• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

"Pressing" of Golden Age books question???

Started by dizzyfoxx,

46 posts in this topic

FFB

FFB

Posted
Posted
Pressing doesn't bother me at all. Nor does dry cleaning (i.e., erasing/wiping away surface dirt and grime).

 

Ditto.

 

The endless talk about pressing and cleaning bothers me more than the things themselves.

 

Me too. I also am not partial to the concept of having a "rogues gallery of disclosure" of pressed books that are labeled as such by people who are not qualified to make those calls. Seems like an irresponsible thing to do to someone else's property.

 

That's one of the things that really bothers me, and the part that ALWAYS gets lost in the shuffle. I am all for detective work and disclosure (it's how we all found out about trimming and other ills), but I think people should use a little more discretion when making accusations about someone else's property....property that often times has substantial value.

Would you and Scott feel better if it was just characterized as a gallery of "CGC graded books that have been resubmitted and received a new grade", with no intimations of pressing or other work done unless such work had been reliably confirmed?

 

No, I have no problem with identifying restoration on the books as long as the designations are accurate. As I showed in a different thread, the NOD's Gallery of Disclosure was not put together by people who know enough about restoration to make the calls they're making. I pointed out several clear mistakes that the creators of the Gallery had made on various books, and have those mistakes been fixed yet? Nope.

 

I'd be happy if the people designating books as restored knew what they were talking about. It isn't the concept I have a problem with - it's the irresponsibility with which it is being carried out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
batman_fan

batman_fan

Posted
Posted
Pressing doesn't bother me at all. Nor does dry cleaning (i.e., erasing/wiping away surface dirt and grime).

 

Ditto.

 

The endless talk about pressing and cleaning bothers me more than the things themselves.

 

Me too. I also am not partial to the concept of having a "rogues gallery of disclosure" of pressed books that are labeled as such by people who are not qualified to make those calls. Seems like an irresponsible thing to do to someone else's property.

 

That's one of the things that really bothers me, and the part that ALWAYS gets lost in the shuffle. I am all for detective work and disclosure (it's how we all found out about trimming and other ills), but I think people should use a little more discretion when making accusations about someone else's property....property that often times has substantial value.

Would you and Scott feel better if it was just characterized as a gallery of "CGC graded books that have been resubmitted and received a new grade", with no intimations of pressing or other work done unless such work had been reliably confirmed?

 

No, I have no problem with identifying restoration on the books as long as the designations are accurate. As I showed in a different thread, the NOD's Gallery of Disclosure was not put together by people who know enough about restoration to make the calls they're making. I pointed out several clear mistakes that the creators of the Gallery had made on various books, and have those mistakes been fixed yet? Nope.

 

I'd be happy if the people designating books as restored knew what they were talking about. It isn't the concept I have a problem with - it's the irresponsibility with which it is being carried out.

 

But Scott, don't you do the same thing? In the thread I started on the Adventure 60 you posted it had been cleaned and pressed but really had no concrete evidence for declaring it pressed. confused-smiley-013.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FFB

FFB

Posted
Posted
Pressing doesn't bother me at all. Nor does dry cleaning (i.e., erasing/wiping away surface dirt and grime).

 

Ditto.

 

The endless talk about pressing and cleaning bothers me more than the things themselves.

 

Me too. I also am not partial to the concept of having a "rogues gallery of disclosure" of pressed books that are labeled as such by people who are not qualified to make those calls. Seems like an irresponsible thing to do to someone else's property.

 

That's one of the things that really bothers me, and the part that ALWAYS gets lost in the shuffle. I am all for detective work and disclosure (it's how we all found out about trimming and other ills), but I think people should use a little more discretion when making accusations about someone else's property....property that often times has substantial value.

Would you and Scott feel better if it was just characterized as a gallery of "CGC graded books that have been resubmitted and received a new grade", with no intimations of pressing or other work done unless such work had been reliably confirmed?

 

No, I have no problem with identifying restoration on the books as long as the designations are accurate. As I showed in a different thread, the NOD's Gallery of Disclosure was not put together by people who know enough about restoration to make the calls they're making. I pointed out several clear mistakes that the creators of the Gallery had made on various books, and have those mistakes been fixed yet? Nope.

 

I'd be happy if the people designating books as restored knew what they were talking about. It isn't the concept I have a problem with - it's the irresponsibility with which it is being carried out.

 

But Scott, don't you do the same thing? In the thread I started on the Adventure 60 you posted it had been cleaned and pressed but really had no concrete evidence for declaring it pressed. confused-smiley-013.gif

 

I think you need to re-read my response when you asked about the pressing. I explained what I was talking about and it is not a guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
batman_fan

batman_fan

Posted
Posted
Pressing doesn't bother me at all. Nor does dry cleaning (i.e., erasing/wiping away surface dirt and grime).

 

Ditto.

 

The endless talk about pressing and cleaning bothers me more than the things themselves.

 

Me too. I also am not partial to the concept of having a "rogues gallery of disclosure" of pressed books that are labeled as such by people who are not qualified to make those calls. Seems like an irresponsible thing to do to someone else's property.

 

That's one of the things that really bothers me, and the part that ALWAYS gets lost in the shuffle. I am all for detective work and disclosure (it's how we all found out about trimming and other ills), but I think people should use a little more discretion when making accusations about someone else's property....property that often times has substantial value.

