7 YEAR MICRO-CHAMBER TUNE-UP?

[Arty]

I think Arty left a link early in this thread where the producers of the microchamber paper can be reached

 

Sorry, I mistakenly posted wrong link earlier.

 

Here's correct link to MC-paper manufacturer's pages:

 

http://www.conservationresources.com/news/newsarticles1.shtml

 

Our friend ablue said in earlier thread "If you hold up the paper inserted with your book (preservation paper)

it has a watermark with this you can tell which company made the product.

http://www.conservationresources.com "

 

Can someone who has broken a slab confirm this.

 

[OldGuy]

"Can someone who has broken a slab confirm this."

 

Never looked and threw out the paper.

[BronzeBruce13]

Hi Tracey,

 

I PM'd you a similar message but don't know if you are familiar with the blinking envelope yet...

 

To quickly clarify... my comment regarding credibility was only made because I didn't know who was posting those statements, nor his qualifications or history in relation to CGC, etc. James said he would ask one of you two, or both to come on, but I had no idea which of you it was since you neglected to identify yourself. I by chance noticed Matt Nelson's testimonial in my old CGC brochure... so I made that comment. In hindsight, I guess the credibility remark made little sense anyway because if someone was "pro" or "con" anything their views could be biased either way.

 

The real point which I did not make well admittedly, was I've learned that it is important to know the facts behind any sources potential motivations when considering their input, especially on a very important matter like this. For example: I heard that Bill Cole (the Mylar guy) and others that produced similar storage related products were originally very critical of the CGC slab too and were supposedly spreading misinformation. I remember hearing a few rumors myself although I never saw a public statement. Since these producers of storage products had a financial interest in people continuing to store their comics in their products... you have to consider that their views and the information they promoted could be less than accurate if they felt CGC was a threat to their business.

 

In short, no offense was intended Tracey, but you were anonymous at that point. James emailed me later it was you. Thanks again for taking the time to share your views and expertise.

 

One other note though, you made this statement in your most recent post....

 

"Ultimately, I hope that the powers that be at CGC read this thread, reconsider their opinions on me and my motivations and seek out the information that will improve their product."

 

Could you please elaborate? You seem to be suggesting that you were once, or are still at odds with CGC in some capacity. I feel this would be relevant for us all to know and consider. I also would point out that even if there was/is an issue, that it would NOT necessarily diminish your remarks or discredit anything you've said in my view. I don't know you from Adam or your credentials, but if JR sourced you out I would automatically give you the benefit of the doubt regardless.

 

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

 

Anyway, I did a little research myself today as I may have been spooked worse than anyone on this matter (drilling and a sell-off crossed my mind) ... I spoke with Steve Borock again in regards to the micro chamber paper, what happens when it reaches saturation, the level of testing performed on the inner-well environment and general follow up to yesterdays series of questions. He again took the time to listen and offer information (and didn't try and get me off the phone either which I was expecting after a half-hour approached). I learned a bit more about the level of testing and findings that were conducted and also was happy to hear they did "accelerated aging tests" too. Much of this info was published and presented publicly and to the experts in the field and no one has produced facts to contradict the findings to this date.

 

The real issues left here in my mind, is to establish whether or not some newer questions raised about the micro chamber paper, its effectiveness, and the idea that potential harm could befall the comic in certain circumstances have validity. You raised one of these concerns personally.

 

I decided to call Conservation Resources International, sole developers and producers (as I understand it) of the various micro chamber products . I learned some rather useful and important information that illustrates the point I made above about further researching and understanding the possible motivations and connections of those sources offering information.

 

I spoke with Bill Hollinger and he was less than pleased to hear what was being suggested about Micro chamber paper. Apparently, Hollinger Corp, is comprised of his uncles and a spilt occurred at some point and now there are 2 different companies. Bill and his Father are part of Conservation Resources International, and his uncles own Hollinger Corp. Its clear there is a rift and they are not on good terms. Bill offered some technical info that I was having trouble absorbing at the rate he was giving it (plus my 5 year old was messin' with me while I was trying to listen). I suggested that he join the discussion personally so I don't post anything inaccurate. He accepted, and he and his father will be joining this discussion to defend their product on Monday I'm told.

 

Some information was relayed to me that I'll post now that offer opposition to remarks that were made (or quoted)...

 

"However, Hollinger Corp no longer sells the Micro chamber paper and the question must be asked as to why! Well, from their own

catalog, their statement says "Merely absorbing the gases is not sufficient because these systems can be reversed thus re-emitting

the dangerous gases now in higher concentrations." WOW. That's a pretty scary statement. So when the paper reaches saturation, it can then become a source of contamination."

