SD Comic-Con Panel Discussion On Noteworthy Community Issues - Input Sought

[esquirecomics]

2) Is it that Chris Freisen is supposedly starting an in-house pressing service under the CGC umbrella? I say supposedly because there has been no confirmation of this, just rumor and innuendo.

 

Not CGC. CCG.

 

It is here. It is now.

[tth2]

As I see it, here's the reality:

 

1) CGC does not, has not, and most likely won't, consider pressing restoration

2) Because of this, they won't put "Pressed" on a label

3) Because of (1) and (2), they won't put "restored" on any book that comes from the alleged Chris Freisen restoration lab (again, I've never seen a definitive statement saying he's going to actually do it) that has been non disassembly pressed.

4) There are certain "shady" dealers in the hobby who probably ARE pressing their books to the high heavens, but because of (1) and (2), these dealers are exploiting a loophole. There's not a whole lot CGC can do.

5) Nobody is saying taking a book apart isn't restoration.

 

Sorry if I've raised another can of worms, but I'm lost here and can't really understand the arguments because of all the noise. Can somebody tell me if I'm wrong in my thoughts above?

Dan, here's my position in a nutshell:

 

I like really high grade SA and GA books for 2 reasons:

 

1. I love the aesthetic of a perfect book

 

2. Comics from that era were meant to be read and not with preservation in mind, so I love the fact that a 40+ year old book could have naturally defied all the odds and survived for so long in pristine condition with no artificial intervention other than good storage techniques. This is why NM 40+ year old books are generally pretty unique, and it makes it fun to try to collect them because it's so damn hard.

 

The wonder and thrill of finding a NM book evaporates for me if I find that its apparent NM condition is artificial. Whether it's what CGC calls restoration, like trimming, color touch, disassembled cleaning and pressing, etc. or whether it's because of techniques that CGC does NOT call restoration, e.g., non-disassembled pressing, either way the book is now beautiful because people were able to artificially manipulate it, not because it defied the odds. There's no longer anything special about it in my mind.

 

So, it bothers me greatly that perhaps many of the NM books that I've been treasuring or coveting have not been "natural" NMs, but artificial creations. Until the last few days, I had pooh-poohed the doomsayers, on the basis that not every book could be transformed into a 9.4 or higher. But some further information discussed on these boards the last couple of days has now caused me to question whether this in fact is the case, and perhaps the number of books that can be transformed via pressing is actually much much higher.

 

I don't agree with CGC that non-disassembled pressing is not restoration. However, I have up until now accepted their rationale that they can't disclose non-disassembled pressing because it's too hard to detect consistently. But, I don't agree that they shouldn't police obviously improved books where it was reasonably easy for them to tell it is the same book as a previously graded book but now was obviously "better". Note that I'm not asking them to take on an impossible task of checking every book they receive against every previous copy of that issue they had ever graded.

 

Of course CGC's response would be they don't consider non-disassembled pressing to be restoration, so why should they need to police even obviously pressed books. To which my response is that that their policy is wrong, and their continued indifference to the need to change their policy is hurting the hobby and will lead to legal liability.

[Red Hook]

Great post, Tim. You've clearly described the dilemma facing the serious collector who isn't determined to continue with eyes wide shut.

[linmoth]

Tim: Excellent post, very nicely stated. You echoed my sentiments to a t.

 

I would like to see a panel discussion about:

 

1. The amount of resubs and the pecentage of upgrades vs downgrades. Maybe Valiantman has those figures already.

 

2. It has been stated on these boards that CGC's standards for grading have changed since 2001. How are they different now compared to then?

 

3. Has third party grading helped or hindered the comicbook hobby?

 

4. What issues are seen as the biggest hurdles to third party grading in maintaining collector trust? Has it eroded since the onset of CGC?

 

I haven't read this entire thread, maybe some of these have been listed. Sorry if there is any duplication.

 

Tom

[Foolkiller]

Brad:

 

I know you and I clearly disagree on this whole "pressing" bit, but I don't think collectors who disagree with your position are going on with eyes wide shut as you put it. To me, collectors who are continuing on about pressing and the need for disclosure (by the way, professional pressing) without a shred of evidence that it will truly damage the book is just talking to hear themselves talk. I read FFB's post regarding the potential damage that can be caused by pressing if it is NOT done correctly, but again: there's no conclusive evidence that will allow CGC to identify a book as being pressed with any kind of regularity, consistency or evidence. Additionally, even Tim's above post just expresses a preference for not having a pressed book (because it's an artificially created high grade) but not any actual reason why pressing is bad for the book. You haven't added or taken anything away from the book. It's still "original". Is pressing just another form of "preservation"... ? I don't think so. But it's also not exactly the same as traditional restoration. There's no dilemna here. You think a book is pressed? Don't buy it. Otherwise, if it doesn't affect the value of the book, the only thing that is affected is your state of mind and feelings about the book. "Oh, I don't own an originally preserved copy... " So what? It looks the same, and if you say, well, I can visibly see the book flattened out, well then, you know what? Don't buy it! If you can't tell, how on earth does it make a difference to anyone except in their own heads?

