use to emulsify adhesives will always require a harder look at how those situations compare with stickers that could mostly be removed with little or no chemical use.

 

Nor is anyone monitoring how people buy a piece with an area that sticks out like a sore thumb from botched sticker removal, covers it up with another sticker (which happens a fair bit), and the down the line effects of repeatedly exposing that same area with repeated applications.

 

To say it doesn't have any impact is predictable dogmatism, and I say this because I've seen this happen repeatedly whenever this subject gets discussed. People who have used Naphtha in the past have a hard time processing its harmful effects on paper.

 

The takeaway from me is not to get embroiled in the argumentative aspects of the topic because I've researched this area and spoken with people whose experience on this subject vastly exceeds our awareness.

 

My stand on the subject remains that if this is still in use, it needs to be disclosed. Not just as "conserved" or "restored", but to go further to disclose the voc nature of the comic being exposed to a combustible/flammable chemical fluid.

 

 

[Bomber-Bob]

I have a question. What exactly are these techniques being used for ? Is it only for the removal of tape and stickers where glue is involved or is it possibly used to remove stains ? The former seems like legitimate conservation, a good thing. Not sure about the latter.

[Foley]

I don't collect restored, and never had any objection against them until reading some of things I have in this thread.

 

It's shocking to read how a blending agent for fuel that has no business coming into contact with comics, has been used and/or is probably still being used on them. For those that collect restored/conserved graded comics, I'd lobby hard for TPG's to provide voc analysis or a notation of the actual chemical used, or just avoid them altogether.

 

Referring to Naphtha as a "blending agent for fuel" is just fear mongering unless you can demonstrate the negative effects of naphtha on comic books. How exactly does it harm a book?

 

Did you know the ink used to print comics use hydrocarbon resins, alkyd resins and other neat substances as a binder?

 

That's a bit of a stretch saying it's "fear mongering". I don't think anyone is pointing an accusing finger in someone's face and screaming "LIGHTER FLUID".

 

If we break down the common chemistry here, any cleaning agent is going to be harmful in strong dilutions. I think concentrations of what is being used is a more productive way to explain the process.

 

Sulfuric acid does not smell indeed.....in low concentrations. In high concentrations it does, or rather, your nasal passages can definitely perceive something in the air.

 

I would tend to agree. Naptha is used in the refinement of crude oils into other products, and is a component of certain types of gasoline.

 

Referring to it as a blending agent for fuel, while that's obviously not its only use, is accurate and I don't see it as fear mongering.

 

I think many people would have the same reaction if they found out people were manipulating their books with Dove soap.

[comicwiz]

I have a question. What exactly are these techniques being used for ? Is it only for the removal of tape and stickers where glue is involved or is it possibly used to remove stains ? The former seems like legitimate conservation, a good thing. Not sure about the latter.

 

Before that Facebook post, I'd only ever known this being used on toy packaging (cardbacks and boxed items). Beyond the advocacy to steer clear of using it on paper due to the harmful effects, the practice of removing price stickers rubs collectors the wrong way because i) price stickers can sometimes provide an added layer of provenence to a piece; ii) botched sticker removal causes undue damage if you consider there are collectors who will pay a premium for nostalgia, and price stickers from certain retailers are sometimes highly sought after; and iii) botched sticker removal enables the rampant practice of people masking damage with period accurate or inacurate price stickers. It's a vicious cycle that emanates mostly from collectors who take amateur action on their misguided/misinformed objections to what they deem as "unsightly" price stickers. The irony is that if you look at the result of their efforts, everyone would unanimously agree they should have left it alone.

[Stronguy]

Here's what you get when a cover is washed with Naphtha. This was ratted out cover I had sitting in a box. The piece was washed in Naphtha for 90 seconds. There is no residue or odor on the paper.

 

 

[PovertyRow]

Saying it has no impact is not predictable dogmatism. I have spent over 30 years researching and experimenting with restoration. And remember, this is not to restore and sell books or restore books for collectors. It is solely for me to observe and measure reactions from restorative processes. I feel my knowledge and experience would match those others you refer to as "vastly exceeding our awareness". I have had conversations with professional conservators and restorers where I was able to educate them on certain topics. And I have even had some of my ideas stolen by another restorer under the guise of a mutual collaboration (no one on the boards that I know of, BTW).