 

According to Bill of Conservation Resources International (NOT Hollinger Corp)

 

1. Hollinger Corp NEVER distributed/sold the Micro chamber products. They are products of Conservation Resources International.

 

2. Hollinger Corp "carefully" promoted the concept about Micro chamber paper possibly being unsafe. They have not produced any facts to support their "suggested" theory within their catalog.

 

3. Micro chamber product are still being made and are being used more than ever.

 

4. The 2 companies are obviously competitors on some level, although Hollinger does NOT offer a comparable product to Micro chamber.

There seems to be bad blood as there are family related issues here.

 

5. Bill claims that, (remarkably similar to James interpretation) that the micro chamber paper absorbs to capacity BUT does not release acids back into the comic with exception of an extreme event (such as a fire burning it) and that would not much matter at that point. It just stops absorbing like a sponge at capacity and becomes irrelevant, not destructive.

 

Anyway as this is the most important question I had... I feel MUCH better after talking to the source directly and look forward to the arrival and the wealth of information we are going to receive. I still will keep an open mind as I want to do everything possible to make sure my slabs (and everyone else's) are safe, but I will sleep MUCH better this weekend.

 

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

 

I'm still VERY interested in determining the specific information necessary to store our CGC'd comics for optimum protection to person_having_a_hard_time_understanding_my_point normal decay.

I would like to know:

 

• the ideal realistic temperature to store the slabs?

• how much temperature fluctuation results in the equilibrium being disturbed?... 5 degrees?, 10 degrees?

• what is the ideal humidity level and an acceptable fluctuation to avoid equilibrium being disturbed?

• is it OK to store the slabs in normal magazine boxes? can the acids flow through the plastic to the comic?

 

 

BTW... props to Arty for producing the link that led to the answers I found.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[PovertyRow]

A few years ago (about 15 or so) people were selling Vapour Phase sheets (VPD and I don't remember what the d stands for)

 

Hey Trace!

 

You are gonna do a "d'oh!". VPD stands for Vapor Phase Deacidification.

 

Pov

[fantastic_four]

Much of this info was published and presented publicly and to the experts in the field and no one has produced facts to contradict the findings to this date.

Steve told me about this about a year ago...I urged him to post it somewhere on CGC's web site. He said he'd try to do that, but I guess he forgot. I wish I could see that research...he said it was originally sent in a newsletter to Collector's Society members a few years ago.

[BronzeBruce13]

I too mentioned the desire to see it. He said it was somewhere in a box when they moved from NJ to Fla. He gave the impression that he would rather not have to look for it... but might if it became very important to me.

 

He was very helpful and patient but clearly unconcerned about all this.

 

Why not post looking for Collector Society Members from the first year who may have saved all the paperwork and still have the printed findings. I bet nearly everybody saved their folder.. I did (from last year...no such info in mine)

[fantastic_four]

Our friend ablue said in earlier thread "If you hold up the paper inserted with your book (preservation paper)

it has a watermark with this you can tell which company made the product.

http://www.conservationresources.com "

 

Can someone who has broken a slab confirm this.

Just looked at the microchamber paper in a cracked slab, and it does have a watermark saying "Conservation Resources" on it.

 

I wonder how this microchamber paper compares to that product Bill Cole sells to absorb acid that I think he calls "Time X-Tenders"? I know his Time X-Tenders are much thicker than the microchamber paper is, although that doesn't necessarily mean anything.

[BronzeBruce13]

Bill Hollinger indicated (if I understood him correctly) that microchamber was the only "lignent free" preservation product of this type without particles that eventually turn acidic. I'm sure he'll explain it better. He emailed me and said his father would be joining in early next week, maybe not Monday.

 

 

[PovertyRow]

Doooh! I must hav bin rong!

 

OK - replying to me but YOU know who you are! I ALWAYS copy/paste to talics - so how did I COPY your dagnabitt?

 

DAGNABBIT!

[BronzeBruce13]

Daggnabit... I thought for sure you knew I was funnin' with ya

Were you really questioning if you were having a senior moment or not? sorry, if so...

Dooooooh!

[PovertyRow]

Were you really questioning if you were having a senior moment or not?

 

- nahh - just covering all my bases after a brief respite! . Besides - how could I side against sucha cute avatar?

[Newerthannew]

Regarding the Microchamber paper:

 

It is not produced by Hollinger Corp. I posted that it was and then discontinued by them. I was unaware that different Hollingers are involved in Hollinger Corp and Conservation Resources. The information I used was from the Hollinger Corp product catalogue and was a general statement not a specific reference to Microchamber paper. I do not have information or data from CRI so I cannot elucidate further on their product and I am looking into getting more infro from them and look forward to learning further.

