SUPERMAN #1 different printings 7 7

[sfcityduck]

On 3/27/2024 at 5:33 PM, BLUECHIPCOLLECTIBLES said:

There's a Batman 1 first printing (aka "no dot" copy) in HA's current auction.  

In rare book parlance, they might actually call this not a first printing but, more specifically, a "first printing, first state" due to an "errata" -- because there are so few "no dot" copies that it's virtually certain it was a mistake caught early in the printing process and corrected before too many copies had been printed.   But whatever you call them, the dotless copies are clearly the first ones off the press.

Conventional wisdom is you're right about the "first printing, first state" but that they interrupted the print run to chisel off the dot because it was misplaced. In fact, there is even a "misplaced dot" house ad which clearly came out before Batman 1:

Edited March 28 by sfcityduck

[Crowzilla]

On 3/27/2024 at 5:54 PM, Vintage_Paper said:

I believe even if the top corner of the cover is missing you can identify the version by the indicia on the inside front cover. The November copies have a black rectangle over the word October and possibly the word November was also added to it. I'm not a Marvel Comics 1 guy - just trying to recall when what I saw a few decades ago.

Correct. The October part is blacked out and then at the end of the indicia the November 1939 copyright is added

[Professor K]

On 3/27/2024 at 5:33 PM, Crowzilla said:

CGC will reholder the Superman #1 for $50 and note which version it is.

 

On 3/27/2024 at 9:01 PM, nearmint said:

D'oh!  Right you are.

I was going to tell you that too........then I saw that big ol' smile and decided not to. 

 

Edited March 28 by Professor K
video removed

[Aman619]

On 3/27/2024 at 8:33 PM, BLUECHIPCOLLECTIBLES said:

There's a Batman 1 first printing (aka "no dot" copy) in HA's current auction.  

In rare book parlance, they might actually call this not a first printing but, more specifically, a "first printing, first state" due to an "errata" -- because there are so few "no dot" copies that it's virtually certain it was a mistake caught early in the printing process and corrected before too many copies had been printed.   But whatever you call them, the dotless copies are clearly the first ones off the press.

well, the covers are printed separately from the interiors, then shipped and added to the interior newsprint sections... so WHEN they discovered the error on the cover determined the amount of each cover (with period and without.  This would have happened BEFORE they shipped the covers AND, assuming they sent a proof to DC before running the presses, everyone missed the error.  This is a complication because no-one would catch the error while being printed because the covers would MATCH the client approved proofs!  And a missing period is just not worth reprinting for a cheap thing like funny books in 1940.

Therefore, Id be leaning on a second printing of Batman 1 was ordered. And, while they were at it, they instructed the printers to add or remove a period.

It could be many theories why we have 2 covers: with and without a period.  I think the cheapest sequence would be that the first print run HAD the period, but it was in the wrong place. At that point it's cheaper (not by much though) to delete the black period from the black plate.  Either by filing it down so it doesn't impart any ink, (cheapest - no new film, no new black plate) or they fixed the film to mask out the period and replaced the black plate from the film.  But frustratingly as in all these scenarios, we just dont know what happened with any certainty.

also, another idea.  IF as you suggest they caught the error while printing the covers, they would have fixed the plate and kept printing.  Then ship ALL the covers (with and without) to be bound with the interiors. This way the entire print run ordered arrives at same time. Some comics got the period an 8th mothers gt the other covers.

 

[tth2]

On 3/27/2024 at 11:13 PM, nearmint said:

I can't imagine anyone having their Supes #1 reholdered.  Why pay thousands of dollars to risk finding out (and announcing to the world in the notes) that you don't have a 1st printing?  Unless you owned the book raw and know that it is.

It's no different than all those sports card guys breaking boxes.  They were paying thousands of dollars to risk finding out publicly (because most of these guys were doing them live on Youtube) that there were no valuable cards in there.  But if they did find some super valuable card in there, then they more than made up for their losses.  So I guess the willingness of people to reholder their Superman #1s and take the gamble will really depend on the difference in value between the prints.  

[nearmint]

Getting the word out to the masses.

 

[Vintage_Paper]

On 3/27/2024 at 7:30 PM, pemart1966 said:

Not too sure what you mean by "checking copy".  Do you mean the "Pay Copy"?

What I mean by 'checking copy' is the copy that was used to verify if corrections needed to be made before they ran the whole print run. I'm not a Marvel Comics 1 guy so I don't recall the exact details, but I'm pretty sure the checking copy is different copy from the Pay Copy. You would have to ask Vincent what he remembers.

