Don Rosa Poll - Pedigree or Collection?

[The Black Hand ®]

How exciting another pedigree how do they find them they must be really looking hard.........

[sterlingcomics]

It is a pedigree then? Oh, Ok.

 

Yeah, we talked about this fact on another thread a while back...I'm sure on of the "I feel regular" guys could pull a link quicker than I can say "cracked slab".

[deathlok]

It is a pedigree then? Oh, Ok.

 

Yeah, we talked about this fact on another thread a while back...I'm sure on of the "I feel regular" guys could pull a link quicker than I can say "cracked slab".

 

ad nauseum

 

ad nauseum II

[Don Rosa-migration]

>>>>So, did you complete your EC collection?

 

Sure. About 1970. Those were easy, everybody had 'em. It was tougher to complete the rest of the sets of horror/SF comics. In those days, if a comic was lousy, nobody wanted it or handled it. Who would have ever thought people would collect comics for any other reason than reading them?!?!? But I had the soul of an archivist; I wanted sets of everything, just to have everything.

[Don Rosa-migration]

That's a BIG question! Includes everything. I need to get back to you when I have more time. Maybe Sunday.

[Don Rosa-migration]

>>>>>Did you read all your comics?

 

Seems like I read most of them (except reprints) until the mid 70's. Then they started turning in general boring directions that I didn't care for, and I stopped reading most of 'em, just buying them only because I still collected old comics. I stopped completely about 1984, but then Marvel and DC, upon hearing I'd stopped buying, started sending me free issues of everything. That lasted until about 1988.

 

>>>>Why didn't you collect the romance titles?

 

Ecch! Those are fer gurls! Besides, I had my hands full collecting "everything but romance comics", eh?

 

>>>>>What is your favorite age of comics?

 

1948-1965!!!!!!!!!

 

>>>>>>Do you buy modern comics at all?

 

I haven't been in a comic store since 1985. I see the new comics at the conventions I'm invited to. Pretty cover art. I don't know about the interiors but at least the covers are better than those ugly comics they put out in the 1970's.

[awe4one]

Nice to see you here Don...

 

Jim

[lou_fine]

>>>>Gotta ask, how many books did you end up collecting and were/are there certain favorites of yours?

 

I lost track of the count around 37,000... I estimate there was about 40,000 comics. But that's down to about 25,000 -- I guess Steve hauled off about 15,000. I didn't check.

Favorites? Well, obviously the Barks Ducks (not Disneys, just Barks). But perhaps even more than Barks, the ECs! (However, characters are more important to me than just stories, so $crooge interests me more than anthology stuff.) And the Weisinger Superman years. But so MANY others. That's why I became a completist (since I started at the time when you could afford to do that). But no, I guess I was only interested in stuff from about 1948-on. The so-called "Golden Age" comics seemed pretty crude and childish to me. I couldn't see why I should pay $1-$5 each for 1940's comics when I could get any comic of the late 40's, 50's or early 60's for 25-50 cents each. Oh, not the ECs... those cost a flat $3 each, $5 for the SF titles.

 

Don;

 

Great to see you on the boards here!

 

Based upon your above comments, are you saying that your collection does not include very many GA books prior to the mid-40's, except for the odd books such as your Batman run back to Bats #1? Do you also have some of the other GA keys and what are the general condition of your GA books? Any plans to dispose of your pre-1965 books or is this going to be left for some distant future?

 

Sounds like you have a pretty amazing collection in your hands and very astute of you to start so early.

[BassGMan]

 

>>>>Why didn't you collect the romance titles?

 

Ecch! Those are fer gurls! Besides, I had my hands full collecting "everything but romance comics", eh?

 

 

Funny that this is probably why Bronze Romance comics are by far the hardest issues to find in a decent grade these days. Most guys probably felt this same way. They may be "fer gurls" as a general audience, but personally I think they have alot of appeal, similar to war comics actually. They often reflect reality, although sometimes exaggerated, as compared to superhero books which are mostly total fantasy. If I could find affordable copies of VF and up BA romance titles, I'd prefer them over any superhero anyday.

[VintageComics]

Does any one have anything in writing as to what designates a pedigree?

Also, why does the collection not warrant pedigree status just because it is primarily SA? The books are over all in very hi grade.

Also, what are the "breadth" and "depth" parameters? This is very vague and open to interpretation. I don't know what the entire run consists of, but it seems to represent very well, that particular time period.

I voted pedigree (and i only own 1 DR book).

JMO.

Roy.

[LearnedHand]

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

My understanding on Pedigrees is that there must be a large depth of collection, consistant high quality, large breadth of collection and must have been an original owner.

 

Depth--Basically # of books.

Breadth--Number of consecutive copies collected and number of titles collected.

Quality--Condition of the books.

Original owner--- Majority of books collected by the owner as the books were printed. Some second hand is possible but not a characteristic of the pedigree.

 

These seem to be the only characteristics of a pedigree that I have heard about. So Don's would apply, would they not? Anyone, have any other info on what determines a "Pedigree"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

If those were the only criteria, then there would be one zillion Copper & Modern pedigrees. I think most pedigree purists would say that a pedigree has to have been compiled during a time when it would have been extremely unusual for someone to purchase a huge amount of comics AND maintain them in great condition. These people would say that any "true" pedigree must contain a significant number of books from before 1965 (actually, some of the more extreme members of this group (cough! pedigreeman! cough!) say that only GA pedigrees can be true pedigrees).

 

Interesting topic. As a GA collector, I've always scoffed at so-called pedigrees from the SA or later. In the last ten years or so, I have thought more about this subject, but have yet to reach a definitive opinion because of the following:

 

The MH collection contained books that were anywhere from about 40 to 19 years old when this collection was deemed "pedigree." Ironically, a collection from (say) 1965 to 1985 discovered today would be relatively just as old. If a SA/BA collection from this era is as complete (or more complete), has a higher median grade, and equal or better median page quality to the MH (or Tom Reilly for that matter), apparently, this isn't enough because the books were collected since collecting (and hoarding) came into vogue? Is this a fair disqualifier?

[adamstrange]

The MH collection contained books that were anywhere from about 40 to 19 years old when this collection was deemed "pedigree." Ironically, a collection from (say) 1965 to 1985 discovered today would be relatively just as old. If a SA/BA collection from this era is as complete (or more complete), has a higher median grade, and equal or better median page quality to the MH (or Tom Reilly for that matter), apparently, this isn't enough because the books were collected since collecting (and hoarding) came into vogue? Is this a fair disqualifier?

 

I have some very nice comics from the 70s from a guy like Rosa who bought one of everything (at least DCs) off of the newstand. I think we'll find that there are just too many collections like that for one or more to stand out relative to the other copies that are available. In the case of the MH 19 year-old books, they are still in a class above most others from their time period.

[LearnedHand]

ANSWER: Off the rack. All the books from 1966 to the late 1980's were purchased by Don firsthand, everything. He is the original owner.

 

Don is quite the comic-collecting perfectionist. His desire was to pick only the very best looking comics at the time of purchase, and it shows. Don bought his books from three primary locations in Louisville, Kentucky. One main store, a magazine store, and a pharmacy. Without fail, Don was there buying all the books on the day they hit the stand. That was his nature. He had to be there when they hit so he could get the very best stuff.

 

Additionally, Don's method of storing his collection was quite unique. His books were not stored in bags, like a lot of people think. The comics were placed standing up, in archival boxes. No bags, no boards. The collection was housed in his basement and the boxes were meticulously placed and arranged in order on shelving he constructed. He installed a heater/humidifier for climate control and the basement had its own generator just in case of an electrical emergency. All of these perfectionist-like-efforts created optimum storages conditions. That's why the books look the way they do. Just absolutely incredible stuff.

 

Quite a meticulous collector and an awesome collection, to be sure.

 

I am curious, however, as to how the books were stored in archival boxes from 1966 on, if archival boxes weren't even commercially introduced until 1979-1980?

[LearnedHand]

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The MH collection contained books that were anywhere from about 40 to 19 years old when this collection was deemed "pedigree." Ironically, a collection from (say) 1965 to 1985 discovered today would be relatively just as old. If a SA/BA collection from this era is as complete (or more complete), has a higher median grade, and equal or better median page quality to the MH (or Tom Reilly for that matter), apparently, this isn't enough because the books were collected since collecting (and hoarding) came into vogue? Is this a fair disqualifier?

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I have some very nice comics from the 70s from a guy like Rosa who bought one of everything (at least DCs) off of the newstand. I think we'll find that there are just too many collections like that for one or more to stand out relative to the other copies that are available. In the case of the MH 19 year-old books, they are still in a class above most others from their time period.

 

So is the thought that there is no such thing as a pedigree after 1962 or so (when fandom and the comic book movement began to flourish), or is it that the collection, aside from completeness, would need to have a ridiculous median grade (say 9.8 or better), or...?

 

I'm not suggesting that I have an answer; I'm just looking for other opinions.

[adamstrange]

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The MH collection contained books that were anywhere from about 40 to 19 years old when this collection was deemed "pedigree." Ironically, a collection from (say) 1965 to 1985 discovered today would be relatively just as old. If a SA/BA collection from this era is as complete (or more complete), has a higher median grade, and equal or better median page quality to the MH (or Tom Reilly for that matter), apparently, this isn't enough because the books were collected since collecting (and hoarding) came into vogue? Is this a fair disqualifier?