 

In the mean time, I stick with my mantra:

 

"proper storage and environmental control is everything".

 

The best holder we can create is only effective within favourable conditions and this is what I am glad to see you all thinking about as this will benefit the life of your collections.

 

Due to my schedule, I cannot participate on this forum regularly, but I'm glad there is a place where we can discuss these issues.

[Newerthannew]

Regarding the Microchamber paper:

 

It is not produced by Hollinger Corp. I posted that it was and then discontinued by them. I was unaware that different Hollingers are involved in Hollinger Corp and Conservation Resources. The information I used was from the Hollinger Corp product catalogue and was a general statement not a specific reference to Microchamber paper. I do not have information or data from CRI so I cannot elucidate further on their product and I am looking into getting more infro from them and look forward to learning further.

 

In the mean time, I stick with my mantra:

 

"proper storage and environmental control is everything".

 

The best holder we can create is only effective within favourable conditions and this is what I am glad to see you all thinking about as this will benefit the life of your collections.

 

Due to my schedule, I cannot participate on this forum regularly, but I'm glad there is a place where we can discuss these issues.

 

Tracey Heft

[Aman619]

I have been under the impression that CGC, before its forming, attended a crash course in the creation of the holder, learning as much as they could in the time available as they were anxious to go to market with the service but needed to first manufacture the holders.... And that since time was a such pressing factor in the decisions they ultimately made as to materials, and shape chosen, my understanding was that it, how do I put this nicely, "could be a lot better and more archival."

 

CGC themselves have always stated that it should be replaced after a certain # years. (7?) But while an honest admission, how comforting is that, really? The cases are plastic. right? Plastic is not inert, like mylar, it interacts with the paper and the gases it emits as it degrades. Can that slip of magic paper cure all??

[fantastic_four]

How do you know Mylar is more inert than Barex, which is what CGC's well is made of? Both Mylar and Barex are plastics.

[Bugaboo-migration]

Actually......mylar is a unique compound which doesn't really qualify as a plastic in the normal sense. It's composed of silicate particles along with extremely small trace amounts of magnesium to help render it inert. Strangely enough, it was originally developed for the space program, but was abandoned when it didn't meet the strict quality control specifications for extreme and rapid temperature changes. Another interesting bit of information is that I just made all of this up.

[blowout]

Plastic is not inert, like mylar, it interacts with the paper and the gases it emits as it degrades. Can that slip of magic paper cure all??

 

The CGC case itself may not be inert, but the inner well is supposed to be. It is not just the micro-chamber paper doing all the work, the inner well will also protect the book from any gases given off by the holder itself.

[blowout]

I wonder how this microchamber paper compares to that product Bill Cole sells to absorb acid that I think he calls "Time X-Tenders"? I know his Time X-Tenders are much thicker than the microchamber paper is, although that doesn't necessarily mean anything.

 

Bill Cole's Time X-Tenders are very thick backing boards, andare more akin to Gerbers Full-backs than micro-chamber paper. They may very well absorb some acid but they are too thick to put between any of the comic pages without damaging the book.

[fantastic_four]

I just noticed you're right about Cole's Time X-Tenders, and here's why I was confused.

 

Cole sells a frame for hanging comics on your wall called a "Showcase Sealer." Included with the Showcase Sealer is what he told me is a "Life X-Tender" board (not Time X-Tender like I said previously; just looked on his web site and got the names straight). However, the Life X-Tender he includes with the Showcase Sealer isn't big enough to fit the back of the comic; it's about 2 inches shorter and thinner than a normal Life X-Tender. I couldn't figure out what he wanted you to do with it since it was smaller than backing boards, so I called and asked in late 2000. He said it is intended that the smaller Life X-Tender be inserted into the middle of the comic to absorb acids, and that's the only reason he includes them with the Showcase Sealers.

 

That's what the microchamber paper reminded me of when I first heard it was in there, and I was surprised to see how thin it was compared to Cole's Life X-Tenders that come with the Showcase Sealers. Since CGC inserts their paper inside both the front and back covers, I thought the microchamber paper was primarily for the reason Tracey Heft pointed out--to absorb oils from the first and last pages so that they don't seep into the cover and cause translucency or transfer stains.

 

So...I wonder how the smaller Life X-Tenders compare to microchamber paper?

[fantastic_four]

I'm glad you're a kidder, because you've got a flair for disinformation...you had me going right until the last sentence!!