Some Qualified/Restored Musing 1 1

[telerites]

When I go in for my radiation treatments, it gives some time to ponder a lot.  From life in general, to my precious daughter, to world events, etc.  So consider this my useless thread of the day along with my apologies for those that may actually read it and respond.

Recently I started thinking about trimming and how despised this damage is by folks in our hobby.  You can count me as one of those people, outside of the stigma that GLODs and PLODs carry and now to a lesser extent - Conserved.  

I realize most, if not all, consider trimming as the kiss of death.  To my knowledge, I have two out of my nearly 3,000 slabbed books that are trimmed and unknown of my raws, if any. The slabbed books were bought raw many years ago and trimming at least for me is the most difficult defect to find. 

I honestly cannot tell you why I disdain trimming other than the standard answer of someone removed pieces of the book purposely.  But what if it wasn't done intentionally so exclude thoughts of enticing a perspective buyer and done just to improve the appearance by an OCD owner.  How about a kid back in the 40's cutting off the hanging ends of pages/covers just because - like cutting the borders off of baseball cards as a kid.  Not done to ruse but just because they liked it.  So pieces are gone but are parts not gone when a corner, chunk, remaindering, etc. are off.  We assume those are accidents (not including the remaindered example) and may have just come with such age of GA books.  Trimming doesn't even remove that much of the original in most cases.

I am not positioning to advocate trimming as acceptable but unless we really know the reason and that it was done intentionally to deceive, why do we frown so much?  All of the parts that remain are still original, heck even married copies, are not all from the original book as published.   Given the chance, I would trade/upgrade my two trimmed books in a heartbeat but am I (are we) being too harsh?  We knew about Ewert's trimmed books so that is easy but without knowing the history of a 90 year book to answer when, why, who, I dunno.

Consider a  chunk out of a classic cover that impacts the image - does that garner greater appeal than one that is trimmed where the entire image is unaffected?  And no fair saying neither - just between those examples, which would have more appeal?

So folks, as my recent therapy-inspired pondering wraps up - talk me down off the ledge, push me over the hill, chastise my thoughts, circumcise my idiocy, assign me penance for even the consideration is it really that bad when we are unsure anything deceptive was intended?

 

 

[path4play]

13 minutes ago, telerites said:

When I go in for my radiation treatments, it gives some time to ponder a lot.  From life in general, to my precious daughter, to world events, etc.  So consider this my useless thread of the day along with my apologies for those that may actually read it and respond.

Recently I started thinking about trimming and how despised this damage is by folks in our hobby.  You can count me as one of those people, outside of the stigma that GLODs and PLODs carry and now to a lesser extent - Conserved.  

I realize most, if not all, consider trimming as the kiss of death.  To my knowledge, I have two out of my nearly 3,000 slabbed books that are trimmed and unknown of my raws, if any. The slabbed books were bought raw many years ago and trimming at least for me is the most difficult defect to find. 

I honestly cannot tell you why I disdain trimming other than the standard answer of someone removed pieces of the book purposely.  But what if it wasn't done intentionally so exclude thoughts of enticing a perspective buyer and done just to improve the appearance by an OCD owner.  How about a kid back in the 40's cutting off the hanging ends of pages/covers just because - like cutting the borders off of baseball cards as a kid.  Not done to ruse but just because they liked it.  So pieces are gone but are parts not gone when a corner, chunk, remaindering, etc. are off.  We assume those are accidents (not including the remaindered example) and may have just come with such age of GA books.  Trimming doesn't even remove that much of the original in most cases.

I am not positioning to advocate trimming as acceptable but unless we really know the reason and that it was done intentionally to deceive, why do we frown so much?  All of the parts that remain are still original, heck even married copies, are not all from the original book as published.   Given the chance, I would trade/upgrade my two trimmed books in a heartbeat but am I (are we) being too harsh?  We knew about Ewert's trimmed books so that is easy but without knowing the history of a 90 year book to answer when, why, who, I dunno.

Consider a  chunk out of a classic cover that impacts the image - does that garner greater appeal than one that is trimmed where the entire image is unaffected?  And no fair saying neither - just between those examples, which would have more appeal?

