Is anyone else getting books back with warped inner wells? 25 25

[0r0d]

On 9/13/2024 at 10:29 AM, Stefan_W said:

Two more people picked up their books that I pressed so they could send them through something else so running total is now at four. 

At least they wont blame you when they get them back with ticks and bends.

[Stefan_W]

On 9/13/2024 at 2:00 PM, 0r0d said:

At least they wont blame you when they get them back with ticks and bends.

The funny thing to me is that while all of this was going on, prior to the start of discussions like this, people would look at their books and ask me whether CGC was relaxing its grading standards. The most popular theory was it was to make room for the 9.9s and 10.0s. 

[DanJD]

On 9/13/2024 at 1:08 PM, Stefan_W said:

The funny thing to me is that while all of this was going on, prior to the start of discussions like this, people would look at their books and ask me whether CGC was relaxing its grading standards. The most popular theory was it was to make room for the 9.9s and 10.0s. 

Little did they know it was just the warped inner well making them look like lower quality grading.  However, this could lead to more relaxed grading in the future to not necessarily make room for 9.9s but to justify the lower quality 9.8s from the damage.

[DanJD]

I noticed today a few people posting to the CGC Fans FB page showing their modern submissions they just got back.  It appears the books are in wider inner wells with the wedge used to hold the book in place compared to the smaller size used for Moderns in the past.  Just sharing an observation and not sure if that fixed anything.

[HotKey]

On 9/13/2024 at 2:08 PM, Stefan_W said:

The funny thing to me is that while all of this was going on, prior to the start of discussions like this, people would look at their books and ask me whether CGC was relaxing its grading standards. The most popular theory was it was to make room for the 9.9s and 10.0s. 

Can't relax what isn't there. 

Lest we forget they knew about swapgate in September at a minimum and didn't tell us until forced to in late December from a collector blowing the lid off it.

[Barrakuda]

On 9/13/2024 at 12:44 PM, LordRahl said:

While I agree 100% with you, given that this is mainly contained to moderns, the only thing I can think of that would meet the criteria would be a 9.9 or 10 of a modern key like New Mutants 98 or NYX 3. Good luck getting the owner of something like that, if there is one that is damaged, to do what you suggest. 

Potentially.  Or maybe a ratio variant of something.  Anything of note could do it.  I think an 9.8 ASM 300 banana could fit the bill.  It's more about a book that will bring eyes to it.  Plus - the seller still might actually get a sale at the price-point the grade dictates to someone who just buys the grade.....and no need to feel like that buyer was taken advantage of since it was prominently disclosed.

Edited Friday at 07:33 PM by Barrakuda

[Gator Guru]

On 9/11/2024 at 4:10 PM, LordRahl said:

If I'm seeing what I think I'm seeing, this isn't a concern. The well is flat, it's just at an angle. One side rests higher than the other within the hard shell. This won't cause any damage. I have tons of slabs like this going many years back. 

This is 💯 what others have been trying to claim is warping. See how ridiculous it is?

[RockMyAmadeus]

https://phys.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/University_Physics/University_Physics_(OpenStax)/Book%3A_University_Physics_I_-_Mechanics_Sound_Oscillations_and_Waves_(OpenStax)/12%3A_Static_Equilibrium_and_Elasticity/12.04%3A_Stress_Strain_and_Elastic_Modulus_(Part_1)

[bc]

On 9/14/2024 at 10:18 PM, RockMyAmadeus said:

https://phys.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/University_Physics/University_Physics_(OpenStax)/Book%3A_University_Physics_I_-_Mechanics_Sound_Oscillations_and_Waves_(OpenStax)/12%3A_Static_Equilibrium_and_Elasticity/12.04%3A_Stress_Strain_and_Elastic_Modulus_(Part_1)

-bc

[PopKulture]

On 9/14/2024 at 9:18 PM, RockMyAmadeus said:

https://phys.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/University_Physics/University_Physics_(OpenStax)/Book%3A_University_Physics_I_-_Mechanics_Sound_Oscillations_and_Waves_(OpenStax)/12%3A_Static_Equilibrium_and_Elasticity/12.04%3A_Stress_Strain_and_Elastic_Modulus_(Part_1)