Would you and Scott feel better if it was just characterized as a gallery of "CGC graded books that have been resubmitted and received a new grade", with no intimations of pressing or other work done unless such work had been reliably confirmed?

 

No, I have no problem with identifying restoration on the books as long as the designations are accurate. As I showed in a different thread, the NOD's Gallery of Disclosure was not put together by people who know enough about restoration to make the calls they're making. I pointed out several clear mistakes that the creators of the Gallery had made on various books, and have those mistakes been fixed yet? Nope.

 

I'd be happy if the people designating books as restored knew what they were talking about. It isn't the concept I have a problem with - it's the irresponsibility with which it is being carried out.

 

But Scott, don't you do the same thing? In the thread I started on the Adventure 60 you posted it had been cleaned and pressed but really had no concrete evidence for declaring it pressed. confused-smiley-013.gif

 

I think you need to re-read my response when you asked about the pressing. I explained what I was talking about and it is not a guess.

 

Exactly the reply I expected Scott, thanks for once again not dissappointing. thumbsup2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FFB

FFB

Posted
Posted
Pressing doesn't bother me at all. Nor does dry cleaning (i.e., erasing/wiping away surface dirt and grime).

 

Ditto.

 

The endless talk about pressing and cleaning bothers me more than the things themselves.

 

Me too. I also am not partial to the concept of having a "rogues gallery of disclosure" of pressed books that are labeled as such by people who are not qualified to make those calls. Seems like an irresponsible thing to do to someone else's property.

 

That's one of the things that really bothers me, and the part that ALWAYS gets lost in the shuffle. I am all for detective work and disclosure (it's how we all found out about trimming and other ills), but I think people should use a little more discretion when making accusations about someone else's property....property that often times has substantial value.

Would you and Scott feel better if it was just characterized as a gallery of "CGC graded books that have been resubmitted and received a new grade", with no intimations of pressing or other work done unless such work had been reliably confirmed?

 

No, I have no problem with identifying restoration on the books as long as the designations are accurate. As I showed in a different thread, the NOD's Gallery of Disclosure was not put together by people who know enough about restoration to make the calls they're making. I pointed out several clear mistakes that the creators of the Gallery had made on various books, and have those mistakes been fixed yet? Nope.

 

I'd be happy if the people designating books as restored knew what they were talking about. It isn't the concept I have a problem with - it's the irresponsibility with which it is being carried out.

 

But Scott, don't you do the same thing? In the thread I started on the Adventure 60 you posted it had been cleaned and pressed but really had no concrete evidence for declaring it pressed. confused-smiley-013.gif

 

I think you need to re-read my response when you asked about the pressing. I explained what I was talking about and it is not a guess.

 

Exactly the reply I expected Scott, thanks for once again not dissappointing. thumbsup2.gif

 

What is that snide crack supposed to mean?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
G.A.tor

G.A.tor

Posted
Posted

hello all...

I am all about the book...if a few imperfections can be pressed out to make it look nicer, then I am all for it...

I think some ( and I clarify now, I don't mean all) of the pressing dislike comes from those that own higher graded copies, only to have their "rare" condition not be so rare due to a lower grade being pressed into a higher grade..since I am not a high grade guy, I don't really care if a book is pressed or not.....pressing usually won't improve my Vg's too much smile.gif.....that said, I am for the disclosure of pressing, if you are involved in a transaction to sell/buy...just good ethical fun...but I am fine with it in general...

gator rick

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Theagenes

Theagenes

Posted
Posted

I just recently sent several GA books in to pressed for the first time. I'm also very curious to see the results. They are all lower grade books (around 3.0ish) and all with really bad spine rolls. I doubt there will be much improvement in the technical grades, but I'd really like to get rid of the spine rolls so that they will actually fit in the mylars and I can open them without having to worry about causing a staple pull. Hmm, that almost sounds like (dare I say it?).... conservation

 

I do believe pressing should be disclosed though, and although I have no intentions of selling these books, If I ever do I would certainly disclose it - I hardly think it matter anyway with regard to value in the case of LG books like these.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrBedrock

MrBedrock

Posted
Posted

Boys, boys, boys....please take this over to the playground called "Comics,General". This is the Gold section, where grown men look at sixty year old funnybooks and ooh and ahh. That is where the kids go and wrassle around with new fangled ideas like pressing. Besides, I am in self-imposed exile from the debate now. You all are encroaching on my refuge! (That being said, I say press away...just make sure you have someone knowledgable do it!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Straw-Man

Straw-Man

Posted
Posted
I'll drink to that, of course I will drink to anything. 27_laughing.gif

I'll join you!

 

Sounds good to me, I will buy first round in Chicago.

 

paul, please do not induce him to drink in c'town--he goes out in the first 10 minutes of the poker tournament as it is. wait, maybe that's it--liquor him up and perhaps he'll play decently. might not remember it, but we can tell him about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mr.schomburg

mr.schomburg

Posted
Posted
I'll drink to that, of course I will drink to anything. 27_laughing.gif

I'll join you!

 

Sounds good to me, I will buy first round in Chicago.

 

paul, please do not induce him to drink in c'town--he goes out in the first 10 minutes of the poker tournament as it is. wait, maybe that's it--liquor him up and perhaps he'll play decently. might not remember it, but we can tell him about it.

 

I keep hearing how easy Richard is at the table, I know he is easy in the Den, I've seen the photo's.

I always play better with a few drinks, maybe it will work for him as well. Sides, we can always let him buy in with a high grade Timely or two. 27_laughing.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing