what's wrong with pressing/cover cleaning?

[FFB]

And I believe that Mark Wilson's tests on post-pressing paper strength were conducted by an independent lab, not by him personally (he talked about this at the 2005 San Diego ComiCon panel and also at the forum dinner afterward -- I think he said that he took unpressed books, cut them it in half, pressed half of each, and sent the pressed and unpressed samples in for testing and no difference in paper strength was found). So if I heard and understood him correctly, there is some "unbiased" scientific evidence right there.

 

That is not surprising. Pressing, as I believe The Z himself mentioned, is not dissimilar to what a comic goes through when being printed.

 

However, it would be interesting to see a similar study on a different level. No need to cut the book in half. If it is possible, perform tests on non-color-breaking creases or other arfeas that are being pressed out..

 

Before pressing test the press-areas for strength. Weaker than the surrounding, areas? I would assume

 

Press and reresubmit for testing:

 

Is the pressed area structurally less sound than uncreased areas? Is it as sound as it was before pressing?

 

If the the strength of the pressed area is the same or even less than it was originally, then what we have is an area of the book that, while appearing the same as the rest of the book because the defects have been pressed out, has compromised structural integrity.

 

It is not dissimilar to sub-standard building materials that may look very nice but do not meet spec.

 

There are practical issues with doing that kind of test, considering that the paper conservator would probably use the fold method of determining paper strength. You'd need to have the same exact crease being tested on both samples (pressed and unpressed). I guess you could do it on a book with a subscription crease, though. Cut the book in half, press half of it, and have them test paper strength at the sub crease at the area on each sample adjacent to where the book was cut in half the first time. (Maybe cut a 1" strip from each half for testing purposes.) They could also test in areas where there is no sub crease.

 

I agree fully, Scott, that there are pracitcal issues. My issue with the cited test is that just pressing half a book is not really a valid test, as the subject of the controversy, things that need ot be pressed out, are not included. The 4-color process uses heat and pressure in its production. So heat and pressure itself is not, to me, an issue. Over the years I have always maintained the real issue is the appearance of structural solidity is lent to a potentially weakened area. I still maintain that. I know that the pressure levels and heat levels used in pressing are pretty safe. It is the "now invisible stressed area" that causes me concern.

 

PS - When is lunch again? And Liz would like to join us!

 

That was why I thought that a heavily wrinkled or warped book would be a good test subject, because you'd have similar issues going on with both samples -- paper that was warped or bent, but without "breakage" of paper fibers like you see in a color breaking crease. Color breaking creases might be flattened from pressing (sometimes, but not always), but books with those kinds of creases aren't really good pressing candidates anyway and those aren't the kinds of defects that the presser is trying to remove. My initial idea was to test the notion of whether a "typical" pressing subject book (i.e., one that doesn't have color breaking creases) is harmed by the pressing process.

 

That said, you raise a valid observation re whether a pressed book that happens to have color breaking creases might be further weakened at the crease point as a result of the pressing. I don't know the answer to that, and I think the test we're talking about (a book with a sub crease where the samples are tested for paper strength at previously adjoining areas along the crease) would be the best way to answer it.

 

Lunch is whenever you want it to be! Just let me know. I took a new client and her family to Hunan Home's for lunch yesterday. It was a big hit. Thanks again for the recommendation!

[FFB]

I probably wouldn't go on record as belittling someone for their "6 weeks" of experience. You really have no idea what Ze-man's experience is.. or how his lifetime's experience with glass/lead work contributes to his understanding of this field.

 

After all, I believe it was you who used to only work mainly with Adobe Illustrator and professed to not know Photoshop. Don't you now teach Photoshop?

 

People are surprising with what they know or what they can do.

 

I am an expert user of Adobe Illustrator (13 years) . I have taught Photoshop to beginners (5 years).

 

I don't make pronouncements about either.

 

I don't see the connection.

 

If you go back and re-read Kenny's post, you'll see that he didn't make any "pronouncements" either. He just offered up what he had, with the caveat that he wasn't holding himself out as authoritative.

