2 copies of Action 1 on Facebook group...Are they real? 5 5

[Senormac]

Of course they are real ……        

[ADAMANTIUM]

4 minutes ago, Senormac said:

Of course they are real ……        

He has mastered the art of concealment, however he has picked a rather obvious hiding spot bam!

[oakman29]

1 hour ago, Senormac said:

BWWWWWAAAAAHAHAHAHA! 

[oakman29]

Has anybody noticed how glossy the cover paper is? I mean i've only held an Action 1 in my hands once, but the paper stock seems too glossy.

[stock_rotation]

3 hours ago, 01TheDude said:

As for the tire-- it is an odd looking difference and I can't quite explain that if you tell me curling the page doesn't make that happen. That seems like the only plausible explanation unless this guy created two separate forgeries and didn't get the tire right.

The cover has been impacted on the tire image, that's what the black spot is. It's a low quality photo, but you can see the indentation which goes through the misshapen spot if you zoom in on it a bit.

[01TheDude]

4 minutes ago, stock_rotation said:

The cover has been impacted on the tire image, that's what the black spot is. It's a low quality photo, but you can see the indentation which goes through the misshapen spot if you zoom in on it a bit.

interesting-- can you do the same sort of zooming clip for the portion above the car that is fine lines?

again-- the image is not great but that would be interesting too

[Senormac]

19 minutes ago, 01TheDude said:

interesting-- can you do the same sort of zooming clip for the portion above the car that is fine lines?

again-- the image is not great but that would be interesting too

or a side by side of the two tires 

 

[stock_rotation]

Since I saw this, I've agreed with whoever posted upthread that these were FFEs with repro covers. They're bad pictures, but I've looked them over for flaws that would show they are printouts of scans or web pictures. Tonight, I recognized the tell. I went to Heritage and pulled a bunch of scans of various Action #1s and sized them all approximately the same:

Then I lined them all up and marked the location of the lower staple:

Those last three are the two "barn copies" and the scan of the $3.2mm copy. Amazingly, all three have the staples in the exact same position, even though the location jumps around on every other copy I looked at. 

[MrBedrock]

5 hours ago, Senormac said:

Did these guys ever own a barn ? 

That is obviously a fake.

[01TheDude]

1 hour ago, stock_rotation said:

Since I saw this, I've agreed with whoever posted upthread that these were FFEs with repro covers. They're bad pictures, but I've looked them over for flaws that would show they are printouts of scans or web pictures. Tonight, I recognized the tell. I went to Heritage and pulled a bunch of scans of various Action #1s and sized them all approximately the same:

Then I lined them all up and marked the location of the lower staple:

Those last three are the two "barn copies" and the scan of the $3.2mm copy. Amazingly, all three have the staples in the exact same position, even though the location jumps around on every other copy I looked at. 

hmmm -- maybe they used those very accessible scans of the 9.0 copy to create the fakes

all I know is that this has been one of the more entertaining Friday threads in a long time.

[KryptoMayor]

7 hours ago, TheWatcher said:

Um, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the dislodged tire near the ground a slightly different shape on the copy on the right? 

I’m seeing a similar issue with the sweaty man’s coat tail. One seems a little longer to me. 

Edited August 11, 2018 by KryptoMayor

[aszumilo]

Looking at the original Superman and then the 2 questionable ones, it looks like the questionable ones are missing the diagonal lines in the artwork.  Might be because the pictures are smaller and not very clear, but, it looks like they are different.  Maybe I am just seeing (or not seeing) things?

[kav]

4 hours ago, stock_rotation said:

Since I saw this, I've agreed with whoever posted upthread that these were FFEs with repro covers. They're bad pictures, but I've looked them over for flaws that would show they are printouts of scans or web pictures. Tonight, I recognized the tell. I went to Heritage and pulled a bunch of scans of various Action #1s and sized them all approximately the same:

Then I lined them all up and marked the location of the lower staple:

Those last three are the two "barn copies" and the scan of the $3.2mm copy. Amazingly, all three have the staples in the exact same position, even though the location jumps around on every other copy I looked at. 

I had a book printed and the colorist did a 'distressed' effect to make it look old-looks like thats what happened here-there are no repro books at all, just a figment of digital manipulation

 

[mackenzie999]

As far as the mismatched tires and coattails go, I think those are an anomaly of this being a photograph vs a flat scan (the earlier comment about the impact ding on the tire makes sense). Assuming these are forgeries, it is highly unlikely they were created individually in such a way as to introduce deviations; and if for some reason they were, they probably wouldn’t be presented together. I suspect the shading lines in Supes are probably there just not visible in the photo; if you can make something this close to the original you sure as hell are going to get the central figure right.

[mackenzie999]

 Delete

Edited August 11, 2018 by mackenzie999

[Ditch Fahrenheit]

On 8/8/2018 at 6:10 PM, Ditch Fahrenheit said:

On 8/8/2018 at 4:58 PM, comicdonna said:

They look like real reprints to me.  

Exactly.

Send this guy back to criminal school...I think he cut class too often.

This thread has been a lot of fun, I've enjoyed reading it and seeing all the methods used in trying to determine the authenticity of these books.

In case you're interested, I found a website where this super-smart (and handsome) guy completely debunks this find.    

Kirkland, TX Barn Find of Two Action Comics #1s Debunked

[stock_rotation]

7 hours ago, 01TheDude said:

hmmm -- maybe they used those very accessible scans of the 9.0 copy to create the fakes

Sarcasm doesn't come through very well in text, but yes, that's the point I was making. It's impossible to make any kind of informed assessment with photos of such low quality (there are too many digital artifacts from compression), but the placement of the staples is a giveaway, since the location is so clearly identified by the cover tearing away on both books.

The consistency of the color is a giveaway as well, something I hadn't even considered until putting all those other books side-by-side.

[mackenzie999]

1 hour ago, Ditch Fahrenheit said:

This thread has been a lot of fun, I've enjoyed reading it and seeing all the methods used in trying to determine the authenticity of these books.

In case you're interested, I found a website where this super-smart (and handsome) guy completely debunks this find.    

Kirkland, TX Barn Find of Two Action Comics #1s Debunked

While I agree that the books are almost certainly fake, I disagree with his reasoning. The fact that the counterspaces in the typography vary can be attributed to what is called ink spread. When paper absorbs ink things like counterspaces can close up a bit. This is affected by things like humidity and therefore can be variable.

I’m not sure if he made any other points because I’m viewing this on my phone and the “next” button didn’t work for me. And again, I’m not defending the legitimacy of these copies at all, just saying that the slight variation in the counterspaces of the type isn’t proof of anything.

Edited August 11, 2018 by mackenzie999

[woowoo]

6 hours ago, kav said:

tt

I think its just the scan some look like the guy's suit looks darker and tie looks darker

[jools&jim]

I'm still not sure why we're generally assuming that these 2 copies, whatever they are, were printed and produced in the standard-size for late 1930s golden age comics. 

None of the pictures produced so far to document this find give any reliable sense of scale, except for one: the one with the guy's thumb holding open the front cover. And in that picture, the book clearly appears to be treasury sized...same as in the b&w picture of Siegel and Shuster holding an FFE reprint with the outer card-stock cover removed.

Has anyone in that Facebook group asked the guy to measure the books, or (better) to photograph them next to a yardstick?

Edited August 11, 2018 by jools&jim