 

I say "fear mongering" because just stating something is "used as a blending agent for fuel" is for effect. It offers no facts. It provides no details of the nature of the substance. Just "it is used in blending of fuel". The government allows petroleum products in foods we eat. I don't like it but there it is. One can find many substances that are benign and even healthy that are used in toxic substances. Water is used as a diluting agent for hydrochloric and sulfuric acid. Therefore water must be dangerous. It is a meaningless statement prone to fear mongering and knee-jerk reactions.

 

So I will ask you...what are the harmful effects of Naphtha on paper? To repeat, over 30 years of observation and I have not noted any as far as comic books or movie posters go. Again, I used it to see how it removes adhesives and to remove transfer stains from covers. I never used or even thought of it as a "cleaning agent" for things like dirt and other stains beyond ink/oil transfer or as a bleach. It simply does not work that way.

[ADAMANTIUM]

would it get a purple lable though??

 

Ever sent one in to find out??

 

honestly curious

[comicwiz]

Saying it has no impact is not predictable dogmatism. I have spent over 30 years researching and experimenting with restoration. And remember, this is not to restore and sell books or restore books for collectors. It is solely for me to observe and measure reactions from restorative processes. I feel my knowledge and experience would match those others you refer to as "vastly exceeding our awareness". I have had conversations with professional conservators and restorers where I was able to educate them on certain topics. And I have even had some of my ideas stolen by another restorer under the guise of a mutual collaboration (no one on the boards that I know of, BTW).

 

I say "fear mongering" because just stating something is "used as a blending agent for fuel" is for effect. It offers no facts. It provides no details of the nature of the substance. Just "it is used in blending of fuel". The government allows petroleum products in foods we eat. I don't like it but there it is. One can find many substances that are benign and even healthy that are used in toxic substances. Water is used as a diluting agent for hydrochloric and sulfuric acid. Therefore water must be dangerous. It is a meaningless statement prone to fear mongering and knee-jerk reactions.

 

So I will ask you...what are the harmful effects of Naphtha on paper? To repeat, over 30 years of observation and I have not noted any as far as comic books or movie posters go. Again, I used it to see how it removes adhesives and to remove transfer stains from covers. I never used or even thought of it as a "cleaning agent" for things like dirt and other stains beyond ink/oil transfer or as a bleach. It simply does not work that way.

 

As I've remarked, prior to this FB post, I had no idea this is a chemical being used on comics. My exposure to it's damaging effects was previously limited to seeing the residual damage it caused on mint on card (MOC) packaging of action figures, which if you haven't already, you should go back and read here. I will defer to the experience/knowledge and warnings of someone, who among their many impressive accomplishments listed in their biography, includes hand-making paper and "sticky tape removal without the use of solvents" every time.

 

Your insistence on "facts" falls flat on it's face when you look at the application/use of the chemical (i.e. yes, it is a blending agent for fuel), and ultimately none of this is meaningless so long as people find this objectionable enough to require disclosure of it's use when comics are resold that have been treated with it.

[comicdonna]

When I was 16, I purchased xylene for my motorcycle. I'd boost it up to about a 200 octane rating.

[Foley]

I knew a kid in high school that used paint thinner on his face for acne. He said it worked, but thinking back, he was always covered in zits.

[Glassman10]

I think "thatpovguy" should be commended for his experimentation. Any time the ball gets moved down the field I view as a good thing. If Naptha can be used to successfully clean up the warts on paper without damage is a good thing. Home depot is different than a chemical supply.

 

My caution was about concentrations and what people think they're using. ( full strength chocolate chip cookies are different than the ones with margarine). I continue to think that experiments are still best done on romance books. It will help lower their census and increase the overall value in the long run.

 

I bought comics because I just loved them no more than that. Now, I'm selling them and it seems like anything but love that drives that conversation.

 

What I do know is that I run a board on glass tech issues with about 1500 people looking at it and 800 are members. I insist that people use their real names and I actually check them out. When I know, and everyone else knows who someone actually is, it tends to keep flaming to a dead minimum that I can police easily. Given the guidelines, people can be pretty civil.