[jimm94]

I have followed the pressing/restoration debate with great interest for several years now on the boards, and I find the whole restoration process fascinating. I have used a dry mount press in the past to mount photographs to matte board - The pressure and heat seem to be applied in a very benign way. After seeing Jeff Li's beautifully restored 'Tec #18 in person, I am even more enthusiastic about the benefits of restoration, especially as it relates to extending the life and appearance of a book in a very natural way.

 

I would be curious to see the results of the tests Scott recommends, and to learn about the ones Matt Wilson conducted. My guess is that dangers to the short and long term health of a comic through proper pressing are negligible compared to the hazards associated with the storage, handling and transportation that so many books go through in this era of extreme liquidity. However, it would be nice to see some scientific data regarding this so we can all feel more comfortable with the process.

[Red Hook]

I probably wouldn't go on record as belittling someone for their "6 weeks" of experience. You really have no idea what Ze-man's experience is.. or how his lifetime's experience with glass/lead work contributes to his understanding of this field.

 

After all, I believe it was you who used to only work mainly with Adobe Illustrator and professed to not know Photoshop. Don't you now teach Photoshop?

 

People are surprising with what they know or what they can do.

 

I am an expert user of Adobe Illustrator (13 years) . I have taught Photoshop to beginners (5 years).

 

I don't make pronouncements about either.

 

I don't see the connection.

 

If you go back and re-read Kenny's post, you'll see that he didn't make any "pronouncements" either. He just offered up what he had, with the caveat that he wasn't holding himself out as authoritative.

 

See my ammended post, which I edited before I read your response. Look, I'm very pro-Kenny. I just feel that if he wants us to accept his opinion, he needs to be more specific. Yes, I'm being a little tough on him. We've been going over these issues for years now, and I guess I was just scratching my head over the reason for his post. If he was in a position to offer something new...then I would be all ears.

 

My point was that he was asking us to accept that pressing when done right, doesn't harm a book. He just wasn't going to describe what that process was. So we're back to square one...with being asked to accept as benign something that won't really be spelled out.

 

And don't tell me it's a "trade secret". I could show 500 people how to use Illustrator in detail, and not one of them would take any business away from me. I just felt his post was too vague to be of any real value. I am VERY interested in what he is learning.

[Red Hook]

 

I would be curious to see the results of the tests Scott recommends, and to learn about the ones Matt Wilson conducted. My guess is that dangers to the short and long term health of a comic through proper pressing are negligible compared to the hazards associated with the storage, handling and transportation that so many books go through in this era of extreme liquidity. However, it would be nice to see some scientific data regarding this so we can all feel more comfortable with the process.

 

Or at least a more detailed demonstation of what is physically being done to the books. I personally believe that yes....spot pressing of cover dents is probably pretty harmless if done by a professional.

 

In other words.......I'd love to see a better description of what proper pressing actually is. With the emphasis on "see". And that includes pressing after disassembly.

[Ze-man]

Let me preface this with Greta took me out for a few beers while our neighbor watched our baby monitor.

 

Ramblings below.

 

 

Brad, look... I am not sure if I was clear earlier. What Matt does is his, and his alone to reveal. I signed confidentially, and non compete contracts with him before I ever stepped into his office. It has nothing to do with me not wanting to give out information, or me being evasive. I am not able to talk in detail about anything of what I learned, period.

 

So I did the next best thing and came here offering my opinion about what I know in a sincere effort to try and move forward what this thread brought up.. While I might not be able to divulge the exact process, I gave my opinion about the process... which ended up to be pro pressing.

My intention was not to make a "print worthy" documentation as to why pressing a book correctly is not harmful. I was only trying to bring to the table what I knew in the manner which I could present it. As a long time boardie and a friend I of course would hope my word carried some weight, but I can see why there might be issue. My opinions are based on conversations with paper manufactures, numerous conversations with pressmen at my wifes newspaper, artists and Profs at our local art school who make paper from scratch as a hobby, talking with retailers who sell specialty art and fabric papers,reading countless documentation regarding known restoration techniques, talking with Dice X and his experience in how a comic was created ,experimenting for years on my own ,plus countless things I am probably forgetting. It all adds up to helping me form a mental picture of the entire issue but was made real recently when I learned the process of pressing a comic correctly which is part of completing a disassembled comic, but the method is the same.

