Intriguing Definitional Changes In New 2006 Overstreet Guide

[jbud73]

good question. but Im sure the answer is that residue from the cleaning agents remains "added" to the comic afterwards.

 

Not if they use a volatile solvent, like Naphtha or Acetone, to clean the book. Those solvents dissipate completely, leaving no trace behind. That's why you can't tell if a book has been solvent cleaned if the professional does it correctly.

 

What is funny is that when you dry clean a book, there is material left behind. But dry cleaning (which I presume is one of the "simple cleaning procedures" referenced in the guide) is still considered not to be restoration.

 

So in their moronic attempt to placate someone or someoneS who do not want pressing to be considered restoration, they come up with a strained definition that defies common sense.

 

Great job, guys. Gotta love the fact that we've got a real brain trust making all the important calls to define policies that supposedly regulate our hobby.

 

 

Scott and this surprises you how?

[Arty]

good question. but Im sure the answer is that residue from the cleaning agents remains "added" to the comic afterwards.

 

Not if they use a volatile solvent, like Naphtha or Acetone, to clean the book. Those solvents dissipate completely, leaving no trace behind. That's why you can't tell if a book has been solvent cleaned if the professional does it correctly.

 

The retention of organic solvents in paper

[Red Hook]

good question. but Im sure the answer is that residue from the cleaning agents remains "added" to the comic afterwards.

 

Not if they use a volatile solvent, like Naphtha or Acetone, to clean the book. Those solvents dissipate completely, leaving no trace behind. That's why you can't tell if a book has been solvent cleaned if the professional does it correctly.

 

The retention of organic solvents in paper

 

It would be nice if we heard directly from some of the professionals themselves. You know....people that have actually done work like this? Would be interesting.

[Sal]

is there a definition in the new glossary for "conservation?" and if so, is pressing within said definition?

 

 

trimming is destruction, so that's an easy one

[boomtown]

Odd that the changes were made the same year that PCS was about to go public. Overstreet must not have gotten word of the backlash on pressing before the print date for the guide.

[esquirecomics]

is there a definition in the new glossary for "conservation?" and if so, is pressing within said definition?

 

There is indeed, for the first time, a definition of "conservation". I don't have time to type the entire language right now but it includes: "archival reinforcement, tear and spine split seals, piece reattachment and deacidification.".

 

There is no reference to pressing.

 

The revised definition of "cleaning", however, now references pressing. I will post that later as well.

 

The more I think about these changes the more concerned I am that it appears a small number of people colluding or coordinating together have just achieved a fundamental policy shift.

 

Given the recent restoration/conservation shift embarked upon by CGC, I would be very interested to know the extent to which these definitional changes were discussed or coordinated in advance with CGC/CGG leadership, and I plan to contact Steve Borock to inquire.

[esquirecomics]

And what did they say? Dont leave me hanging.

I would especially love to hear what Geppi has to say because he dont give a poop about anything.

 

No response yet, but it is not even 10:00 am.

 

POSTCRIPT: I have now received a call but due to schedules the conversation will happen tomorrow. I'll update the thread when additional information is known.

[FlyingDonut]

 

[Red Hook]

 

 

Prove it.

[FlyingDonut]

 

 

Prove it.

 

Prove what, that I don't care about the incessant bleating about pressing and restoration? I really don't care. Everyone's mind has been made up already, and we just go aroundandaroundandaroundandaroundandaroundandaround about the same issue overandoverandoverandoverandover again.

[Red Hook]

So you really do care. Otherwise you'd just ignore the whole debate, and not remind us everytime there's a discussion about it. We know how you feel. We got it. Now go away!

[mica]

I don't care about crime. We keep hearing about it overandoverandoverandoverandover

 

People should care. Or just stick to glorious market reports.

[Scheradon]

Sometimes issues take endless nagging to get the point across. Cough, PCS, cough....

 

Occasionally it works.

[drice6900]

Odd that the changes were made the same year that PCS was about to go public. Overstreet must not have gotten word of the backlash on pressing before the print date for the guide.

 

I think this strikes very close to the truth

[Darthdiesel]

you're just mad because they finally got it right

[Red Hook]

My point to the Donut is that if I were in his shoes, I'd simply treat it like one of the debates along the lines of "Who'd win in a fight, Wolverine or Spider-Man". Since I have no interest in the answer, even though it, or it's equivalent are debated over and over on the boards......I simple move on. No problemo.

 

I can understand your irritation at the fact that the debate goes on and may not be resolved for a long time, if ever. But to be irritated by it's very existance is kinda' futile, don't you think? Besides, there are new people coming on board here all the time, so we gotta' keep them up on what's happening.

 

It's obviously a debate thats of interest to enough people to keep it going, otherwise it would die out. It hasn't. Sorry 'bout that. But as far as I'm concerned, the people posting about how tired they are of the topic, are as much of a broken record as the people taking part in the discussion. So I do like your choice of a record label to signify your displeasure.

 

[Silver Surfer]

Spider-man.

[Red Hook]

Spider-man.

 

Why did I know that was coming.....

[drice6900]

Punisher, because he did kill every hero in the Marvel Universe

[Red Hook]