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I have some very nice comics from the 70s from a guy like Rosa who bought one of everything (at least DCs) off of the newstand. I think we'll find that there are just too many collections like that for one or more to stand out relative to the other copies that are available. In the case of the MH 19 year-old books, they are still in a class above most others from their time period.

 

So is the thought that there is no such thing as a pedigree after 1962 or so (when fandom and the comic book movement began to flourish), or is it that the collection, aside from completeness, would need to have a ridiculous median grade (say 9.8 or better), or...?

 

I'm not suggesting that I have an answer; I'm just looking for other opinions.

 

For me, I pay little attention to pedigree designation for books published after 1963. Not that there aren't copies that aren't exceptional, just that I don't consider their state of preservation to be rare enough to merit recognition as a pedigree.

[MasterChief]

According to my research, the first archival corrugated storage box was manufactured in 1947.

http://www.hollingercorp.com/history.htm

[LearnedHand]

According to my research, the first archival corrugated storage box was manufactured in 1947.

 

I'm curious about this, as the evolution of archival products for comic books can overwhelmingly be attributed to two people that brought the rest of the hobby kicking and screaming into the state-of-the-art methods employed today: Ernie Gerber and Bill Sarrill.

 

They both had formal and scientific training in paper conservation and preservation and were far ahead of the curve, working on archival products even before the hobby knew that comic books were acidic time bombs requiring proper preservation and storage. In fact, the first commercial offering relative to boxes of archival quality specifically for comic books was made by Ernie Gerber (E. Gerber Products) in 1979-1980.

 

And, having spoken to Ernie on several occasions in the 1980s-1990s, he indicated that mylar bags and archival boxes were an extremely hard sell, even at the major conventions, for the first several years after that first offering. People thought the prices were uncompetitive (compared to regular boxes and plastic bags) in return for what was preceived as, at best, notional benefit.

 

Aside from my curiosity over the 1947 date you mentioned, are you connecting that date to Rosa's storage techniques? And are you saying that Rosa was having archival boxes custom made for his comic books years before anyone in the hobby was even aware of the need for this level of care?

[BassGMan]

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The MH collection contained books that were anywhere from about 40 to 19 years old when this collection was deemed "pedigree." Ironically, a collection from (say) 1965 to 1985 discovered today would be relatively just as old. If a SA/BA collection from this era is as complete (or more complete), has a higher median grade, and equal or better median page quality to the MH (or Tom Reilly for that matter), apparently, this isn't enough because the books were collected since collecting (and hoarding) came into vogue? Is this a fair disqualifier?

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I have some very nice comics from the 70s from a guy like Rosa who bought one of everything (at least DCs) off of the newstand. I think we'll find that there are just too many collections like that for one or more to stand out relative to the other copies that are available. In the case of the MH 19 year-old books, they are still in a class above most others from their time period.

 

So is the thought that there is no such thing as a pedigree after 1962 or so (when fandom and the comic book movement began to flourish), or is it that the collection, aside from completeness, would need to have a ridiculous median grade (say 9.8 or better), or...?

 

I'm not suggesting that I have an answer; I'm just looking for other opinions.

 

Don't mind me because I'm not a "pedigree" collector, but my question is, why in the heck does it even matter if CGC, or anyone for that matter, considers a collection an official pedigree or not? Whether CGC gives the Don Rosa books, or any collection the pedigree status, is it going to factor into anyone's decision to buy those books, assuming that you know where the book came from anyway (if that is the case)? I mean, if Don Rosa is selling his books, or Burntboy is selling his early SA books that HE bought off the rack, or I am selling my 80s books that I bought off the rack, why in the heck does it matter what the status is anyway? Still the same book, recognized or not. Or, since I have heard that some people buy pedigrees for the story behind them, what if there was a collection that had a really interesting story behind it, but because the collection didn't have the depth, or the age, or the volume, the powers that be decide that the collection then is NOT a pedigree, now are the books less appealing than if it WAS a recognized pedigree? I understand a few peds out there, Mile High, Bill Gaines and a few others, I just don't understand what the big deal is over just some nice large collection, Gold, Silver, Bronze or whatever. And I especially don't understand why anybody really cares what the status is declared. All I can think of to answer my question is that it sounds good, "Hey, I have the Fantastic Four #50 Mile High Club copy".

[Timulty]

To me, the story behind a pedigree is a factor. Call it romanticism of a sort. To think, you are owning a High Quality book that survived the circumstances of the pedigree's history. I mean, owning a book like a Church, is owning a fine example of a High Quality book that almost got dropped in the trash!!

[johnenock]

Just give me a NM-, at least, and I'm happy. I haven't noticed anything exceptional about the Rosa's except for the fact that he had a lot of DC's, they probably weren't pressed and cleaned(yet), and they were available once a week, which made my money disapear really fast.