It was BOUND to happen, show us your Bound Volumes and Books removed from them. 3 3

[pemart1966]

On 5/10/2019 at 8:50 PM, TheSurgeon said:

I have one more! This is a great piece of popular culture memorabilia. You can read Playboy and Mad magazine and it seems like they came from the same place. Both really smart, funny, culturally important. Playboy devoted many pages of its early issues to serializing Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451. Unlike the early EC’s, though, Playboy gave him credit for the stories! 

WOW!  One of the rare people who reads Playboy for the articles  

[RedFury]

Weird Tales, August 1929

1st appearance of Kull of Atlantis by Robert E. Howard.  Also of note, a story by Lois Lane, a real author who probably inspired the naming of Superman's girlfriend.  Jerry Siegel most certainly saw this story.  In a letter in the August 1929 Amazing Stories he said "I buy every issue of Weird Tales magazine". 

[RedFury]

Scientific Detective Monthly / Amazing Detective Tales, Jan-Jul 1930

Bed-sheet sized detective pulps from Amazing Stories publisher Hugo Gernsback.  There's probably a third volume of this set out there somewhere with the final three issues.

[RedFury]

Several of my early Weird Tales are former bound copies.  Here are two important ones.  The first is the first published work by Robert E. Howard in the July 1925 issue.  The second is his first cover story in the April 1926 issue.

[Robot Man]

17 hours ago, OtherEric said:

Found this yesterday; I actually posted all the covers in the Four Color thread but nobody reacted.  I was curious if anybody knew what the source of the book might be:

Very cool. Looks like maybe a Dell publishers file copy. The Volume 93 kind of tips it off. Wouldn't you like to find the other 92 volumes? I assume no stamps inside. Fun to check out all the books published in order. a real mix of issues.

 

[Robot Man]

58 minutes ago, RedFury said:

Several of my early Weird Tales are former bound copies.  Here are two important ones.  The first is the first published work by Robert E. Howard in the July 1925 issue.  The second is his first cover story in the April 1926 issue.

Wow Fury! Some rare stuff there. I have seen quite a few pulp bound volumes. Seems adult readers wanted to keep them in book form for easy reading. These are two very tough ones!

[Robot Man]

A couple of George Delacourte Dell File bound volumes.

[RedFury]

4 minutes ago, Robot Man said:

A couple of George Delacourte Dell File bound volumes.

Wow, these are great. I love Sagendorf Popeye, and I read them to my kids all the time.

[OtherEric]

54 minutes ago, Robot Man said:

Very cool. Looks like maybe a Dell publishers file copy. The Volume 93 kind of tips it off. Wouldn't you like to find the other 92 volumes? I assume no stamps inside. Fun to check out all the books published in order. a real mix of issues.

 

No stamps or any other markings beyond the cover and spine.  The books, other than obviously being bound & trimmed, are gorgeous.  I think it was a well spent $40.

[Robot Man]

Picked this up at the Rose Bowl Flea Market yesterday. Nothing high grade or earth shaking but just a very random fan bound volume of comics all from the same time period. These are always just so surprising to find out in the wild. There are quite a few more in here, these are just random ones. Fun reading matter.

[50YrsCollctngCmcs]

21 hours ago, Robot Man said:

Picked this up at the Rose Bowl Flea Market yesterday. Nothing high grade or earth shaking but just a very random fan bound volume of comics all from the same time period. These are always just so surprising to find out in the wild. There are quite a few more in here, these are just random ones. Fun reading matter.

I wonder what it cost to have these bound? Seems like it might have cost more than the costs of the books themselves. Or perhaps it was a cheap way to practice the craft. Seems odd someone would do this.

[Robot Man]

Probably. Maybe the original owner knew some one in the business? I know I had all my Cochran EC reprints bound and the cost was about $25. per volume in today's dollars so it was probably real cheap when these books were published. What is so odd is that the contents are so random. It was like some one took an handful off books and had them bound just because...

I have a few other fairly random bound volumes. Not quite as diverse as this but similar. This one is just titled "Horror" and contains random PCH books from 1952 I believe.

[Artboy99]

how does someone assign a value to one of these bound volumes? I was thinking you would grade each book within, giving it a restored grade and then adding up the numbers. While a niche market, bound volumes are collectible.

Am I in the ballpark on value?

[bluechip]

7 hours ago, Artboy99 said:

how does someone assign a value to one of these bound volumes? I was thinking you would grade each book within, giving it a restored grade and then adding up the numbers. While a niche market, bound volumes are collectible.

Am I in the ballpark on value?

Realized prices vary widely, so there is no wrong answer.   It is wrong, however, to call them "restored" because they just... are.  not. restored.     It is wrong and silly to use the word "restored" for any-book-which-had-something-done-to-it-that-some-people-don't-approve of.   