 

I think such stuff as the Naptha issue, or that thread on pressing are moving the ball forward. I know so much more than I did a week ago that it's astonishing. I can recognize dogs sniffing dogs too,

 

Thank you all.

[DR.X]

When I was 16, I purchased xylene for my motorcycle. I'd boost it up to about a 200 octane rating.

 

 

 

How long before you burned up the cylinders?

[PovertyRow]

 

Your insistence on "facts" falls flat on it's face when you look at the application/use of the chemical (i.e. yes, it is a blending agent for fuel), and ultimately none of this is meaningless so long as people find this objectionable enough to require disclosure of it's use when comics are resold that have been treated with it.

 

The only fact I have seen from you is something about a" foreign cardstock" and an undisclosed chemical causing microscopic ink cracks (if you meant Naphtha do you know how many types of naphtha there are?)

 

Earlier in this thread I posted a quote of myself from 2002. Had you read or remembered it you would know my stance on resto and disclosure. You seem to want to paint me as the bad guy. I am simply revealing my own discoveries and observations as well as helping people spot resto. To repeat what I said about resto:

 

Some of it is remarkably benign and some is like radical surgery. I neither condone nor oppose it. It is what it is and is up to the individual to decide how they feel about it. What I am really opposed to is undisclosed restoration of any kind, no matter how slight. The pro restorers provide a detailed checklist of what has been done. Unfortunately, that checklist doesn't always stay with the book, if you get my meaning.

 

 

[buttock]

Saying it has no impact is not predictable dogmatism. I have spent over 30 years researching and experimenting with restoration. And remember, this is not to restore and sell books or restore books for collectors. It is solely for me to observe and measure reactions from restorative processes. I feel my knowledge and experience would match those others you refer to as "vastly exceeding our awareness". I have had conversations with professional conservators and restorers where I was able to educate them on certain topics. And I have even had some of my ideas stolen by another restorer under the guise of a mutual collaboration (no one on the boards that I know of, BTW).

 

I say "fear mongering" because just stating something is "used as a blending agent for fuel" is for effect. It offers no facts. It provides no details of the nature of the substance. Just "it is used in blending of fuel". The government allows petroleum products in foods we eat. I don't like it but there it is. One can find many substances that are benign and even healthy that are used in toxic substances. Water is used as a diluting agent for hydrochloric and sulfuric acid. Therefore water must be dangerous. It is a meaningless statement prone to fear mongering and knee-jerk reactions.

 

So I will ask you...what are the harmful effects of Naphtha on paper? To repeat, over 30 years of observation and I have not noted any as far as comic books or movie posters go. Again, I used it to see how it removes adhesives and to remove transfer stains from covers. I never used or even thought of it as a "cleaning agent" for things like dirt and other stains beyond ink/oil transfer or as a bleach. It simply does not work that way.

 

As I've remarked, prior to this FB post, I had no idea this is a chemical being used on comics. My exposure to it's damaging effects was previously limited to seeing the residual damage it caused on mint on card (MOC) packaging of action figures, which if you haven't already, you should go back and read here. I will defer to the experience/knowledge and warnings of someone, who among their many impressive accomplishments listed in their biography, includes hand-making paper and "sticky tape removal without the use of solvents" every time.

 

Your insistence on "facts" falls flat on it's face when you look at the application/use of the chemical (i.e. yes, it is a blending agent for fuel), and ultimately none of this is meaningless so long as people find this objectionable enough to require disclosure of it's use when comics are resold that have been treated with it.

 

So to summarize, it's something new and unknown to you and therefore scares you. And facts and data can't convince you otherwise.

[Bomber-Bob]

I just know that I would be upset if I bought a book that had any of this work done on it.

I'm shopping for organic.

[Glassman10]

I think they call that "unrestored"

[PovertyRow]

I just know that I would be upset if I bought a book that had any of this work done on it.

I'm shopping for organic.

 

You have nothing to worry about, Bob, as petroleum is an organic compound!

[comicdonna]

When I was 16, I purchased xylene for my motorcycle. I'd boost it up to about a 200 octane rating.

 

 

 

How long before you burned up the cylinders?

The recommended amount for my compression ratio was 125 However, I was only shy a little to bring it up to 250 The stuff was $10 a quart in 1980