 

Edited March 28 by Vintage_Paper

[onlyweaknesskryptonite]

[pemart1966]

On 3/28/2024 at 12:10 PM, Vintage_Paper said:

What I mean by 'checking copy' is the copy that was used to verify if corrections needed to be made before they ran the whole print run. I'm not a Marvel Comics 1 guy so I don't recall the exact details, but I'm pretty sure the checking copy is different copy from the Pay Copy. You would have to ask Vincent what he remembers.

 

Never heard of the "checking copy" but would like too...anyone else heard of it?  

[sfcityduck]

On 3/28/2024 at 12:13 PM, pemart1966 said:

Never heard of the "checking copy" but would like too...anyone else heard of it?  

I have heard of the "Pay Copy" of MC 1 which is a Nov. copy. But I have seen "checking copy" stamped on other GA comics.

[Mmehdy]

On 3/26/2024 at 10:45 PM, sfcityduck said:

I think it is will be just like MC 1 Oct. and Nov. copies.  The highest graded is a Nov. and that will trump all others. But, an Oct. copy is likely to have more value than an equivalent Nov., right?

SPOT ON....

[BLUECHIPCOLLECTIBLES]

On 3/27/2024 at 6:14 PM, sfcityduck said:

Conventional wisdom is you're right about the "first printing, first state" but that they interrupted the print run to chisel off the dot because it was misplaced. In fact, there is even a "misplaced dot" house ad which clearly came out before Batman 1:

This ad appeared before the book was on the stands, but it was not necessarily printed before the cover itself had been printed.  House ads were not always created with a stat of the actual, final cover, very many of them show differences between the ad and the published cover, especially in the logos and blurbs.  Sometimes the differences are huge: a house ad prior to Captain America #1 release shows him without wings on his head.  And a house ad for an early Timely comic had Stalin partnered with Hitler, while the published book removed Uncle Joe because in the small window between ad and publication, Russia had become our ally.  There may have been copies printed with the original cover, but destroyed.

And this ad for Batman 1 has the number and date in blue, whereas in all published copies (dot or no dot) the number and date were clearly part of the red plate.  So it's definitely not a version of the cover that was published.  

  

Edited March 28 by BLUECHIPCOLLECTIBLES

[BLUECHIPCOLLECTIBLES]

On 3/27/2024 at 8:39 PM, Aman619 said:

well, the covers are printed separately from the interiors, then shipped and added to the interior newsprint sections... so WHEN they discovered the error on the cover determined the amount of each cover (with period and without.  This would have happened BEFORE they shipped the covers AND, assuming they sent a proof to DC before running the presses, everyone missed the error.  This is a complication because no-one would catch the error while being printed because the covers would MATCH the client approved proofs!  And a missing period is just not worth reprinting for a cheap thing like funny books in 1940.

Therefore, Id be leaning on a second printing of Batman 1 was ordered. And, while they were at it, they instructed the printers to add or remove a period.

It could be many theories why we have 2 covers: with and without a period.  I think the cheapest sequence would be that the first print run HAD the period, but it was in the wrong place. At that point it's cheaper (not by much though) to delete the black period from the black plate.  Either by filing it down so it doesn't impart any ink, (cheapest - no new film, no new black plate) or they fixed the film to mask out the period and replaced the black plate from the film.  But frustratingly as in all these scenarios, we just dont know what happened with any certainty.

also, another idea.  IF as you suggest they caught the error while printing the covers, they would have fixed the plate and kept printing.  Then ship ALL the covers (with and without) to be bound with the interiors. This way the entire print run ordered arrives at same time. Some comics got the period an 8th mothers gt the other covers.

 

Your final paragraph is the one suggestion that makes the most sense. 

The vast majority of copies have the period in that "wrong place".  So the idea that some production person would, very late in the process, see it's in the "wrong place" and halt production so he could remove the dot completely -- rather than put it in the "right place" -- that makes no sense at all, no matter how many people say it.

The dot is clearly a correction, even if it's still not a perfect correction because it's in the "wrong place".  But you are probably right in suggesting that all copies in the first printing, with or without the dot, likely hit the newsstands on the same day

Edited March 28 by BLUECHIPCOLLECTIBLES

[Aman619]

What you state makes me think that perhaps they started printing with no dot. And when noticed, early on in the run, decided to add the dot. But, it was added in the wrong place!  So they said f it. Finish the run. That would explain that more for copies exist. 
 

but, if the no dot version was the proof that DC approved, I doubt they’d stop the presses on their own accord. They’d have to check with DC first.  So I find it harder to believe that with the no dot covers piling up (presses are fast and the covers are 8-up on a sheet) by the time they got DC on the line, the run could be almost finished. At that point with 75% finished, I think DC says “it’s fine, just finish the run”.
 

or, if they DID STOP THE PRESS and theyd probably get a quick answer such as  “might as well fix it since you stopped the print run…”. 

of course, covers were printed 8-up, or maybe 4-up. With a combination of different comic covers on each sheet. This complicates the idea of stopping the presses, or maybe not. It just delayed it a few hours or a day. Since all the other covers print runs also needed to get back on press. 
 

im rambling on mostly guessing based on how the printing works, trying to take the evidence before us (the comics)  and work backward without any real certainty. Or knowledge of how they did it in 1940 versus how they’ve done it in my lifetime. 

