• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Dan'el

  • Boards Title

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Excellent! Did not know that. I do some selling on eBay and have never had the right words for that flaw. Have heard that CGC tends to give it a pass, even on higher grade books. Maybe because it lies outside the comic production process. Still, I have seen some that are pretty ugly.
  2. Glad to hear that others like this have popped up in the past. Can't agree with you on the name issue though. Giving a known defect a name, regardless of rarity, allows us to talk about it and be on the same page. It makes the process more precise and objective. Names are good. Actually, I do not think there are that many possible printing defects and most of those already have names. Miswrapped cover, mistrimmed cover, Marvel chipping, missing or off-center staple, are all used consistently in grading. Three of these particular issues surfaced in the past month (and you mentioned others have surfaced in the past), so it is apparently not that uncommon. In this case, three different people described the phenomenon in three different ways and Lions Den suggested another way CGC might describe it. Far better to give it a simple name (reversed wrapped or whatever) so we can discuss it and everyone will know exactly what we are talking about. Another common flaw I would like to see named is those cover wrinkles or ridges or folds or whatever the heck they are called that show up fairly often – mostly on Bronze-Age comics it seems. There does not seem to be a consistent way to discuss those either.
  3. Okay, so this a different print error. One that is on the cover. This post is referring to comics that have the internal pages reversed. So far, we have only identified three of those, all on Silver Age Marvel comics.
  4. Are you referring to this issue where all of the internal wraps are reversed or something else? Have you seen a lot of reversed wrapped books or is this a color variation on a cover?
  5. Double covers are fairly common. I had one with 5 covers once. Got a few hundred on eBay for that one. I agree about the name. I vote for "reverse wrapped" since the pages are assembled in reverse order.
  6. Given that we have now identified three of these errors it is possible this is an unidentified systemic print error. I started a topic to that effect in the grading forum. Maybe we can get some more feedback there. As info https://www.cgccomics.com/boards/topic/463943-systemic-print-error-identified-by-cgc-board-members/
  7. In the past month or so, several different posters on these boards have identified the same print error in three different Silver-Age comics. So far, no one seems to know anything about this error. In each case, the comic has been what I am calling “reverse wrapped” at the printer. Basically, the pages are assembled in reverse order so that the wrap that contains the first and last page of the comic is placed in the centerfold. Question for the board is: If this is indeed a systemic printing error how do we get it acknowledged as such by the comic gods at CGC, Overstreet, etc.? We comic people love our anomalies and screw ups but we like to have them documented by some “authority”. Lends them authenticity I suppose. This board has uncovered three of these “reverse wrap” errors in a very short time. Might be a bunch of them out there. People just don’t know what they heck they are. Just below are links to the three error comics (two on CGC boards and one on eBay). Below that (if you are interested) I have outlined my theory on how this happens at the printer. Strange Tales #113 https://www.cgccomics.com/boards/blogs/entry/5014-strange-tales-v1-113-oct-1963-extremely-rare-bindery-error/ Thor #150 https://www.cgccomics.com/boards/topic/463832-my-thor-150-is-bound-backwards/ Fantastic Four #63 https://www.ebay.com/itm/Fantastic-Four-1961-63-Manufacturing-ERROR-Title-Page-At-Centerfold-Fine/402037837291?hash=item5d9b528deb:g:aZAAAOSwEaJeHgfd ========================================================================== Looking at the three examples of this error unearthed by this board, I think I see how the error occurs and how it could be repeated. See what you think. There are eight page-wraps in a standard comic. Each wrap contains four pages, two on each side. At some point in the assembly process the eight wraps are stacked in order. The top wrap will have the first page of the comic printed on the right side and the last page printed on the left, facing up. At that point the cover (which is also a four-page wrap) is added to the stack face up, with the front cover on the right and the back cover on the left. It is then stapled and folded down and the comic is correctly assembled. Now, if those page wraps are initially inserted into the process upside down by error, then the wraps will be stacked in reverse order with the first wrap (the one with the first and last page) face down on the bottom of the stack. Then, when the cover is added and the comic is stapled and folded, the wrap with the first and last page will now be the centerfold - which is exactly the case in the three examples we have seen. I assume that someone checks the comics after a handful are run, so this error is likely caught most of the time. However, if quality control is having a bad day or the printer is short-handed, some of them may make it through to distribution and out the door. Probably not often and probably not many. My guess is this error was far more likely in the earlier days of comics because the printing process would have involved more manual steps back then and more chances for screw ups. The process no doubt became more automated and less susceptible to error over time. So, what do you think? Sound plausible? If so, this board may have identified a systemic print error. (Yaay us!) And, if so, I think it merits a name. My vote is for, “Reverse wrap” just because it rolls trippingly off the tongue.