 

Among other things(me being evasive) It was less invasive then I first though, it involved less heat then I first thought,it involved less moisture then I thought, and involved less pressure then I first thought. And while I cannot prove it, I honestly feel that way.

 

So when I took into account what I knew about the properties of newsprint, the process of how the pulp is made into paper, how that newsprint is made into a comic how the comics were run through an oven to dry the inks, then stacked 100's upon 100's on top of each other I walked away after seeing how a book is pressed properly today thinking "well f ...that ain't chit compared to what the book went through to get to this point".

 

I have learned more this past couple months then I have in years. Similar to if you taught a Photoshop workshop at your house to one student for 4 days straight, a student who already had a working knowledge of what you were teaching them. If somebody on a high level teaches a willing, able student.. the battle is mostly over. All that student has to do is hone that skill through practice.

 

So while I am not an authority, I am past the playing around with it stage. I am somewhere in between.

 

People can and will be polarized regarding this issue, among the reasons why imho should NOT be that it damages the book to such an extent that it could damage, or destoy the book.

 

They can dislike the act itself

 

They can dislike not disclosing it

 

They can be mad that easy money is being made by those working the known rules.

 

They can just flat out not like it, period

 

But I think the misconception that properly pressing a book is damaging the comic, should not be a valid reason for being anti pressing.

 

imho

 

And that was the reason I made my initial post in the first place.

 

There, I rambled..

 

 

Kenny

[FFB]

 

I would be curious to see the results of the tests Scott recommends, and to learn about the ones Matt Wilson conducted. My guess is that dangers to the short and long term health of a comic through proper pressing are negligible compared to the hazards associated with the storage, handling and transportation that so many books go through in this era of extreme liquidity. However, it would be nice to see some scientific data regarding this so we can all feel more comfortable with the process.

 

Or at least a more detailed demonstation of what is physically being done to the books. I personally believe that yes....spot pressing of cover dents is probably pretty harmless if done by a professional.

 

In other words.......I'd love to see a better description of what proper pressing actually is. With the emphasis on "see". And that includes pressing after disassembly.

 

Well, since Matt isn't talking and Kenny isn't able to, talk to the people who like you and who press books and ask them how they do it. Do some independent reading on restoration and conservation websites instead of on here, where, through some bizarre situation, people get slapped for trying to share information they've learned on restoration. Start with Vince Scipior's site, which has been posted and referenced here before. He has a full description of his method of pressing there.

[Red Hook]

 

Brad, look... I am not sure if I was clear earlier. What Matt does is his, and his alone to reveal. I signed confidentially, and non compete contracts with him before I ever stepped into his office. It has nothing to do with me not wanting to give out information, or me being evasive. I am not able to talk in detail about anything of what I learned, period.

 

I'm not saying you're being evasive. I understand you signed agreements, whatever. What I am saying is that unless or until you arein a position to show us exactly what you're talking about, the discussion remains abstract and anecdotal. Grasp that distinction and you won't be so defensive. I was just pointing out that because what you can say is restricted, you're not really presenting us with anything convincing one way or the other. It's nothing personal. But we've moved beyond the point where anecdote and vague assurances are welcome. Basically, again, I read your post as saying...."I can't tell you exactly what I'm doing...but trust me...it's okay."

 

Not good enough.

 

So I did the next best thing and came here offering my opinion about what I know in a sincere effort to try and move forward what this thread brought up.. While I might not be able to divulge the exact process, I gave my opinion about the process... which ended up to be pro pressing.

 

Which, at this late date doesn't really add anything to the discussion. The heated pro-press/anti-press debate is history on these boards for the most part. Besides, using the term "pressing" is too general.