So folks, as my recent therapy-inspired pondering wraps up - talk me down off the ledge, push me over the hill, chastise my thoughts, circumcise my idiocy, assign me penance for even the consideration is it really that bad when we are unsure anything deceptive was intended?

 

 

Greetings telerites.  I actually like writing on cover in regard to names, dates and scribbles.  Spine roll, no problem.  Someone pounded staples into a cover, dribbled elmer's glue all over the place?  No issues.  Three hole punch - bring it on!   But for some reason, trimmed is like where I draw the line.  Also missing pages.  These are both more egregious than even the next worse, some type of nasty color touch.

 

Edited July 1, 2017 by path4play

[telerites]

21 minutes ago, path4play said:

Greetings telerites.  I actually like writing on cover in regard to names, dates and scribbles.  Spine roll, no problem.  Someone pounded staples into a cover, dribbled elmer's glue all over the place?  No issues.  Three hole punch - bring it on!   But for some reason, trimmed is like where I draw the line.  Also missing pages.  These are both more egregious than even the next worse, some type of nasty color touch.

 

But why do you draw the line there?  Are you assuming, it was done intentionally?  If it weren't in a slab, where it was noted, does it distract from the appearance of the book more so that staples pounded into the cover, as one of your examples?

I am just wondering if it has become so ingrained in our mindset (mine included) to indiscriminately shun it?  Do we really buy the slab and not the book?  I won't nor am I trying to change opinions, just trying to find out why I and others feel that trimming is so horrific, when we are not sure why it was done and nothing unoriginal has been added and it is a minuscule portion compared to other defects.

[Get Marwood & I]

Hi @telerites 

First up, good luck with the radiation treatments. I've added you to tonights prayer list and I hope everything goes well for you.

There's nothing wrong at all with your thoughts here in my view. If you get flack, then just rise above it. Yours is a well positioned, well argued post.

When I was a kid, I had a Beatles poster in my bedroom for years. It moved around from wall to wall to the point where there were loads of pin holes on the perimeter. So one day I cut an inch off each side and it looked as good as new. Nothing was lost - just blue background border. There are probably many old comics that were trimmed for the same reason, with no malice, or intent to deceive at a future date. It's what kids do (did).

I may be wrong here, I often am, but there seems to be an opinion that it is difficult to tell if an AF 15 has been trimmed on the right edge. Many say it often looks as such, but hasn't been touched. So it can be a fine line between distinguishing trimmed books from naturally cut books. When noted by CGC or one of the other companies, the impact on the book is devastating. And yet, it's still the same comic, just with a tiny bit less of it in evidence.

If I had two AF 15s and one had a 1mm edge trim, nice and neat, the other a crude full length 'natural' tear, then the tear book gets a Universal label and, financially, becomes immeasurably more desirable than it's neat trimmed cousin. I think this is nonsense. 

But one thing I have learned is that you cannot change the way people feel. They hate trimming, and nothing will change that however illogical the premise.

I once sold a Canadian ASM Annual #1 on Ebay. It was about a VG+. I bought it from a reputable dealer. We were all happy. The buyer then contacted me in a state of apoplexy - he had got it graded and CGC noted a 'small amount of colour touch'. I never saw it, nor did the buyer, nor did the dealer who sold it to me. So the book, and everyone involved's day was devastated by a pin of ink, invisible to the naked eye. And on a book on which such an addition would make zero difference visually.

So I think we should all be a little more forgiving of trimming and the like. 

I have more to say, but Doctor Who is on shortly and it's the last one. So I may return later, with further ramblings on this 

 

 

[rjpb]

Best of luck with radiation treatments.

I agree that sometimes the disdain for trimming can go overboard, particularly the interior page trimming one sees noted, which was likely due to a ragged overhanging edge that just looks unattractive. While deliberate undisclosed restoration is contemptible, lets not let suspected motive override judgement on the seriousness and degree of restoration on a given book, especially low-mid grade books which frequently have flaws more aesthetically bothersome than restoration. 

