Post Your Top 3 Golden Age Books

[adamstrange]

great books guys! no action 1s or Tec 27s yet?

 

We're waiting for you to post yours.

 

We're waiting for your top 3

 

You tell him, buttock!

 

Get that camera out, aman.

[FFB]

What grade would you assign to the Double Action #2 and Detective 15? I still remember what you said about the NA#26.

 

The Detective #15 is probably around a 9.0 because of the tiny flaw you can see in the upper right corner. The Double Action #2 is a 9.2 or 9.4. Other than the miscut, the NA #26 is virtually flawless.

 

Is the cover on the NA#26 actually miswrapped, or is that just how the art was laid out on that book? Reason I ask is because the book looks like it is cut perfectly square and I don't really see the front cover wrapping around to the back (or vice versa) when I look at the spine.

 

I've noticed on more recent books (Hulk #181 is a good example) that the original artwork sometimes has the "Marvel Comics Group" logo along the top laid out crookedly, such that it slants up and to the right when the printed book is perfectly centered at the spine. It almost looks to me like that's what's going on with your copy. At bottom right, we get just enough of the cover art to get just about all of Creig Flessel's signature and it looks like it is flush with the bottom edge (which also leads me to think that the yellow strip along the top might have been slanted on the original art, as opposed to it being slanted because of a cover miswrap on this particular book).

 

Regardless, it's an absolutely mind-blowing copy.

[adamstrange]

What grade would you assign to the Double Action #2 and Detective 15? I still remember what you said about the NA#26.

 

The Detective #15 is probably around a 9.0 because of the tiny flaw you can see in the upper right corner. The Double Action #2 is a 9.2 or 9.4. Other than the miscut, the NA #26 is virtually flawless.

 

Is the cover on the NA#26 actually miswrapped, or is that just how the art was laid out on that book? Reason I ask is because the book looks like it is cut perfectly square and I don't really see the front cover wrapping around to the back (or vice versa) when I look at the spine.

 

I've noticed on more recent books (Hulk #181 is a good example) that the original artwork sometimes has the "Marvel Comics Group" logo along the top laid out crookedly, such that it slants up and to the right when the printed book is perfectly centered at the spine. It almost looks to me like that's what's going on with your copy. At bottom right, we get just enough of the cover art to get just about all of Creig Flessel's signature and it looks like it is flush with the bottom edge (which also leads me to think that the yellow strip along the top might have been slanted on the original art, as opposed to it being slanted because of a cover miswrap on this particular book).

 

Regardless, it's an absolutely mind-blowing copy.

 

Is there a point here?

 

If a guy puts a NM+ Church copy of an ungettable book directly on a scanner to give us the best shot possible for us to admire, I don't usually like to spend much time trying to nitpick it. But that's me.

[RareHighGrade]

Is the cover on the NA#26 actually miswrapped, or is that just how the art was laid out on that book? Reason I ask is because the book looks like it is cut perfectly square and I don't really see the front cover wrapping around to the back (or vice versa) when I look at the spine.

 

Good point. Those 1930's books had a lot of irregularities, so I don't know the answer.

[FFB]

What grade would you assign to the Double Action #2 and Detective 15? I still remember what you said about the NA#26.

 

The Detective #15 is probably around a 9.0 because of the tiny flaw you can see in the upper right corner. The Double Action #2 is a 9.2 or 9.4. Other than the miscut, the NA #26 is virtually flawless.

 

Is the cover on the NA#26 actually miswrapped, or is that just how the art was laid out on that book? Reason I ask is because the book looks like it is cut perfectly square and I don't really see the front cover wrapping around to the back (or vice versa) when I look at the spine.

 

I've noticed on more recent books (Hulk #181 is a good example) that the original artwork sometimes has the "Marvel Comics Group" logo along the top laid out crookedly, such that it slants up and to the right when the printed book is perfectly centered at the spine. It almost looks to me like that's what's going on with your copy. At bottom right, we get just enough of the cover art to get just about all of Creig Flessel's signature and it looks like it is flush with the bottom edge (which also leads me to think that the yellow strip along the top might have been slanted on the original art, as opposed to it being slanted because of a cover miswrap on this particular book).

 

Regardless, it's an absolutely mind-blowing copy.

 

Is there a point here?

 

If a guy puts a NM+ Church copy of an ungettable book directly on a scanner to give us the best shot possible for us to admire, I don't usually like to spend much time trying to nitpick it. But that's me.