Edited March 29 by Aman619

[BLUECHIPCOLLECTIBLES]

On 3/28/2024 at 4:53 PM, Aman619 said:

What you state makes me think that perhaps they started printing with no dot. And when noticed, early on in the run, decided to add the dot. But, it was added in the wrong place!  So they said f it. Finish the run. That would explain that more for copies exist. 
 

but, if the no dot version was the proof that DC approved, I doubt they’d stop the presses on their own accord. They’d have to check with DC first.  So I find it harder to believe that with the no dot covers piling up (presses are fast and the covers are 8-up on a sheet) by the time they got DC on the line, the run could be almost finished. At that point with 75% finished, I think DC says “it’s fine, just finish the run”.
 

or, if they DID STOP THE PRESS and theyd probably get a quick answer such as  “might as well fix it since you stopped the print run…”. 

of course, covers were printed 8-up, or maybe 4-up. With a combination of different comic covers on each sheet. This complicates the idea of stopping the presses, or maybe not. It just delayed it a few hours or a day. Since all the other covers print runs also needed to get back on press. 
 

im rambling on mostly guessing based on how the printing works, trying to take the evidence before us (the comics)  and work backward without any real certainty. Or knowledge of how they did it in 1940 versus how they’ve done it in my lifetime. 

I never worked in book publishing but I did work for a company that printed its own newspapers and magazines.  It was not uncommon to run off hundreds of copies before a pause to correct things.  And if a minor error was found and corrected, the copies with the minor error would go out along with the corrected copies.  Only if something was especially egregious or factually erroneous would they take the step of meticulously separating out and trashing the imperfect copies.  I would imagine it was somewhat the same in the comics magazine business.

Edited March 29 by BLUECHIPCOLLECTIBLES

[Aman619]

earlier I posted this in the wrong thread... posting it here with the Superman 1 discussion...

 

while we are at it and having fun, here's another similar situation.  Same comic but some copies have the star, others dont.  Unless that star was some kids collection marker stamp, there must have been 2 printings.  Did this publisher license out the comic to someone else and they used a star to track them?  thoughts?

[tth2]

I'm suddenly getting this image of a bunch of workers on a Friday at the printing factory, after having had "a few" beers at lunch, saying "Let's do something that'll have all these nerds tearing their hair out in 80 years!"

[woowoo]

On 3/28/2024 at 4:05 PM, BLUECHIPCOLLECTIBLES said:

This ad appeared before the book was on the stands, but it was not necessarily printed before the cover itself had been printed.  House ads were not always created with a stat of the actual, final cover, very many of them show differences between the ad and the published cover, especially in the logos and blurbs.  Sometimes the differences are huge: a house ad prior to Captain America #1 release shows him without wings on his head.  And a house ad for an early Timely comic had Stalin partnered with Hitler, while the published book removed Uncle Joe because in the small window between ad and publication, Russia had become our ally.  There may have been copies printed with the original cover, but destroyed.

And this ad for Batman 1 has the number and date in blue, whereas in all published copies (dot or no dot) the number and date were clearly part of the red plate.  So it's definitely not a version of the cover that was published.  

  

well Detective 1 add looked like this at first.  December 1936 From More fun 16 But Detective 1 has a different date.

[sfcityduck]

Misplaced dot clearly was the earlier part of the print run because the misplaced dot was in the pre-Batman 1 house ad based on the cover proof. The notion that the misplaced dot was misplaced after DC first ran a bunch of no dot copies fails the old Occam's razor test. That would be an absurd coincidence.

 

 

[ageofsilver]

Occam’s razor also suggests that the most likely possibilities for the sequence of Action 14 adds in the first issue of Superman have now been enumerated. However, in the absence of percentages of issues with each not yet being determined, I’d like to propose an imaginative alternative. Suppose the first run erroneously did say Action 14 was on sale contemporaneously with Sup 1, and the press supervisor noticing that for whatever reason an error had been made said, “Stop the press” The offending red plate is altered reflecting the June 2nd date and the press run then continued. Now you would have two first prints, with one first state (the error) and one corrected second state. I know; highly unlikely.