 

Great post, Tim. You've clearly described the dilemma facing the serious collector who isn't determined to continue with eyes wide shut.

[tth2]

I don't think collectors who disagree with your position are going on with eyes wide shut as you put it. To me, collectors who are continuing on about pressing and the need for disclosure (by the way, professional pressing) without a shred of evidence that it will truly damage the book is just talking to hear themselves talk.

Brian, whether pressing results in any damage or not is completely and utterly irrelevant to me. And I don`t think a lot of HG collectors who are opposed to pressing oppose it on this basis either. It`s all about the rarity of finding something naturally wonderful, and I think a lot of HG collectors would agree me with on this. Think of it like this: a guy who can naturally run 100 meters in 9.6 seconds, fantastic. A guy who can run 100 meters in 9.6 seconds, or 9.5 seconds, or 9.4 seconds, because he`s on all sorts of steroids and other enhancements. BFD!

 

there's no conclusive evidence that will allow CGC to identify a book as being pressed with any kind of regularity, consistency or evidence.

Let`s assume this is true. Is there any reason they can`t at least pluck the low-hanging fruit and at least nail the pressed books that obviously have been pressed, due to it being an easily identifiable book that was previously slabbed and is obviously improved the second time around? I don`t think restoration should mean only work that somehow damages books. I`ve stated on these boards that there can be good restoration that is important for preserving a book. But even these "good" forms of restoration are restoration, because there has been tampering with the book.

 

You think a book is pressed? Don't buy it. Otherwise, if it doesn't affect the value of the book, the only thing that is affected is your state of mind and feelings about the book. "Oh, I don't own an originally preserved copy... " So what? It looks the same, and if you say, well, I can visibly see the book flattened out, well then, you know what? Don't buy it! If you can't tell, how on earth does it make a difference to anyone except in their own heads?

Brian, this was a real head scratcher. State of mind and feelings about the book are what collecting is all about! I`m incredulous that you so easily discount this aspect, and are so cavalier that if something looks the same, then that`s all that matters. In that case, if you had a fabled Eastern Press married cover copy of AF 15, you`d be just as happy as if you had an original AF 15? After all, it looks the same and you couldn`t tell the difference.

[BassGMan]

Oh my GOD!!! This assumingly innocent thread about an upcoming panel at the San Diego con has become another pressing thread. And in the Comic Events area of all places.

[tth2]

I blame Mark, Dan and Brian!

[Red Hook]

Hi Brian,

 

First of all.....I could just as easily say that the assurances we've received that professional pressing won't have any long term affects on the books is just as unscientific and anecdotal as theories that there might be such harm.

 

And who is doing the re-assuring? The folks that are directly or indirectly profitting from the practice.

 

So why not err on the side of caution?

 

- Secondly, yes, we can go around the horn forever, debating the pluses and minuses of the practice. But my main desire is to have pressing disclosed whenever possible.

[wormboy]

I think Joe Field would be an excellent addition to the panel.

 

He started Wonder-Con, invented 'Free Comic Book Day', and owns my LCS:

 

Flying Colors

[esquirecomics]

I blame Mark, Dan and Brian!

 

[esquirecomics]

I would like to see a panel discussion about:

 

1. The amount of resubs and the pecentage of upgrades vs downgrades. Maybe Valiantman has those figures already.

 

2. It has been stated on these boards that CGC's standards for grading have changed since 2001. How are they different now compared to then?

 

3. Has third party grading helped or hindered the comicbook hobby?

 

4. What issues are seen as the biggest hurdles to third party grading in maintaining collector trust? Has it eroded since the onset of CGC?

 

Tom, these are all great questions and each of them deserves discussion and responses.

 

However, as no doubt you all understand, the panel needs to be somewhat broadly focused and at no time give the appearance that it is an attack or focus on someone or some entity, i.e., it cannot become a "question CGC panel".

 

But the third question, and generic first part of the fourth question, above are absolutely on the discussion pad.

 

Keep the suggested questions coming!

[esquirecomics]

I don't think collectors who disagree with your position are going on with eyes wide shut as you put it. To me, collectors who are continuing on about pressing and the need for disclosure (by the way, professional pressing) without a shred of evidence that it will truly damage the book is just talking to hear themselves talk.