Just as an engineering aside, these analyses of structural members in pure bending are only loosely applicable to the discussion because comics aren’t isotropic homogeneous materials, meaning they aren’t continuous and behave the same in every direction: the pages are discrete, and the layers are allowed to slide except at the spine, and that becomes more a discussion of a material constraint (and the analysis becomes a bit more nuanced). In a beam or any other structural member, sheer stresses develop throughout a given cross-sectional thickness and this is what leads to the tensile and compressive forces in the opposing halves. Generically speaking, when a stack of paper is bent, every piece or page assumes essentially the same geometry (unless you glued all the pages together; then sheer stress can develop layer to layer or page after page). In a comic, those same pages slide freely until you get too close to the spine where there is a more complicated phenomenon because of the geometry.

So… while it helps as a visual analog, don’t bet the farm on this terminology because the spine puckers you’re seeing in many cases are much more analogous to a half-tube (ie., the cover) starting to buckle in bending where the stresses become more complicated, even though the outcome is the same: damage. 

Conclusion: comics don’t really behave much like beams, but if they are bent too much, the outcome isn’t pretty. 

Edited Monday at 02:35 PM by PopKulture

[Stefan_W]

On 9/14/2024 at 11:58 PM, PopKulture said:

Just as an engineering aside, these analyses of structural members in pure bending are only loosely applicable to the discussion because comics aren’t isotopic homogeneous materials, meaning they aren’t continuous and behave the same in every direction: the pages are discrete, and the layers are allowed to slide except at the spine, and that becomes more a discussion of a material constraint (and the analysis becomes a bit more nuanced). In a beam or any other structural member, sheer stresses develop throughout a given cross-sectional thickness and this is what leads to the tensile and compressive forces in the opposing halves. Generically speaking, when a stack of paper is bent, every piece or page assumes essentially the same geometry (unless you glued all the pages together; then sheer stress can develop layer to layer or page after page). In a comic, those same pages slide freely until you get too close to the spine where there is a more complicated phenomenon because of the geometry.

So… while it helps as a visual analog, don’t bet the farm on this terminology because the spine puckers you’re seeing in many cases are much more analogous to a half-tube (ie., the cover) starting to buckle in bending where the stresses become more complicated, even though the outcome is the same: damage. 

Conclusion: comics don’t really behave much like beams, but if they are bent too much, the outcome isn’t pretty. 

Yup. Slabs allow for approx a 4 mm bend across 27 cms, which includes the length of the book and the amount the inner well extends beyond the top and bottom of the comic. There is some variation based on the thickness of the book and the type of slab that is used. It was imperfect, but I tried to reproduce different amounts of bends, and with that amount of bend existing ticks definitely show more, but it took approx 2X to 3X that amount to cause new damage. 

[RockMyAmadeus]

On 9/14/2024 at 8:58 PM, PopKulture said:

Just as an engineering aside, these analyses of structural members in pure bending are only loosely applicable to the discussion because comics aren’t isotopic homogeneous materials, meaning they aren’t continuous and behave the same in every direction: the pages are discrete, and the layers are allowed to slide except at the spine, and that becomes more a discussion of a material constraint (and the analysis becomes a bit more nuanced). In a beam or any other structural member, sheer stresses develop throughout a given cross-sectional thickness and this is what leads to the tensile and compressive forces in the opposing halves. Generically speaking, when a stack of paper is bent, every piece or page assumes essentially the same geometry (unless you glued all the pages together; then sheer stress can develop layer to layer or page after page). In a comic, those same pages slide freely until you get too close to the spine where there is a more complicated phenomenon because of the geometry.

So… while it helps as a visual analog, don’t bet the farm on this terminology because the spine puckers you’re seeing in many cases are much more analogous to a half-tube (ie., the cover) starting to buckle in bending where the stresses become more complicated, even though the outcome is the same: damage. 

Conclusion: comics don’t really behave much like beams, but if they are bent too much, the outcome isn’t pretty. 

 

 

 

On 9/14/2024 at 8:58 PM, PopKulture said:

Just as an engineering aside, these analyses of structural members in pure bending are...loosely applicable to the discussion...

 

...until you get too close to the spine where there is a more complicated phenomenon because of the geometry.

 

So… while it helps as a visual analog... 