I've heard defense of that approach by graders who say graders "don't have many options", which means, basically, that they want to label a book as being "desecrated" but, since there isn't a "desecration label" what the hey just say it's restored because casual investors have been conditioned to think a purple label means the book is non-existent so anything we call restored will be shunned by casual investors looking for simple guidelines.  Thus, "restored" can be used when what you'd like to say is "I don't approve what I believe somebody was thinking when this book got damaged" or even "I hate so much that people trimmed books books to make them look better that I will call anything restored if it's trimmed in any way for any reason."   

Those books were bound, and damaged in the process, even "desecrated", if you like.   But until Webster's says otherwise, they simply were. not. restored.

 

Edited June 13, 2019 by bluechip

[Artboy99]

28 minutes ago, bluechip said:

Realized prices vary widely, so there is no wrong answer.   It is wrong, however, to call them "restored" because they just... are.  not. restored.     It is wrong and silly to use the word "restored" for any-book-which-had-something-done-to-it-that-some-people-don't-approve of.   

I've heard defense of that approach by graders who say graders "don't have many options", which means, basically, that they want to label a book as being "desecrated" but, since there isn't a "desecration label" what the hey just say it's restored because casual investors have been conditioned to think a purple label means the book is non-existent so anything we call restored will be shunned by casual investors looking for simple guidelines.  Thus, "restored" can be used when what you'd like to say is "I don't approve what I believe somebody was thinking when this book got damaged" or even "I hate so much that people trimmed books books to make them look better that I will call anything restored if it's trimmed in any way for any reason."   

Those books were bound, and damaged in the process, even "desecrated", if you like.   But until Webster's says otherwise, they simple were not restored.

 

absolutely agree. 

My model is just a guide to try to come up with a reasonable value for a bound volume. 

Would have to pay for the book to be restored as well. 

Edited June 12, 2019 by Artboy99

[Chicago Boy]

1 hour ago, bluechip said:

Realized prices vary widely, so there is no wrong answer.   It is wrong, however, to call them "restored" because they just... are.  not. restored.     It is wrong and silly to use the word "restored" for any-book-which-had-something-done-to-it-that-some-people-don't-approve of.   

I've heard defense of that approach by graders who say graders "don't have many options", which means, basically, that they want to label a book as being "desecrated" but, since there isn't a "desecration label" what the hey just say it's restored because casual investors have been conditioned to think a purple label means the book is non-existent so anything we call restored will be shunned by casual investors looking for simple guidelines.  Thus, "restored" can be used when what you'd like to say is "I don't approve what I believe somebody was thinking when this book got damaged" or even "I hate so much that people trimmed books books to make them look better that I will call anything restored if it's trimmed in any way for any reason."   

Those books were bound, and damaged in the process, even "desecrated", if you like.   But until Webster's says otherwise, they simple were not restored.

 

Couldn’t agree more !   I was just having this conversation yesterday with another boardie. Trimmed is not restored !  It’s is destruction ( or taking away from something but  certainly not adding to it to bring it back to its original state ).  I don’t understand why CGC does not differentiate this on their labels  while their biggest competition does note the difference between trimmed and restoration On their labels

[bluechip]

4 hours ago, Chicago Boy said:

Couldn’t agree more !   I was just having this conversation yesterday with another boardie. Trimmed is not restored !  It’s is destruction ( or taking away from something but  certainly not adding to it to bring it back to its original state ).  I don’t understand why CGC does not differentiate this on their labels  while their biggest competition does note the difference between trimmed and restoration On their labels

I can only guess but it seems clear that either some influential people on the inside, or some influential customers putting pressure on them, are willing to accept the misuse of the term.   But when the purple label is used on books that are not restored but, simply, disapproved, it invalidates the assertion that the purple label is not employed to make people avoid books.  And it leads to valuations that actually incentivize people to tear up books that have gotten a purple label through misuse of a term, or which are not quite complete.  Imagine if you will the same thing happening with the valuation of classic cars, and you found a hundred year old classic missing only a few bolts, but putting them on the car would make it shunned, so you're better off taking the whole thing apart and selling the wheels, the doors, the steering column, etc. piece by piece, only to be sold as separate items, because that is approved, while completing a car, even with original parts, is not.

 

Edited June 13, 2019 by bluechip

[Knightsofold]

15 hours ago, Artboy99 said:

how does someone assign a value to one of these bound volumes? I was thinking you would grade each book within, giving it a restored grade and then adding up the numbers. While a niche market, bound volumes are collectible.

Am I in the ballpark on value?

I’ve seen many books from bound volumes get a universal label.  They’ve also had some of the deepest and finest cover colors I’ve ever seen.

[Mr. Lady Luck]

[Chicago Boy]

2 hours ago, Knightsofold said:

I’ve seen many books from bound volumes get a universal label.  They’ve also had some of the deepest and finest cover colors I’ve ever seen.

Same goes for color of the inside pages