• 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.

Hypothesis: Pressing causes long-term damage to comics
2 2

276 posts in this topic

Good points (having a few patents myself, I totally understand that particular point). And thanks for being civil. Appreciate all of the knowledge that you are selflessly sharing here.

 

He goes on to further clarify, "Another proposal has been to encapsulate a sheet of alkaline paper along with the acid-containing paper to be preserved. While this has been reported as slowing the deterioration of acid-containing paper, the degradative reaction still continues with the acid-containing paper degenerating faster than non-acidic paper. "

 

I would think that the reaction has already begun long before the article has been encapsulated (on say 70s or older items), any buffer would only serve to slow that process in the encapsulation, no? His argument is that the added benefit would only partially cancel the deleterious accelerated deterioration effect of the trapped gasses.

 

You could infer that his conclusion is that combined effects of encapsulation along with a buffer, like microchamber are not sufficient to offset the increased rate of decay due to trapped gasses in the encapsulation method; to address namisgr's question.

 

edit: I read a bit more, that microchamber is a much longer protectant than standard alkaline buffering (100X according to one source), so I'm not certain how much they offset the gasses, to the extent that it is equivalent to degradation rate of decay under no encapsulation.

 

 

Keep in mind what a patent application is and what it is not. It is a document prepared by an inventor who is trying to convince a patent examiner why his invention is useful and innovative. It is not a neutral, peer reviewed journal article. You can't give the statements in the patent application the same weight as you could give similar statements in a peer-reviewed article.

 

All of the questions regarding the safety of encapsulation are secondary to the storage environment in which the artifact is kept. If temperature and humidity are properly regulated and stabilized, the rate of decay of an artifact will be slowed considerably even if encapsulated. Look at the Edgar Church books. They were stacked ceiling high on top of one another in a closed closet for 30-40 years (which would be as much of a microclimate as an open-topped mylar with a Full Back) and they were as fresh as the day they were printed because they were not exposed to a high level of atmospheric pollutants, the humidity level was relatively low, and the temperature was stable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good points (having a few patents myself, I totally understand that particular point). And thanks for being civil. Appreciate all of the knowledge that you are selflessly sharing here.

 

I'm amazed that we've been able to keep this thread as civil as it has been for as long as it has gone on. lol

 

I am happy to share the information I've learned. If you look up the first posts I made in this forum when I first started posting here, you'd realize that I knew absolutely nothing about any of this stuff five years ago. A lot of what I've learned has been because other people were willing to share information. The more people learn about restoration, the less they fear it (whether or not they want to own restored books is another story). And then we can all start looking at restored books as what they are, instead of having a knee-jerk reaction of revulsion every time we see a purple label.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have some drek, mostly 80's or 90's stuff that I will donate to the testing efforts

 

edit: ignore this if it is useless since I read you are looking more for GA books.

Edited by John A III
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you only looking for GA books for the experiment? What are the sample perameters? Readers ok? PQ cut-off? etc....

 

I have some SA "readers" that I'd fork over for the experiment as well as some BA/CA books (mostly dollar-box fodder stuff). Unfortunately, my GA scope is very limited and I'm not willing to part with those books for the experiment.

 

Let me know. I will donate some books if I have what you're looking for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of the questions regarding the safety of encapsulation are secondary to the storage environment in which the artifact is kept. If temperature and humidity are properly regulated and stabilized, the rate of decay of an artifact will be slowed considerably even if encapsulated.

 

 

Agreed. I really don't have any concern about a book being in a CGC holder if it is properly stored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to be asking a friend's wife about this issue - She's a paper conservator and book restorer for the Library of Congress

 

Better yet, get her to sign up and join in on the conversation! :banana:

 

And if she's shy... At the very least, try to get her to read this thread. (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you only looking for GA books for the experiment? What are the sample perameters? Readers ok? PQ cut-off? etc....

 

I have some SA "readers" that I'd fork over for the experiment as well as some BA/CA books (mostly dollar-box fodder stuff). Unfortunately, my GA scope is very limited and I'm not willing to part with those books for the experiment.

 

Let me know. I will donate some books if I have what you're looking for.

 

Just GA. I have a box of silver age and bronze age readers that I am happy to cut up. Anything with OW (or CR-OW if the paper is still nice and flexible) or better pages should be fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So would I (that's why tb's experiment sounds so interesting), but we are getting far afield of the original point that fantastic_four raised when he started the thread. The question was whether a typical dry mount press job would cause "long term damage" to a comic. My point was that it will cause at most negligible damage on a molecular level, but nothing appreciable in terms of fold strength, suppleness, tear strength, or any other test of paper freshness or strength. It doesn't seem like you're disputing that, right?

