Isn't "Color Touch Removal" Just Destroying the Book? 1 1

[Professor K]

On 1/12/2024 at 11:26 AM, Professor K said:

Lawyer- :Isn't it true that you were aware that the comic had color touch but did not disclose this to the buyer?".

Defendant- "No".

Judge- "Case dismissed".

 

On 1/12/2024 at 11:28 AM, shadroch said:

A photo of the book in a PLOD is produced, and your client looks like the scumbag he is.  He's also paid far more for the lawyer than he sold the book for. 

Sometimes, people type things without thinking them through.  Hopefully, this is one, and the person hasn't sold any books under those conditions. 

I did think it through. And the guy who sold the book doesn't need a lawyer.  Just as a person who bought a book raw and found out it had restoration done will have a hard time finding a court system who will even bother with the case. I guess if it's a real big money book involved , 6 figures or high 5 figures you might find a prosecutor who might get to it one day. Unless there was a contract in which the seller states that they guarantee the book has had no restoration. Other than that all the seller has do is say they were unaware of any restoration, and even claim the buyer did it themselves. 

And a photo of the book in a purple label holder. Prove it's the same book. Send it to the boys down in the lab to analyze the book and the photo.  Hire some expert witnesses. 

 You buy a raw book and find out it has color touch you're pretty much beat. 

 

[Yorick]

On 1/12/2024 at 4:25 PM, szav said:

the books pictured below

Those look awful.

Perhaps soon scientists will find an organism that loves to eat paint and we can drop them on our CT books.

[Phill the Governor]

On 1/12/2024 at 7:25 PM, szav said:

I have not performed color touch removal, nor have I, nor would I purchase a book where there's readily apparent paper loss to the underlying book as the result of such, with the intent of deslabbing then inspecting them in hand.  I have not otherwise performed any restoration on books, but I am somewhat knowledgeable about and practiced in methods used to detect restoration.

Since you don't have any actual experience with this it sounds like you may be lending an emotional response instead of seeing the nuanced landscape. Totally understandable, especially when you see a book that was desecrated. I get that. Except you're forgetting about the subjective nature of collecting. One man's trash is another mans potpourri (I like the Grinch version the most). There exist many more people than you'd think who are fine with every one of the books you've posted. You don't' like these books, that's fine you don't have to.

On 1/12/2024 at 7:25 PM, szav said:

1) concerning the books pictured below by what argument have these books not been trimmed?  Particularly the Wonder Woman where large portions of paper have been completely excised, how is this not identical to cutting paper off the edges of the book with the intent to deceive and secure a grade that results in higher monetary value for the book.  This is a purple label book if ever there was one.  For the Planet, how is poking holes along the spine to remove CT not 'trimming' even if you somehow believe that scraping portions off the book horizontally is not also trimming.

Trimming is, by definition: a technique that involves cutting off the edges of a comic book's cover or pages to remove defects and sharpen edges. Unlike the other restoration techniques, trimming results in an improved appearance through destruction (loss of paper). What you are doing is taking the later part of the definition of trimming and applying it to this. They are not the same thing, no matter how much you want to try and create your own definition for it. Horizontal trimming is not a thing.

On 1/12/2024 at 7:25 PM, szav said:

2) This Hit Comics 5 has the telltale signs of scraping.  Has paper been removed to achieve this look?  If not, is this done by treating with some sort of chemical that bleaches the paper or turns it stark white, and would that not be color touch meant to deceive as to the state of the book.

You answered your own question: There is no longer color touch. The book was not trimmed to mask anything, but paper was removed at areas of previously covered defects which is insanely apparent. The book isn't trying to be anything other than what it is.

On 1/12/2024 at 7:25 PM, szav said:

3) Should CGC be noting the color touch, removal, particularly when they are the perpetrators?  Does it seem deceptive to you at all that these plainly visible, unnatural looking defects, are often times not noted at all in the graders notes, or are noted simply as "scrape" without further explanation, thus intentionally obscuring the history of the book, all for the purpose of assigning a grade of higher monetary value.

No. You answered your own question: the areas of color touch removal are plainly visible, therefore there is no deception.

