Sluggo's Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 Restoration shouldn't be cleaning the ORIGINAL staples or cleaning the book as like with ANYTHING it's just call maintenance. Like with a car you clean the rims just taking of something that not supposed to be there or washing the car. It's still completely ORIGINAL but it's just maintaining it. Restoration "IS" by definition "adding something to an original piece to make it look original". Just by that statement ALONE cleaning is not involved what so ever... Pressing on the other hand it is FIXING a damaged book and should be considered RESTORATION more than either of the other two... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bomber-Bob Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 36 minutes ago, Sluggo's said: Restoration shouldn't be cleaning the ORIGINAL staples or cleaning the book as like with ANYTHING it's just call maintenance. Like with a car you clean the rims just taking of something that not supposed to be there or washing the car. It's still completely ORIGINAL but it's just maintaining it. Restoration "IS" by definition "adding something to an original piece to make it look original". Just by that statement ALONE cleaning is not involved what so ever... Pressing on the other hand it is FIXING a damaged book and should be considered RESTORATION more than either of the other two... I see that Sluggo doesn't hold back his punches. Actually cleaning the staples is considered a lighter form of restoration called conservation. Personally, I agree with your point on pressing but that ship has sailed. The industry has it's set of standards and they are not going to change. Your opinions will probably fall on deaf ears. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ride the Tiger Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 Restoration is treatment intended to return a comic book to a known or assumed state by adding non-original material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
namisgr Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Ride the Tiger said: Restoration is treatment intended to return a comic book to a known or assumed state by adding non-original material. By that definition, moving the spine by disassembly, realigning the cover more front-to-back, pressing and then reassembly isn't restoration. Edited March 18, 2018 by namisgr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shark Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 If my shirt has wrinkles and I iron it, it's still completely original. I'm just maintaining it. dee165 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
namisgr Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 21 minutes ago, Shark said: If my shirt has wrinkles and I iron it, it's still completely original. I'm just maintaining it. I hope you also sometimes wash it with detergent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ride the Tiger Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 9 hours ago, namisgr said: By that definition, moving the spine by disassembly, realigning the cover more front-to-back, pressing and then reassembly isn't restoration. That statement was directly taken from CGCs definition on this site. It is their exact words in the FAQ section. You should call them and tell them their error in this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
namisgr Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Ride the Tiger said: That statement was directly taken from CGCs definition on this site. It is their exact words in the FAQ section. You should call them and tell them their error in this. If you think CGC is infallible, then you can read old threads discussing books that change from blue to purple and back to blue labels again, books that change from blue to green labels, books that are submitted by the original owner and deemed to be trimmed, and books that receive higher numerical grades after having their spines realigned or having been pressed to the point that their interior pages stick out from the covers like the ears of Alfred E. Neuman. Then, you can consider that certain types of restoration are also being missed because, like pressing, they can't be detected with absolute certainty. Glue on the spine of a Marvel annual. Techniques that require disassembly and reassembly. Books that were microtrimmed. Other dark arts that shall remain nameless. That CGC doesn't always catch them and stick purple labels on them doesn't mean they aren't cases of restoration by most anyone's definition. If you want to drink the Kool-Aid and believe that it's CGC and not the collecting and dealer hobby that they serve that sets all directions and makes all choices for the hobby, that's fine. But the hobby existed long before the advent of CGC, and hobbyists can certainly have opposing points of view on grading, restoration, conservation, pedigrees, encapsulation, and other issues that carry as much or even more weight. And the hobby has played a key role in reigning in certain practices at CGC and CCS that did not have the best interests of the hobby at the forefront. Edited March 18, 2018 by namisgr Get Marwood & I, porcupine48, Lazyboy and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ride the Tiger Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 I wish to drink the koolaid. Sorry you feel that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bomber-Bob Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 While CGC is very good at detecting restoration they are not infallible. The name of the game today is 'let's fool CGC'. IMO, the biggest loophole for scammers is the fact that CGC let's bindery problems slide. Got a bad ding on a FC corner ? Use a fingernail clipper and clip it off and see if CGC let's it pass for a bindery chip. This sort of scamming is happening and the scammers are getting better at their techniques. Terrible for the hobby. porcupine48 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lazyboy Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 6 hours ago, Ride the Tiger said: That statement was directly taken from CGCs definition on this site. It is their exact words in the FAQ section. You should call them and tell them their error in this. I love it when businesses try to redefine words, because I know they're always looking out for me and a conflict of interest is impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcjames Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 (edited) 20 hours ago, Sluggo's said: Restoration shouldn't be cleaning the ORIGINAL staples or cleaning the book as like with ANYTHING it's just call maintenance. Like with a car you clean the rims just taking of something that not supposed to be there or washing the car. It's still completely ORIGINAL but it's just maintaining it. Restoration "IS" by definition "adding something to an original piece to make it look original". Just by that statement ALONE cleaning is not involved what so ever... Pressing on the other hand it is FIXING a damaged book and should be considered RESTORATION more than either of the other two... What is being "added" to a book by pressing? Using your car analogy, is merely banging out a dented fender (not adding Bondo or repainting, just removing the dent) considered "restoration" or