I've noted before, that due to the lack of QC with GA books, that frequently there are untrimmed copies floating around with more severe cuts that trimmed copies of the same book. What is more aesthetically pleasing, an untrimmed copy with a narrow cut that clearly clips the logo or price (not uncommon with 1944/45 Timelys), or a more centered wider copy, where someone trimmed an overhang by 1/16" for whatever reason?

  

[Get Marwood & I]

18 minutes ago, rjpb said:

Best of luck with radiation treatments.

I agree that sometimes the disdain for trimming can go overboard, particularly the interior page trimming one sees noted, which was likely due to a ragged overhanging edge that just looks unattractive. While deliberate undisclosed restoration is contemptible, lets not let suspected motive override judgement on the seriousness and degree of restoration on a given book, especially low-mid grade books which frequently have flaws more aesthetically bothersome than restoration. 

I've noted before, that due to the lack of QC with GA books, that frequently there are untrimmed copies floating around with more severe cuts that trimmed copies of the same book. What is more aesthetically pleasing, an untrimmed copy with a narrow cut that clearly clips the logo or price (not uncommon with 1944/45 Timelys), or a more centered wider copy, where someone trimmed an overhang by 1/16" for whatever reason?

  

Well said @rjpb

I've forgotten what else I was going to say on the subject now, but if anyone's interested, the last Doctor Who was marvellous. 

[*paull*]

Another type of acceptable trimming?  Bound volumes.

[Get Marwood & I]

11 minutes ago, *paull* said:

Another type of acceptable trimming?  Bound volumes.

Yes. I agree. And I like your avatar @*paull* I feel sure that if I was confronted by it on a dark night I would likely have to change my pants double quick. 

[ender]

To anyone's knowledge is there any way to tell when it was trimmed?  If done in 1991 then yea I may be really upset, but if done in 1947 to make the book look better, or even preserve it (if an interior page hangs out by 1/4 inch it is more likely to get snagged on something starting a tear) I would feel much differently. On a tangent I don't know why people are upset about married books or conserved books.  conserved doesn't really look better it is just to make the book more structurally sound and last longer.  When people are so put off by this I wonder if they are upset when someone stores books in Mylar because it will.................gasp...............make them last longer?   OK that last point was tongue in cheek but hopefully everyone understands the point I am making.  just to me there is a big difference between trimming and doing it specifically to defraud someone.  Just my 

[Get Marwood & I]

7 minutes ago, ender said:

To anyone's knowledge is there any way to tell when it was trimmed?  If done in 1991 then yea I may be really upset, but if done in 1947 to make the book look better, or even preserve it (if an interior page hangs out by 1/4 inch it is more likely to get snagged on something starting a tear) I would feel much differently. On a tangent I don't know why people are upset about married books or conserved books.  conserved doesn't really look better it is just to make the book more structurally sound and last longer.  When people are so put off by this I wonder if they are upset when someone stores books in Mylar because it will.................gasp...............make them last longer?   OK that last point was tongue in cheek but hopefully everyone understands the point I am making.  just to me there is a big difference between trimming and doing it specifically to defraud someone.  Just my 

In this new enlightened age, with professional grading companies and a wealth of online information, who but a fool would trim a book with the intent to defraud anyway?  If it has value, there's a good chance it will end up graded and any trimming discovered. If I see a book on ebay and are unsure about trimming, I avoid it. If I buy a book from any source, having decided myself there is no trimming from scans and photos etc, and then through CGC submission find that it is, then why was I happy before the discovery? This book looks great! (Sorry, it's been trimmed). This book is the work of Satan's backside!

We're all musing here, and I like to muse with the best of them, but how can a tatty looking universal graded 2.5 AF 15 command a higher price than a clean 6.0 with a PLOD due to the top edge having a millimeter cleanly removed? 

When I watch the antiques roadshow with my pipe and slippers on they talk about how getting paintings, furniture, cars and watches restored will increase insurance value, eye appeal and desirability.  Why do we all poop our pants when someone cuts half a millimeter of overhang from a comic? 