 

 

My intention was not to make a "print worthy" documentation as to why pressing a book correctly is not harmful. I was only trying to bring to the table what I knew in the manner which I could present it. As a long time boardie and a friend I of course would hope my word carried some weight, but I can see why there might be issue. My opinions are based on conversations with paper manufactures, numerous conversations with pressmen at my wifes newspaper, artists and Profs at our local art school who make paper from scratch as a hobby, talking with retailers who sell specialty art and fabric papers,reading countless documentation regarding known restoration techniques, talking with Dice X and his experience in how a comic was created ,experimenting for years on my own ,plus countless things I am probably forgetting. It all adds up to helping me form a mental picture of the entire issue but was made real recently when I learned the process of pressing a comic correctly which is part of completing a disassembled comic, but the method is the same.

 

But you didn't go into any detail like that in your original post. My approach is to question (not rip apart) the content of claims. I'm just asking for a high level of detail at this late stage in the discussions.

 

Among other things(me being evasive) It was less invasive then I first though, it involved less heat then I first thought,it involved less moisture then I thought, and involved less pressure then I first thought. And while I cannot prove it, I honestly feel that way.

 

Again, I'm saying that, this late in the day, you could add real value by doing a demo, or presenting more actual data of some kind. I don't think you'll find too many people to argue that localized pressing does real damage to cover crimps when done right.

 

So when I took into account what I knew about the properties of newsprint, the process of how the pulp is made into paper, how that newsprint is made into a comic how the comics were run through an oven to dry the inks, then stacked 100's upon 100's on top of each other I walked away after seeing how a book is pressed properly today thinking "well f ...that ain't chit compared to what the book went through to get to this point".

 

 

It's about the disclosure. Have you done any disassembly pressing?

 

I have learned more this past couple months then I have in years. Similar to if you taught a Photoshop workshop at your house to one student for 4 days straight, a student who already had a working knowledge of what you were teaching them. If somebody on a high level teaches a willing, able student.. the battle is mostly over. All that student has to do is hone that skill through practice.

 

I'm not disputing that, but it's a pisspoor analogy. Photoshop is not a particularly controversial topic. Say there was a debate raging between traditional photographers and digital practioners. The 35 mm, dark room photographers feel that there is something not right about digital manipulation of images. So I study photoshop for 8 weeks. I may know a lot more. I may even teach it. But it would be silly for me to go to those traditional photographers and tell them that there's nothing wrong with digital, and in fact they should buy the program and start using it. And not give them any details, either. Like I said, it's a poor comparison anyway.

 

So while I am not an authority, I am past the playing around with it stage. I am somewhere in between.People can and will be polarized regarding this issue, among the reasons why imho should NOT be that it damages the book to such an extent that it could damage, or destoy the book.

 

Again, you're being way too general. What books are good candidates for pressing? What kinds of pressing are you talking about?

 

They can dislike the act itself

 

Generalization.

 

They can dislike not disclosing it

 

They can be mad that easy money is being made by those working the known rules.

 

What rules are those? Who made the rules? Just asking.

 

They can just flat out not like it, period

 

But I think the misconception that properly pressing a book is damaging the comic, should not be a valid reason for being anti pressing.

 

Show me the last thread that focused on pressing as inherently evil? It's the highend manipulation of books (with pressing as being just one of a suite of practices being followed).

 

imho

 

And that was the reason I made my initial post in the first place.

 

Again, I don't know what we're supposed to take away from your post. You gotta' define the different kinds of pressing and what you're talking about. It simply added nothing to the conversation, imho.

 

There, I rambled..

 

 

Noted. And now, since you're working towards becoming a professional restoration person, as your friend, I would hold you to higher standards of detail when you discuss this. That's not dissing you....that's respectfully saying that you gotta' bring more to the table. I'm separating the discussion from personal stuff. You took it personally....I didn't bring up half the stuff you threw out.

[FFB]

Which, at this late date doesn't really add anything to the discussion.

 

The irony. What have you added to the discussion?

[Ze-man]

 

Brad, look... I am not sure if I was clear earlier. What Matt does is his, and his alone to reveal. I signed confidentially, and non compete contracts with him before I ever stepped into his office. It has nothing to do with me not wanting to give out information, or me being evasive. I am not able to talk in detail about anything of what I learned, period.