 

Brian, whether pressing results in any damage or not is completely and utterly irrelevant to me. And I don`t think a lot of HG collectors who are opposed to pressing oppose it on this basis either. It`s all about the rarity of finding something naturally wonderful, and I think a lot of HG collectors would agree me with on this. Think of it like this: a guy who can naturally run 100 meters in 9.6 seconds, fantastic. A guy who can run 100 meters in 9.6 seconds, or 9.5 seconds, or 9.4 seconds, because he`s on all sorts of steroids and other enhancements. BFD!

 

Tim, I agree with your recent posts here 100%, and the above paragraph really paints a face on our distaste as far as I am concerned.

 

I have no problem with people not sharing our sentiment about pressing, and most certainly NDP, but I am very disappointed that so many people seem not to understand why we feel this way.

 

Maybe they are Canadians trying to get even for Ben Johnson!

[october]

Here is a good topic for the upcoming panel:

 

SHOULD THERE BE A SEPARATE PRESSING SECTION ON THE FORUM SO EVERY DAMN THREAD DOESN'T DEVOLVE INTO A DISCUSSION OF IT?

 

 

[deathlok]

Here is a good topic for the upcoming panel:

 

SHOULD THERE BE A SEPARATE PRESSING SECTION ON THE FORUM SO EVERY DAMN THREAD DOESN'T DEVOLVE INTO A DISCUSSION OF IT?

 

 

 

Arch would have to ban FFB for that to happen.

[Foolkiller]

I'm not taking the resto experts' opinions regarding the harm/benefits of pressing with any greater regard than anyone else or giving them more credence. But when people are claiming that they don't like pressing, or you are going on the offensive against pressing, that presumes that there must be some sort of evidence to back up the point. I have the best evidence of all to defend the position that professional pressing isn't, at least probably in the next 10 years, going to harm the books -- pressing's been going on for years, and I don't see any of the books pressed in the mid 90s suddenly deteriorating or showing noticeable signs of wear, or at least nobody is bringing it to anybody's attention if it is. So you have plenty of pressed books in people's collections and on the market that are apparently not readily noticeable that they were professionally pressed.

 

I thinking erring on the side of caution in this case is waiting until there is actual evidence that supports that properly done professional pressing causes damage to a book.

 

As I've said before, disclosure would be nice, but hardly necessary.

 

Hi Brian,

 

First of all.....I could just as easily say that the assurances we've received that professional pressing won't have any long term affects on the books is just as unscientific and anecdotal as theories that there might be such harm.

 

And who is doing the re-assuring? The folks that are directly or indirectly profitting from the practice.

 

So why not err on the side of caution?

 

- Secondly, yes, we can go around the horn forever, debating the pluses and minuses of the practice. But my main desire is to have pressing disclosed whenever possible.

[october]

Here is a good topic for the upcoming panel:

 

SHOULD THERE BE A SEPARATE PRESSING SECTION ON THE FORUM SO EVERY DAMN THREAD DOESN'T DEVOLVE INTO A DISCUSSION OF IT?

 

 

 

Arch would have to ban FFB for that to happen.

 

True.....and several others.

[Foolkiller]

Tim:

 

First of all, an Eastern Press copy, a married copy, doesn't look the same. A married copy isn't the same as pressing the book either, since it's essentially two separate parts.

 

Of course state of mind concerning a book is important, but for the most part, owning a high grade book has to do with aesthetic appeal, not how it's been preserved. If you can't tell the book is pressed, then quite honestly, how is it different to you unless you know it's different? That's what I'm cavalier about. Honestly, think about it, you don't know the book is pressed -- you will probably never find out it is pressed. It's a comic book, not some ultimate truth in life, so the "deception" is really irrelevant. Listen, would I rather know a book is pressed rather than not know? Sure, but why? It honestly doesn't matter to me.

 

Every book has had some artificial help at some time or another, it's just a matter of degree. To use your analogy, andro is ok, but steroids aren't? Ok. Stacking a bunch of dictionaries on a book is ok, but non-disassembly professional pressing isn't? Where do you draw the line at what is natural v. unnatural? Sorry, but I don't see where the dividing line comes in with pressing.

[chrisco37]

 

I'll splain it to you over beers at the Brickskeller Friday night.

 

My old stomping grounds? And no invite!!!

 

Thanks fellas.

[PovertyRow]

Comics from that era were meant to be read and not with preservation in mind, so I love the fact that a 40+ year old book could have naturally defied all the odds and survived for so long in pristine condition with no artificial intervention other than good storage techniques. This is why NM 40+ year old books are generally pretty unique, and it makes it fun to try to collect them because it's so damn hard.

 

I have been taking that position for a long time now. My last attempt at explaining this was a few months back when I said "Why do high grade books command so much more money? the answer is so blatant but so often ignored. It is because the odds of a book, and especially SA and GA, surviving intact in a raw, untouched high grade are quite slim. (Barring warehouse finds). these books, untouched by any process, deserve a special place simple because they have survived." It is great to actually see it being expressed by someone else, as it is usually met with resounding silence.