 

[Sqeggs]

7 hours ago, telerites said:

When I go in for my radiation treatments, it gives some time to ponder a lot.  From life in general, to my precious daughter, to world events, etc.  So consider this my useless thread of the day along with my apologies for those that may actually read it and respond.

Recently I started thinking about trimming and how despised this damage is by folks in our hobby.  You can count me as one of those people, outside of the stigma that GLODs and PLODs carry and now to a lesser extent - Conserved.  

I realize most, if not all, consider trimming as the kiss of death.  To my knowledge, I have two out of my nearly 3,000 slabbed books that are trimmed and unknown of my raws, if any. The slabbed books were bought raw many years ago and trimming at least for me is the most difficult defect to find. 

I honestly cannot tell you why I disdain trimming other than the standard answer of someone removed pieces of the book purposely.  But what if it wasn't done intentionally so exclude thoughts of enticing a perspective buyer and done just to improve the appearance by an OCD owner.  How about a kid back in the 40's cutting off the hanging ends of pages/covers just because - like cutting the borders off of baseball cards as a kid.  Not done to ruse but just because they liked it.  So pieces are gone but are parts not gone when a corner, chunk, remaindering, etc. are off.  We assume those are accidents (not including the remaindered example) and may have just come with such age of GA books.  Trimming doesn't even remove that much of the original in most cases.

I am not positioning to advocate trimming as acceptable but unless we really know the reason and that it was done intentionally to deceive, why do we frown so much?  All of the parts that remain are still original, heck even married copies, are not all from the original book as published.   Given the chance, I would trade/upgrade my two trimmed books in a heartbeat but am I (are we) being too harsh?  We knew about Ewert's trimmed books so that is easy but without knowing the history of a 90 year book to answer when, why, who, I dunno.

Consider a  chunk out of a classic cover that impacts the image - does that garner greater appeal than one that is trimmed where the entire image is unaffected?  And no fair saying neither - just between those examples, which would have more appeal?

So folks, as my recent therapy-inspired pondering wraps up - talk me down off the ledge, push me over the hill, chastise my thoughts, circumcise my idiocy, assign me penance for even the consideration is it really that bad when we are unsure anything deceptive was intended?

That's a useful distinction: trimming by a kid years ago to make his book look better and trimming by a sneaky scammer in more recent times.  There's a lot of amateur resto that resulted from a kid rereading a favorite book many times -- and maybe passing it around to his friends -- and attempting to preserve it or make it look better with tape, coloring in creases, and trimming.  From the kid's point of view, the next stop for the book when he was finally tired of it was the trash can, so it didn't much matter.

In the end, objectively, the motives behind doing something to a book shouldn't matter -- the book is in the state it's in, however it got there.  But, of course, no one wants to be hoodwinked and the few times I've been surprised by undisclosed resto that was discovered too long after a sale to make a return feasible, I sold the book even though I might have bought it (at the right price!) and not been overly bothered by it if the resto had been disclosed. 

[MrBedrock]

Food for thought...

There is an earlier issue of Action Comics, #79 I believe, where the Church copy was printed with the corner of an interior page folded over about an inch during the original printing and trimming process. The result was that when the paper on that one interior page was folded back out there was overhanging paper on two sides of about 3/4 of an inch by one inch. The book wouldn't fit in a bag if the page was unfolded, and looked odd when the one page was left folded in. The owner of that book at that time, mid '80s, decided to cut away the paper that wasn't supposed to be there in the first place. He cut that paper away with scissors. The cuts weren't perfectly straight but the overall result was much cleaner and realistic than with all of that excess paper sticking out. Turns out that he should have torn the paper instead of cutting it. Apparently, simply because the excess paper was cut away with a sharp instrument it is now considered trimmed, whereas if the excess had been carefully torn off there would be no notation.

[woowoo]

17 minutes ago, MrBedrock said:

Food for thought...