is it just "repair"? It's still the original fender with original paint, right? Is removing a fold or bend from the cover any different than removing light soiling or tape? If you have a book with a dog-eared page or cover that is folded over, if you unfold the corner have you done restoration on the book? If so, what did you add? Edited March 18, 2018 by jcjames Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bomber-Bob Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 26 minutes ago, jcjames said: What is being "added" to a book by pressing? Using your car analogy, is merely banging out a dented fender (not adding Bondo or repainting, just removing the dent) considered "restoration" or is it just "repair"? It's still the original fender with original paint, right? Is removing a fold or bend from the cover any different than removing light soiling or tape? If you have a book with a dog-eared page or cover that is folded over, if you unfold the corner have you done restoration on the book? If so, what did you add? I agree. However, this has opened the door to more 'aggressive' pressing techniques that is given a pass by CGC and, IMO, should not be allowed. Things like, mentioned above by Namisgr, the spine realignment process. Literally moving the spine to 'hide' FC spine creases onto the vertex or BC. Getting rid of a fold that was not there upon production is cool. However, altering the book to someplace that was not original is not cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorick Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 19 minutes ago, Bomber-Bob said: ...the spine realignment process... Wouldn't this cause extra staple holes on the interior? I don't see how they could achieve such a dramatic shift of the cover without punching new staple holes. That right side "under-bite " looks awful on that 9.2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcjames Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 36 minutes ago, Bomber-Bob said: I agree. However, this has opened the door to more 'aggressive' pressing techniques that is given a pass by CGC and, IMO, should not be allowed. Things like, mentioned above by Namisgr, the spine realignment process. Literally moving the spine to 'hide' FC spine creases onto the vertex or BC. Getting rid of a fold that was not there upon production is cool. However, altering the book to someplace that was not original is not cool. That example looks more like flawed grading. A cb-spine-crease is a cb-spine-crease, whether on the front or back cover, right? And as noted above, that right side gap on the cover should be a major defect. UNLESS the sum of the "fixed" defects (like pressing out bends, creases etc) offset the addition of the new defects (misaligned right side) to the point that in-hand, the post-fix book really did look better. But I find that very implausible. To me, it looks worse than pre-fixing and appears like flawed grading. I bet if that 9.2 were cracked and resubbed, it wouldn't come back 9.2, ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bomber-Bob Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 12 minutes ago, Yorick said: Wouldn't this cause extra staple holes on the interior? I don't see how they could achieve such a dramatic shift of the cover without punching new staple holes. That right side "under-bite " looks awful on that 9.2. Totally agree that it looks awful but CGC thought it looked like a 9.2 . No extra staple holes, the staples are moved with the spine. This is an obnoxious example but there are more subtle examples out there . The spine realignment is an 'old' technique used by restoration labs to fix large spine rolls on vintage GA books. Now, it is creatively being used on books that don't need an alignment but may result in a better grade because the spine creases are less visible. Terrible. Whenever I see a book with a little too much paper fanning on the right edge, I avoid them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bomber-Bob Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 11 minutes ago, jcjames said: That example looks more like flawed grading. A cb-spine-crease is a cb-spine-crease, whether on the front or back cover, right? And as noted above, that right side gap on the cover should be a major defect. UNLESS the sum of the "fixed" defects (like pressing out bends, creases etc) offset the addition of the new defects (misaligned right side) to the point that in-hand, the post-fix book really did look better. But I find that very implausible. To me, it looks worse than pre-fixing and appears like flawed grading. I bet if that 9.2 were cracked and resubbed, it wouldn't come back 9.2, ever. I agree, in theory a flaw is a flaw, no matter where the location. CGC is supposed to grade the flaw, not the location of the flaw. The argument for the right edge is they 'may' have been manufactured this way = it is treated like a bindery issue and basically given a pass. IMO, CGC should not be trying to judge whether a flaw is bindery or not. It's a flaw, treat it as such. Stop giving bindery problems a pass and this will stop. Get Marwood & I and jcjames 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcjames Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 37 minutes ago, Bomber-Bob said: I agree, in theory a flaw is a flaw, no matter where the location. CGC is supposed to grade the flaw, not the location of the flaw. The argument for the right edge is they 'may' have been manufactured this way = it is treated like a bindery issue and basically given a pass. IMO, CGC should not be trying to judge whether a flaw is bindery or not. It's a flaw, treat it as such. Stop giving bindery problems a pass and this will stop. Yeah, I can see that too. On the other hand, if damage from a printer-grab or bindery tears which might be universal on pretty much every single copy of a book coming off the press, then is it really a "defect"? IOW, if every issue has it, then isn't it basically part of the normal condition of the book originally published coming off the press? Kind of like PQ - doesn't "white pages" depend on the original stock of paper at the time of print rather than a fixed color-pallet across all ages? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
namisgr Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 (edited) Like I wrote earlier, if your definition of comic book restoration is that something has been added, then you can disassemble and reassemble, realign a spine, solvent clean a cover, microtrim an edge, clip off a tiny piece of corner paper, or do any of a number of other things that, while not adding anything, would be considered restoration by the majority of collectors and dealers. It's an inaccurate and incomplete definition. Edited March 18, 2018 by namisgr Bomber-Bob 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bomber-Bob Posted March 18, 2018 Share Posted March 18, 2018 17 minutes ago, jcjames said: Kind of like PQ - doesn't "white pages" depend on the original stock of paper at the time of print rather than a fixed color-pallet across all ages? You are correct, it does. I believe CGC considers the paper stock of the time frame rather than a stock color chart, IE they don't use an OWL chart. jcjames 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