 

I get frustrated because I don't think people consider this enough. They extrapolate one book's results to all books. They press a book from 1968 successfully and think it will be similar for a book from 1942. And the scary part for me is that even with all these unknowns out there, it is not slowing down the amounts of Golden Age books being "processed".

 

SDJ: Your last paragraph sums up my own feelings. You seem to understand paper as well as anyone here and I am glad you and FFB have taken the initiative to this thread. I simply don't understand how hundreds of boarders can post tens of thousands of messages about pressing, but when it comes to actually taking the initiative, doing the work, and paying the money required to answer the question scientifically there is dead silence. Honestly, that's why I am reluctant to put any of my own time, which is sparse enough as it is, into this.

 

I do know several professors at UC Berkeley but none associated with the Forest Lab that FFB mentions. Also, knowing what it is like to be on tenure track at a competitive university, I fear it would be difficult to get anyone to help with this project for free. I think the best bet would be to contact authors of some of the papers that FFB mentions. If they won't do the experiments, they should at least be able to comment on how we could conduct such experiments ourselves.

 

FFB: I like your suggestion of cutting the books in halves. The other types of experiments that you mention sound valuable but I am not familiar with the literature and don't know how to conduct them in practice. The one experiment that I suggested seems like something that wouldn't be too hard to do, unless, of course, everyone is too busy talking about pressing over in the General forum.

 

tb,

 

I have the equipment and know-how to do the pressing if you've got some particular cheap books you want to use as samples. The thing I don't have is the MIT folds testing equipment. If we could track down someone who does and who would be willing to run the tests, we could do it.

 

FFB (who is sick and tired of all of the endless debates re the goods or evils of pressing and would love to get some real data to talk about)

 

Count me in as willing to help.

 

Got any GA books with reasonably decent page quality that you wouldn't mind being cut in half for the good of the collective? :insane:

 

Sure. I can come up with some stuff. Shoot me a PM to remind me and I'll do some digging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So would I (that's why tb's experiment sounds so interesting), but we are getting far afield of the original point that fantastic_four raised when he started the thread. The question was whether a typical dry mount press job would cause "long term damage" to a comic. My point was that it will cause at most negligible damage on a molecular level, but nothing appreciable in terms of fold strength, suppleness, tear strength, or any other test of paper freshness or strength. It doesn't seem like you're disputing that, right?

 

I get frustrated because I don't think people consider this enough. They extrapolate one book's results to all books. They press a book from 1968 successfully and think it will be similar for a book from 1942. And the scary part for me is that even with all these unknowns out there, it is not slowing down the amounts of Golden Age books being "processed".

 

SDJ: Your last paragraph sums up my own feelings. You seem to understand paper as well as anyone here and I am glad you and FFB have taken the initiative to this thread. I simply don't understand how hundreds of boarders can post tens of thousands of messages about pressing, but when it comes to actually taking the initiative, doing the work, and paying the money required to answer the question scientifically there is dead silence. Honestly, that's why I am reluctant to put any of my own time, which is sparse enough as it is, into this.

 

I do know several professors at UC Berkeley but none associated with the Forest Lab that FFB mentions. Also, knowing what it is like to be on tenure track at a competitive university, I fear it would be difficult to get anyone to help with this project for free. I think the best bet would be to contact authors of some of the papers that FFB mentions. If they won't do the experiments, they should at least be able to comment on how we could conduct such experiments ourselves.

 

FFB: I like your suggestion of cutting the books in halves. The other types of experiments that you mention sound valuable but I am not familiar with the literature and don't know how to conduct them in practice. The one experiment that I suggested seems like something that wouldn't be too hard to do, unless, of course, everyone is too busy talking about pressing over in the General forum.

 

tb,

 

I have the equipment and know-how to do the pressing if you've got some particular cheap books you want to use as samples. The thing I don't have is the MIT folds testing equipment. If we could track down someone who does and who would be willing to run the tests, we could do it.

 

FFB (who is sick and tired of all of the endless debates re the goods or evils of pressing and would love to get some real data to talk about)

 

Count me in as willing to help.

 

Got any GA books with reasonably decent page quality that you wouldn't mind being cut in half for the good of the collective? :insane:

 

Sure. I can come up with some stuff. Shoot me a PM to remind me and I'll do some digging.

 

I would also like to help.

 

I have been thinking about this for quite some time and about 2 months ago I placed a single sheet of printer paper under the bottom support in one of my presses. This piece of paper has been in the press for about 3 weeks now and has been subject to the press turning on and off, heating and cooling many, many times.