  8. Nice catch! The FF is the focus of my collection (I am building a website for it) so I picked that comic up to add to it. Thanks
  9. Unlike the ST 113, which is perfectly readable, it seems like your comic would have been spotted pretty quickly. I took a quick spin through the 'net and did not find any reference to an error with that book so, chances are, there are not many out there. Error comics typically sell for a premium but that is only if collectors know about the error. Goofs like this may have had only a handful released. Sadly, that may mean they are so rare they are essentially worthless. If there was some way to get the error "officially" documented (by Marvel or some other comic authority) that could be a game changer. I do not have a clue as to how to go about getting that done.
  10. I was the one that posted the same issue with the Strange Tales #113. Is the Thor #150 readable? Meaning could a non-comic person read it and not realize anything was wrong with it? If so, there could be plenty of the misprints just no one caught it. The Strange Tales #113 reads fine, just has the stories in the wrong order. My question was who to contact to verify the error and try to determine how many of them were printed. If the error is documented and rare, it might well sell for a premium. Collectors shell out extra bucks for double (or more) covers all the time and that is a printer/bindery error. However, if no one knows it is rare misprint then it probably only has curiosity value. If you have any ideas on how to research something like that, let me know.
  11. That is an excellent observation. I don't know if there is any criteria for what counts as an error and what does not. I may start a thread on that subject. See what other folks think. The FF issue you are referring to is #110. In that case one entire color was left out of the first print run. It was caught and corrected but some of them got out the door. I have that one scanned in another post in this journal if you haven't seen it. Couple of other noted errors I have heard of (but not seen) is Venom: Lethal Protector #1 (back cover is misprinted in black) and TMNT #4 second printing (although that one had an actual wrong cover, not an ink-type issue). I expect there are others as well.
  12. Just for grins I checked CGC sales on Go Collect since they have images of the sales with the following totally weird result. <> There were seventeen 9.8s sold and 11 were yellow like yours with only 6 being red. <> Three of the 9.8s had sequential CGC numbers meaning they were graded one right after the other. That tells me a dealer probably sent them in as part of a lot. Two of those were yellow and one was red. You would think a dealer lot would all be identical. <> There were fourteen CGC copies sold that were less than 9.8 and only 2 of those were yellow with the other 12 being red. <> Then, just for giggles, I looked at the first 25 listed on eBay today and only 2 of those were yellow. So, the results of the data analysis of my new, officially sanctioned (by me), double-blind, placebo controlled, perfectly falsifiable, utterly reproducible, peer-reviewed (my cat looked at it) experiment is: 1<> More yellow copies are apparently very high-grade than red copies. 2<> With the exception of very high-grade copies only around 1 in 10 are yellow. So, there you have it. Remember, you heard it here first! Would still be nice to know how this came about.
  13. Nothing crazy unique about this lot, although you don't often see them displayed with their 30-cent counterparts. I put the 30-cent variants in a separate post. I have a bunch of variants, error issues, and signed FF comics scanned front and back on my website if you want check out any other stuff: https://dekventures.com/FantasticFour/fantastic-four-v-1-variants-signed-reprints/
  14. Nothing crazy unique about this lot, although you don't often see them displayed with their 25-cent counterparts. I put the 35-cent variants in a separate post. I have a bunch of variants, error issues, and signed FF comics scanned front and back on my website if you want check out any other stuff: https://dekventures.com/FantasticFour/fantastic-four-v-1-variants-signed-reprints/
  15. As curiosities go, this is one. The first comic below has an apparent print error. The top right corner of the comic, just above the issue number, is printed in yellow for no known reason. In the normal comic, posted below that, the area is printed correctly in red. This is not a one-off. This FF issue is very common so there are a ton of them listed on eBay at any given time. I have checked a few times (looked at maybe 200 comics) and have seen this identical error on just three other issues. (Checked the other day and there was one misprint out of fifty-four on eBay.) So, this glitch shows up on every 50-75 comics. So, here is the deal. This print error is undocumented. Can’t find a hint about it anywhere. So, how does one go about researching and/or documenting an error? Anyone got a proverbial clue? I have a bunch of variants, error issues, and signed FF comics scanned front and back on my website if you want check out any others: https://dekventures.com/FantasticFour/fantastic-four-v-1-variants-signed-reprints/