 

I'm not saying you're being evasive. I understand you signed agreements, whatever. What I am saying is that unless or until you are in a position to show us exactly what you're talking about, the discussion remains abstract and anecdotal. Grasp that distinction and you won't be so defensive. I was just pointing out that because what you can say is restricted, you're not really presenting us with anything convincing one way or the other. It's nothing personal. But we've moved beyond the point where anecdote and vague assurances are welcome. Basically, again, I read your post as saying...."I can't tell you exactly what I'm doing...but trust me...it's okay."

 

Not good enough.

OMG Brad, not good enough for who? YOU?

 

I offered an opinion relating to the topic"whats wrong with pressing" People can choose to take what I said into account, or they can dismiss it. I am not out to prove anything to anybody. I made that post in an effort to offer my opinion of what I had learned firsthand. YOU may have moved past the point of wanting to hear opinions about the topic, but perhaps others have not. Besides, I was not aware that you spoke for the group.

 

And that is exactly what I am saying Brad...I cannot tell you what I am doing exactly, you WILL just have to trust me.. not that I am 100% correct, but that I believe what I am saying to be true. It is only MY opinion, an opinion I decided to add to the mix of the thread.

 

 

 

 

 

 

So I did the next best thing and came here offering my opinion about what I know in a sincere effort to try and move forward what this thread brought up.. While I might not be able to divulge the exact process, I gave my opinion about the process... which ended up to be pro pressing.

 

Which, at this late date doesn't really add anything to the discussion. The heated pro-press/anti-press debate is history on these boards for the most part. Besides, using the term "pressing" is too general.

I disagree Brad, Educating people (no mater how vague or anecdotal it may be) about what pressing does and does not do can only lead to a better understanding of how people feel about it the topic. De mystifying it is obviously the desired end result, but not as easy to do given the circumstances. My initial post in this thread was just that, offering my thoughts about a process that most people are not privy to. This thread was about pressing a book, not taking it apart, twiddling with it, re assembling it and re subbing it was simply about pressing a book, and that was what I tried to comment on. Cover creases, indents, etc..

 

 

 

 

 

 

My intention was not to make a "print worthy" documentation as to why pressing a book correctly is not harmful. I was only trying to bring to the table what I knew in the manner which I could present it. As a long time boardie and a friend I of course would hope my word carried some weight, but I can see why there might be issue. My opinions are based on conversations with paper manufactures, numerous conversations with pressmen at my wife's newspaper, artists and Profs at our local art school who make paper from scratch as a hobby, talking with retailers who sell specialty art and fabric perpetrating countless documentation regarding known restoration techniques, talking with Dice X and his experience in how a comic was created ,experimenting for years on my own ,plus countless things I am probably forgetting. It all adds up to helping me form a mental picture of the entire issue but was made real only recently when I learned the process of pressing a comic correctly which is part of completing a disassembled comic, but the method is the same.

But you didn't go into any detail like that in your original post. My approach is to question (not rip apart) the content of claims. I'm just asking for a high level of detail at this late stage in the discussions.

Well, I can appreciate that, but I was not aware I would have to present a resume with my opinions. I was not stating facts, I was offering my personal observations on the topic.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Among other things(me being evasive) It was less invasive then I first though, it involved less heat then I first thought,it involved less moisture then I thought, and involved less pressure then I first thought. And while I cannot prove it, I honestly feel that way.

Again, I'm saying that, this late in the day, you could add real value by doing a demo, or presenting more actual data of some kind. I don't think you'll find too many people to argue that localized pressing does real damage to cover crimps when done right.

I was not talking about localized pressing, but rather whole book pressing, sorry if there was confusion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So when I took into account what I knew about the properties of newsprint, the process of how the pulp is made into paper, how that newsprint is made into a comic how the comics were run through an oven to dry the inks, then stacked 100's upon 100's on top of each other I walked away after seeing how a book is pressed properly today thinking "well f ...that ain't chit compared to what the book went through to get to this point".

It's about the disclosure. Have you done any dis assembly pressing?

Sure, that is the only type of pressing I will preform for the work I will hopefully be doing for Matt, disassembly, dry/wet clean, structural and reassembly,and pressing. So once again, I was under the assumption we were all talking about flat, non dis assembly pressing is it or is it not harmful.