 

I am going to leave it in a few more weeks and then replace it. I will keep that piece of paper and bring it with me to the Chicago show. I am also going to do this with a bronze age beater that I will press maybe 20 times. Again, I will take before and after photo's as well as remove a few pages so we have something to compare them against at the show.

 

If anyone would like to see them or possibly have a small get together and discuss the results in Chicago let me know and we can possibly do this over lunch or in one of the corners of the convention hall. I will even bring a few books. Some pressed some not and see if the "experts" can pick them out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I would also like to help.

 

I have been thinking about this for quite some time and about 2 months ago I placed a single sheet of printer paper under the bottom support in one of my presses. This piece of paper has been in the press for about 3 weeks now and has been subject to the press turning on and off, heating and cooling many, many times.

 

I am going to leave it in a few more weeks and then replace it. I will keep that piece of paper and bring it with me to the Chicago show. I am also going to do this with a bronze age beater that I will press maybe 20 times. Again, I will take before and after photo's as well as remove a few pages so we have something to compare them against at the show.

 

If anyone would like to see them or possibly have a small get together and discuss the results in Chicago let me know and we can possibly do this over lunch or in one of the corners of the convention hall. I will even bring a few books. Some pressed some not and see if the "experts" can pick them out.

 

Removing pages beforehand is not going to give you a good control sample because paper degrades differently in stacks and in book form than in individual sheet form. You really need to cut the book in half from side to side in order to have a proper control sample.

 

Instead of using printer paper in your machine, use a piece of newspaper. It's not going to be exactly the same as the newsprint used in comics, but it'll be a lot closer than printer paper. Or better yet, just pull a wrap out of a beater comic and use that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I would also like to help.

 

I have been thinking about this for quite some time and about 2 months ago I placed a single sheet of printer paper under the bottom support in one of my presses. This piece of paper has been in the press for about 3 weeks now and has been subject to the press turning on and off, heating and cooling many, many times.

 

I am going to leave it in a few more weeks and then replace it. I will keep that piece of paper and bring it with me to the Chicago show. I am also going to do this with a bronze age beater that I will press maybe 20 times. Again, I will take before and after photo's as well as remove a few pages so we have something to compare them against at the show.

 

If anyone would like to see them or possibly have a small get together and discuss the results in Chicago let me know and we can possibly do this over lunch or in one of the corners of the convention hall. I will even bring a few books. Some pressed some not and see if the "experts" can pick them out.

 

Removing pages beforehand is not going to give you a good control sample because paper degrades differently in stacks and in book form than in individual sheet form. You really need to cut the book in half from side to side in order to have a proper control sample.

 

Instead of using printer paper in your machine, use a piece of newspaper. It's not going to be exactly the same as the newsprint used in comics, but it'll be a lot closer than printer paper. Or better yet, just pull a wrap out of a beater comic and use that.

 

You got it. I will take high resolution scans of all the pages to do a before and after comparison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK. Scans will follow later tonight. The book has been selected. A beater copy of Fantastic Four #123.

 

Day 1

 

Pages are still very supple and appear OW in color.

No odors, foxing or tanning to the covers.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for taking the initiative, JP. I think we can pursue this in parallel using several different ideas - nothing is off the board as far as I am concerned. Contacting professionals is one way, but grass roots experiments like yours could make it easier to get experts to listen and help if preliminary results suggest that pressing could cause damage.

 

I like the tone of this thread. It doesn't matter what any of us think about pressing: there are plenty of opinions elsewhere. What's missing is hard data. Without that, there's no premise for the debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the tone of this thread. It doesn't matter what any of us think about pressing: there are plenty of opinions elsewhere. What's missing is hard data. Without that, there's no premise for the debate.

 

:applause:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the tone of this thread. It doesn't matter what any of us think about pressing: there are plenty of opinions elsewhere. What's missing is hard data. Without that, there's no premise for the debate.

 

:applause:

+infinity

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, no one is equating Springhill Offset testing results with newsprint on a 1:1 basis. We're just discussing the results from the LOC's article. To say that these results are completely irrelevant to how groundwood paper ages is not accurate either. The lignin in the groundwood pulp will obviously cause the paper to age more rapidly and create additional aging byproducts than lignin-free paper like the Springhill Offset, but that does not mean we can't discuss the Springhill Offset results at all.

 

 

I see where you are coming from. But a groundwood sheet is so much different from a freesheet, I don't think you could equate the results with anything. They are completely different types of paper by nature and manufacturing process.