 

...if they are bent too much, the outcome isn’t pretty. 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

On 9/14/2024 at 10:31 PM, Stefan_W said:

Yup. Slabs allow for approx a 4 mm bend across 27 cms, which includes the length of the book and the amount the inner well extends beyond the top and bottom of the comic. There is some variation based on the thickness of the book and the type of slab that is used. It was imperfect, but I tried to reproduce different amounts of bends, and with that amount of bend existing ticks definitely show more, but it took approx 2X to 3X that amount to cause new damage. 

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

[HotKey]

On 9/15/2024 at 1:31 AM, Stefan_W said:

 but it took approx 2X to 3X that amount to cause new damage VISIBLE TO THE NAKED EYE THAT I COULD IMMEDIATELY SEE. 

Fixed for you.

Edited Sunday at 07:45 AM by HotKey

[Stefan_W]

On 9/15/2024 at 3:39 AM, Poutine said:

There is no logic behind "allowable" damage being caused by these slabs.

Watching you man handle books is about as cringeworthy as your beer drinking 

Thank you for watching my videos!

Unfortunately, the way you phrase the other part continues to mix up two things that are best left apart and as a result and misrepresents what I am saying. My position is that the bend needs to be fixed by CGC because it can make the books look bad, and no one pays for that sort of thing. That is enough. By insisting on pushing the position that any amount of bend is damage the argument loses credibility because you can put 5, or 50, or 500, or 5000 books in inner wells with that amount of bend without producing new ticks. Even without taking a few minutes to try to replicate what I did on your own (which everyone is free to do, by the way) intuition should at the very least make people question how thousands of people missed "damage" on tens of thousands of books prior to threads starting up. 

It is perfectly fine to parse out "the bend makes my book look bad and I didn't pay hard earned cash for that" and "the damage we see on some books is unacceptable, and the cause needs to be identified and fixed." 

[EastEnd1]

On 9/15/2024 at 8:35 AM, Stefan_W said:

Thank you for watching my videos!

Unfortunately, the way you phrase the other part continues to mix up two things that are best left apart and as a result and misrepresents what I am saying. My position is that the bend needs to be fixed by CGC because it can make the books look bad, and no one pays for that sort of thing. That is enough. By insisting on pushing the position that any amount of bend is damage the argument loses credibility because you can put 5, or 50, or 500, or 5000 books in inner wells with that amount of bend without producing new ticks. Even without taking a few minutes to try to replicate what I did on your own (which everyone is free to do, by the way) intuition should at the very least make people question how thousands of people missed "damage" on tens of thousands of books prior to threads starting up. 

It is perfectly fine to parse out "the bend makes my book look bad and I didn't pay hard earned cash for that" and "the damage we see on some books is unacceptable, and the cause needs to be identified and fixed." 

Thanks for all the hard work you've put into this issue.  I haven't done any experiments but I've graded a number of moderns recently that fall into this category and these are only my impressions from looking some of them over.  Think I'd agree with you that it would be difficult to cause a new tic from the amount of bend that we are typically seeing.  As many have said, the spacing doesn't appear large enough, though there likely are some extreme curving situations where new spine "stresses" can form.  Some of the more extreme well curves mimic those that you sometimes find in a poorly stored long box of comics where the backing boards have similarly curved.  In those instances, new spine stress is sometimes very evident.  I also think the well curving does exacerbate and worsen to some degree existing minute tics and bends... in some instances, unwinding the benefits that a good press had provided.  From this perspective, the curved wells are causing some amount of damage, or restoring damage that had been removed.  Anyway, just my two cents.  

Edited Sunday at 04:09 PM by EastEnd1

[RockMyAmadeus]

On 9/15/2024 at 5:35 AM, Stefan_W said:

By insisting on pushing the position that any amount of bend is damage the argument loses credibility because you can put 5, or 50, or 500, or 5000 books in inner wells with that amount of bend without producing new ticks.

 

On 9/15/2024 at 5:35 AM, Stefan_W said:

Even without taking a few minutes to try to replicate what I did on your own (which everyone is free to do, by the way) intuition should at the very least make people question how thousands of people missed "damage" on tens of thousands of books prior to threads starting up. 

[RockMyAmadeus]

[RockMyAmadeus]