 

On the flip side I have been going through and dry mount pressing dozens of books of my own(all my horror books that I will not be selling ever) to see how different types of books and flaws react to the pressing process. Doing this helped me form the opinion that dry mount pressing does not harm a book is done correctly. If I found out otherwise I would have said as much in my initial post.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have learned more this past couple months then I have in years. Similar to if you taught a Photoshop workshop at your house to one student for 4 days straight, a student who already had a working knowledge of what you were teaching them. If somebody on a high level teaches a willing, able student.. the battle is mostly over. All that student has to do is hone that skill through practice.

 

I'm not disputing that, but it's a pisspoor analogy. Photoshop is not a particularly controversial topic. Say there was a debate raging between traditional photographers and digital practioners. The 35 mm, dark room photographers feel that there is something not right about digital manipulation of images. So I study photoshop for 8 weeks. I may know a lot more. I may even teach it. But it would be silly for me to go to those traditional photographers and tell them that there's nothing wrong with digital, and in fact they should buy the program and start using it. And not give them any details, either. Like I said, it's a poor comparison anyway.

I think we are looking at the analogy from a different perspective. You mentioned earlier that since I have only been playing around with this stuff for " only six weeks" how much weight should you put in my opinion. Shin mentioned the photoshop thing. That was when I made the comparison of having a teacher who is a master at what they do, teach someone in a very short timeframe what took them years to learn. It brings the student up to speed at a much faster rate. The actual time that may have elapsed for the student is not as important as how information was transferred. Sure I am just starting out, but I may or may not be able to offer some insight into things that most people are not privy to.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So while I am not an authority, I am past the playing around with it stage. I am somewhere in between.People can and will be polarized regarding this issue, among the reasons why imho should NOT be that it damages the book to such an extent that it could damage, or destroy the book.

 

Again, you're being way too general. What books are good candidates for pressing? What kinds of pressing are you talking about?

I think I covered this above, and am sorry if it was unclear earlier. I should have clarified dry mount whole book pressing was what I was talking about. As far as a good or bad candidate that depends on what result is desired. A brittle older book is obviously not a good candidate, it's time has past and should be left alone. But a nice supple book that still has life in it, indented covers, spine nicks, creases be that CB or non CB. (The types of books that people are pressing for aesthetics reasons)that is the prime candidate. I do not think a book is being harmed by pressing those correctly. Spine roll, wavy pages..that is a different beast.. while it can be removed..it is a different process and while I would say it is not harmful, it was not what I had in mind when I made my post. Sorry I was not clear earlier.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

They can dislike the act itself

 

Generalization.

Sure it is, but people do fall under that umbrella.. some just flat out do not like the act .

 

They can dislike not disclosing it

 

They can be mad that easy money is being made by those working the known rules.

What rules are those? Who made the rules? Just asking.

switch out rules and insert loophole

 

 

 

 

They can just flat out not like it, period

 

But I think the misconception that properly pressing a book is damaging the comic, should not be a valid reason for being anti pressing.

 

Show me the last thread that focused on pressing as inherently evil? It's the high end manipulation of books (with pressing as being just one of a suite of practices being followed).

That is for another thread then. This thread and my comments were about whats wrong with pressing. Not what is wrong with the manipulation of high end books through a variety of procedures.

 

imho

 

And that was the reason I made my initial post in the first place.

 

Again, I don't know what we're supposed to take away from your post. You gotta' define the different kinds of pressing and what you're talking about. It simply added nothing to the conversation, imho.

I hope I cleared up part of that in my above responses. And sorry you felt id did not add anything to the conversation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

There, I rambled..

 

 

Noted. And now, since you're working towards becoming a professional restoration person, as your friend, I would hold you to higher standards of detail when you discuss this. That's not dissing you....that's respectfully saying that you gotta' bring more to the table. I'm separating the discussion from personal stuff. You took it personally....I didn't bring up half the stuff you threw out.

I just replied in turn Brad, and I agree.. I should be more careful what I say and how it will be perceived.

 

Take care.

 

And if you reply to this , please dont use another color..make a new post..my eyes hurt.

 

 

Kenny

[Red Hook]

Thank you. You clarified a lot of the vagueness contained in your original post.