 

What are you basing that statement on? There is quite a bit of scientific evidence that suggests that it is acidity, and not necessarily the lignin content of the paper, that determines paper strength and permanence upon aging. Springhill Offset is alum-rosin sized, which means it is inherently acidic. I will grant you that high lignin content paper tends to react more with atmospheric pollutants than lignin free paper, but that's why it's not appropriate to compare the Springhill Offset results 1:1 with high lignin content groundwood. But that does not mean you should make the logical leap that we can learn nothing from the Springhill Offset results and simply disregard them as though high lignin content paper will react the opposite way upon aging. It simply means that they will age at different rates, with the high lignin content paper aging faster.

 

Hey buddy How are things? :hi:

 

I would add that through my research (more interested in paper quality and aging, and less about pressing) the physical strength of paper comes mainly from the longer fibers. Hence why paper produced hundreds of years ago (and generally stored in less than ideal conditions) can often be structurally better than paper produced more recently.

 

Of course, that being said, the acidic level present within paper (especially during production) plays a major role in paper deterioration over time (and indirectly, on overall structural strength). As does the fact that modern papers are rarely made up of pure cellulose, usually contain lignin, alum and rosin sizing, have been bleached, etc. But as you mentioned earlier, the right storage conditions and correct book handling will see your books last a long time (much longer than any of us will survive), in pretty much the condition they are currently in.

 

On another note, I'm currently researching the different types of paper used in mass print runs (comics, newspapers) from the 1920's onwards. What are your thoughts on paper strength/quality when one compares paper used in Golden Age through to Bronze Age books? Have you come across any data on paper processing and paper types used during these periods in the United States?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, no one is equating Springhill Offset testing results with newsprint on a 1:1 basis. We're just discussing the results from the LOC's article. To say that these results are completely irrelevant to how groundwood paper ages is not accurate either. The lignin in the groundwood pulp will obviously cause the paper to age more rapidly and create additional aging byproducts than lignin-free paper like the Springhill Offset, but that does not mean we can't discuss the Springhill Offset results at all.

 

 

I see where you are coming from. But a groundwood sheet is so much different from a freesheet, I don't think you could equate the results with anything. They are completely different types of paper by nature and manufacturing process.

 

What are you basing that statement on? There is quite a bit of scientific evidence that suggests that it is acidity, and not necessarily the lignin content of the paper, that determines paper strength and permanence upon aging. Springhill Offset is alum-rosin sized, which means it is inherently acidic. I will grant you that high lignin content paper tends to react more with atmospheric pollutants than lignin free paper, but that's why it's not appropriate to compare the Springhill Offset results 1:1 with high lignin content groundwood. But that does not mean you should make the logical leap that we can learn nothing from the Springhill Offset results and simply disregard them as though high lignin content paper will react the opposite way upon aging. It simply means that they will age at different rates, with the high lignin content paper aging faster.

 

Hey buddy How are things? :hi:

 

I would add that through my research (more interested in paper quality and aging, and less about pressing) the physical strength of paper comes mainly from the longer fibers. Hence why paper produced hundreds of years ago (and generally stored in less than ideal conditions) can often be structurally better than paper produced more recently.

 

Of course, that being said, the acidic level present within paper (especially during production) plays a major role in paper deterioration over time (and indirectly, on overall structural strength). As does the fact that modern papers are rarely made up of pure cellulose, usually contain lignin, alum and rosin sizing, have been bleached, etc. But as you mentioned earlier, the right storage conditions and correct book handling will see your books last a long time (much longer than any of us will survive), in pretty much the condition they are currently in.

 

On another note, I'm currently researching the different types of paper used in mass print runs (comics, newspapers) from the 1920's onwards. What are your thoughts on paper strength/quality when one compares paper used in Golden Age through to Bronze Age books? Have you come across any data on paper processing and paper types used during these periods in the United States?

 

Hi George,

 

I think that DCs during the Golden Age probably have the highest quality newsprint of any newsprint ever used to make a comic book. Harry Donenfeld owned the printing plant and had contacts with Canadian paper mills, so it didn't cost him as much as it cost his competitors to use a higher grade of paper.

 

As recycling became more prominent, newsprint began to be made out of higher and higher concentrations of recycled newsprint. Using recycled materials necessarily has an effect on fiber length, which, as you noted, has a significant effect on paper strength.

 

There have also been periods when very low quality paper was used - Timely GA, 1950s Atlas, and early 60s Marvels being some of the most notorious. There was a lot of lousy paper being used in the mid-1970s as well, when the comic industry was near collapse and the big two were trying everything they could to save a buck here and there.

 

I don't have any hard core data about the changes in the strength of newsprint over the decades or what specific newsprint grades were used from which mills - just anecdotal stuff I've picked up over the years from talking to GA collectors and seeing generally which publishers' paper has held up the best over time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, and PS, when are you coming to WonderCon? I've got a bottle of Quilceda Creek with your name on it if you ever make the trip. (How's that for an incentive?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
2 2