There is an earlier issue of Action Comics, #79 I believe, where the Church copy was printed with the corner of an interior page folded over about an inch during the original printing and trimming process. The result was that when the paper on that one interior page was folded back out there was overhanging paper on two sides of about 3/4 of an inch by one inch. The book wouldn't fit in a bag if the page was unfolded, and looked odd when the one page was left folded in. The owner of that book at that time, mid '80s, decided to cut away the paper that wasn't supposed to be there in the first place. He cut that paper away with scissors. The cuts weren't perfectly straight but the overall result was much cleaner and realistic than with all of that excess paper sticking out. Turns out that he should have torn the paper instead of cutting it. Apparently, simply because the excess paper was cut away with a sharp instrument it is now considered trimmed, whereas if the excess had been carefully torn off there would be no notation.

          

Edited July 2, 2017 by woowoo

[ender]

1 hour ago, Sqeggs said:

That's a useful distinction: trimming by a kid years ago to make his book look better and trimming by a sneaky scammer in more recent times.  There's a lot of amateur resto that resulted from a kid rereading a favorite book many times -- and maybe passing it around to his friends -- and attempting to preserve it or make it look better with tape, coloring in creases, and trimming.  From the kid's point of view, the next stop for the book when he was finally tired of it was the trash can, so it didn't much matter.

In the end, objectively, the motives behind doing something to a book shouldn't matter -- the book is in the state it's in, however it got there.  But, of course, no one wants to be hoodwinked and the few times I've been surprised by undisclosed resto that was discovered too long after a sale to make a return feasible, I sold the book even though I might have bought it (at the right price!) and not been overly bothered by it if the resto had been disclosed. 

Objectively I totally agree that motivation should not affect the value, but to be honest it would affect my mood once I found out. Then again I am somewhat flexible about restoring and trimming and all of that depending on the book. I don't like trimming but if anyone has a trimmed More Fun 54 that they don't want anymore that can give me a call!

[Knightsofold]

I always thought people trimmed books so I'd be able to buy it for a discount once graded.

 

 

[AllStar-Comics]

Depends on the extent of it and the era of the book.  Dont mind it much on golden age books especially if its just a minor trim of one edge  .  With how expensive books are getting I see slowly it becoming more acceptable.  There already is a lot of comics I cant afford in any shape and more I can only afford if they are plods or conserved so it doesnt bother me a lot.  I'd be more likely to buy a book with three trimmed edges that presents well vs a dogged up unrestored 1.8 copy or worse brittle pages.  I think a llot of the stigma came from silver age books, same with color touch  Lot of dealers loved to trim the edges that had marvel chipping and touch up spines that had minor color breaks in silver age comics.  Used to run into it a lot in my early years of collecting in the 1980's

[sagii]

@telerites 

Best of luck with the radiation treatments, always cheering you on pal. 

[Get Marwood & I]

Trim trimmeny, trim trimmeny, trim trim charoo.

What's the verdict on the musings thus far @telerites ? 

[Frisco Larson]

16 hours ago, MrBedrock said:

Food for thought...

There is an earlier issue of Action Comics, #79 I believe, where the Church copy was printed with the corner of an interior page folded over about an inch during the original printing and trimming process. The result was that when the paper on that one interior page was folded back out there was overhanging paper on two sides of about 3/4 of an inch by one inch. The book wouldn't fit in a bag if the page was unfolded, and looked odd when the one page was left folded in. The owner of that book at that time, mid '80s, decided to cut away the paper that wasn't supposed to be there in the first place. He cut that paper away with scissors. The cuts weren't perfectly straight but the overall result was much cleaner and realistic than with all of that excess paper sticking out. Turns out that he should have torn the paper instead of cutting it. Apparently, simply because the excess paper was cut away with a sharp instrument it is now considered trimmed, whereas if the excess had been carefully torn off there would be no notation.

Ricky, you are just an endless fountain of knowledge my sky-scraping friend  I have a gorgeous book with the same problem. I'll attach a pic below of it from my photobucket from a few years back. The pic wasn't taken to show the excess paper, but you can still kinda see it if you look close. Not sure what CGC would do with it if I submitted it for grading. I'd about sooner let someone slap me bald headed than RIP the excess away. I SUPPOSE I could sell it raw to someone who likes pretty books with Tarzan covers .... if such a person exists in this day & age ....

[Frisco Larson]

A bit better of a close up