 

I'm not nitpicking. I'm asking a question about something I find interesting about the book. You have misconstrued my post by making it sound like my curiosity (about whether the original artwork for the cover might be skewed) was a negative comment about the book. It's a killer book. "Mind-blowing" I think I said.

 

And mind-blowing as it is, I was curious about whether the miswrap was actually a "miswrap" or just skewed cover art on the original production piece. So I asked the question.

[Timulty]

I don't believe miswrap is the proper term here. I believe miscut is more accurate. Awesome book by the way. Flessel is the man!!!!

[FFB]

I don't believe miswrap is the proper term here. I believe miscut is more accurate. Awesome book by the way. Flessel is the man!!!!

 

I always think of miscuts as books that are not cut squarely. I use the term miswrap for books cut squarely that have the cover art skewed. I know others use the terms interchangeably, but to me they mean different things. But anyway, back to everyone's top three GA books.... still waiting for Aman and several others to post their stuff. Lou_Fine, get one of those one-touch pushbutton scanners. I know you've got the goods and it's time you showed them off.

[Timulty]

I don't think Skybolt has posted anything either. Be nice to see, what his Top 3 are.

[ronm3-migration]

My top 3 will be changing next month as I get more books in.

[14 of spades]

This might be cheating - Seduction of the Innocent, true first printing, includes the excised bibliography pages

 

hey donut

 

is it just me - but isn't that "just" the scan of the dustcover?

 

The scan of the full book doesn't really show anything. I can scan it if you want - I keep the dust cover separate to keep it flat. I suppose I could put the bibilography pages up there, which are the cool part of the book.

 

no need.

 

i just wanted to make sure it was the scan, and not my eyes...

[Norrin_Radd]

I don't believe miswrap is the proper term here. I believe miscut is more accurate. Awesome book by the way. Flessel is the man!!!!

 

I agree. It looks cut off at the top, so I would term it a slight miscut. Miswrap, to me, would mean the back cover was showing a bit on the front (or vice versa).

 

Still, the book is in unbelievably condition. But that's what the Edgar Church collection is all about.

 

 

I wonder if Mr_Glass ever lurks here anymore. I'd like to see his Church copies (since he collects them exclusively).

[143ksk]

I don't think Skybolt has posted anything either. Be nice to see, what his Top 3 are.

 

He did. And I'm jealous of all 3! See the first page of this thread

[buttock]

great books guys! no action 1s or Tec 27s yet?

 

We're waiting for you to post yours.

 

We're waiting for your top 3

 

You tell him, buttock!

 

Get that camera out, aman.

 

[Aman619]

im like that old Jack benny joke--- "Im thinking it over!"

[buttock]

Someone else needs to poke adamstrange.

 

 

 

No, not like that.

[adamstrange]

Someone else needs to poke adamstrange.

 

Ouch!

 

How am I supposed to pick just 3 when I love them all? It's like asking me which of my nieces/nephews I love the best.

[buttock]

Someone else needs to poke adamstrange.

 

Ouch!

 

How am I supposed to pick just 3 when I love them all? It's like asking me which of my nieces/nephews I love the best.

 

Some day I'll make my way up there and pick 3 for you.

[adamstrange]

While I'm unable to pick only 3 comics, I will at least provide my 3 favorite Lou Fine and Charlie Sultan comics. This was easier than it sounds because these are my only comics with Lou Fine and Charlie Sultan covers.

 

 

[lou_fine]

While I'm unable to pick only 3 comics, I will at least provide my 3 favorite Lou Fine and Charlie Sultan comics. This was easier than it sounds because these are my only comics with Lou Fine and Charlie Sultan covers.

 

Adam;

 

Some superb looking GA books you got here as part of your amazing collection!

 

What kind of condition would you say the WW #7 is in and what would the page colours be? The book looks absolutely gorgeous to me, especially since I don't have a copy in my own collection. I had to changed my mind on completing my HG run from issue #3 to #13 since I was never able to pick up a nice looking #7 before the prices on the Fox books took off in the mid-90's.

 

How long have you had this copy for and did you have to pay over guide for it at the time? Most important question of all, any plans to sell it in the near future (for a reasonable price)?

[Aman619]

See Adam? See what you get for showing your books?? No good deed goes unpunished... l o l