On 1/12/2024 at 7:25 PM, szav said:

4) what do you think of my idea that they could simply offer the blue label grade that it would get "if the CT were removed" without actually removing it?  There is precedent for such treatment particularly with some of the Church books.  Would you agree that it might be better for the hobby, better for CGCs reputation as stewards of the hobby who built their brand on authentication and identification of tampering, and better for the books themselves if such a policy was adopted?

No.

 

Back to the subjective nature of collecting...  Some people prefer the one they know has 0 restoration on it. You could leaf-cast or add paper, if necessary, and/or just recolor touch the area to get your purple label again. Or you can pass on the copy if it's not to your liking. CGC doesn't have to remark about it because 1. it's incredibly obvious to the naked eye and 2. remark on what? they grade the book as it sits. The book has defects of paper/color loss at affected areas and downgraded appropriately.

I'm not trying to change your mind since it seems to be made up. It can be unsightly, sure, but calling ct-removal trimming is factually incorrect and will only confuse others.

[shadroch]

On 1/12/2024 at 8:58 PM, Professor K said:

 

I did think it through. And the guy who sold the book doesn't need a lawyer.  Just as a person who bought a book raw and found out it had restoration done will have a hard time finding a court system who will even bother with the case. I guess if it's a real big money book involved , 6 figures or high 5 figures you might find a prosecutor who might get to it one day. Unless there was a contract in which the seller states that they guarantee the book has had no restoration. Other than that all the seller has do is say they were unaware of any restoration, and even claim the buyer did it themselves. 

And a photo of the book in a purple label holder. Prove it's the same book. Send it to the boys down in the lab to analyze the book and the photo.  Hire some expert witnesses. 

 You buy a raw book and find out it has color touch you're pretty much beat. 

 

Kool. Now the guy isn't just a scumbag, he's a iying scumbag. In a business where reputation is everything, it sounds like he'll have a tremendous career.

[Marty Mann]

CGC RESTORED GRADE

Restoration includes:  Small amount of color touch on cover.

No idea where the "color touch"  is but I think I could have done a lot more to restore this book...

maybe some Scotch Tape?

[Professor K]

On 1/13/2024 at 10:26 AM, shadroch said:

Kool. Now the guy isn't just a scumbag, he's a iying scumbag. In a business where reputation is everything, it sounds like he'll have a tremendous career.

I agree. I was only addressing the legal aspect of it regarding a buyer getting their money back if they found restoration on a book they bought at some point after the sale. It would be difficult, especially if some time has passed since the sale. That's all. That was my only point. 

Edited January 13 by Professor K

[Phill the Governor]

Since some obvious ct removed books were posted earlier in the thread, here are some other examples for everyone to see.

 

The DD1 was an ideal case as there was only a few dots of ct at the spine.

Cap had all resto removed and was conserved (all work done by me except for the leaf-casting).

 

 

[Ryan.]

Collecting is a generally irrational endeavor so, while I can appreciate attempts to add objective analysis to this thread, my deeply considered and highly scientific conclusion is that scraping paper away from a book to remove color touch stinks and I don't like it.

[Point Five]

On 1/13/2024 at 12:57 PM, Ryan. said:

Collecting is a generally irrational endeavor so, while I can appreciate attempts to add objective analysis to this thread, my deeply considered and highly scientific conclusion is that scraping paper away from a book to remove color touch stinks and I don't like it.

Same. But I don't have any issue with the two examples Phil posted just above (DD #1, Cap #3). If a book looks visibly horribly disfigured... vs if a few tiny dots of color touch are removed that would take a magnifying loupe to see and understand... those are two completely different scenarios. Not complicated, to me at least.

 

[Ryan.]

On 1/13/2024 at 2:22 PM, Point Five said:

Same. But I don't have any issue with the two examples Phil posted just above (DD #1, Cap #3). If a book looks visibly horribly disfigured... vs if a few tiny dots of color touch are removed that would take a magnifying loupe to see and understand... those are two completely different scenarios. Not complicated, to me at least.

 

It's similar in my mind to buying a book with a coupon clipped. The book may look amazing in a mylar and the missing coupon may have no impact on the story, the visual presentation, the colors, etc but once I know that coupon is missing it's gotta go. No one is wrong for wanting a comic I might not want. It's just my preference.