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

[ImageMask]

You aren't going to find that smoking gun article. The question you're asking may seem like a deep, scientific issue for you, but for a conservator, whether or not to press an artifact tends not to be a huge internal struggle. Their scholarly articles will deal with far more sophisticated topics. Pressing is "Conservation 101."

 

 

 

 

You aren't going to find that smoking gun article. The question you're asking may seem like a deep, moral issue for you, but for some one looking to make a buck, whether or not to press a funny book tends not to be a huge internal struggle. Their financial gains will deal with far more sophisticated topics. Pressing is "Profitering 101."

 

Fixed that for ya.

 

Think that separates a conservator from the rest.

 

Since we're trying to have a serious discussion here, maybe you could confine this useless moralizing to one of the other 800 pressing threads?

 

 

 

I figured this was one of those 800.....

 

 

 

 

 

So, please don't confuse a conservator whom preserves historical documents for future generations to a "funny book" presser looking for a buck.

[FFB]

Just because a conservator isn't born knowing it doesn't mean that one of them will have done an extensive scholarly article on the topic. Feel free to keep looking though.

 

I have no expectation of finding an article devoted to pressing--just someone who does more than mention it in passing with the same presumption you alluded to, that it's simply standard practice. One or two sentences with some specific details about when to press or when not to, or some explicit reference that pressing is something that's appropriate for any type of paper, or alternatively that there are times you shouldn't use it. One of the main jists of the recent pressing arguments which I can't just refute out of hand is that pressing might be fine for sturdier documents, but not for the cheap pulp comics are printed on.

 

You aren't going to find anything like that because pressing IS fine for comics. Every comic book ever made was subjected to greater forces during the production process than it would be exposed to in a standard pressing job. Instead of looking for a mythical, scholarly article that does not exist, do some research on the processes involved in making comics. Compare the forces exerted during the production process to what you know of the comic book pressing/restoration process.

 

In terms of the "long term effects," whatever molecular damage is done to a comic book during a professional pressing job using heat and moisture is insignificant when compared to the damage that will be caused over the course of decades from keeping a comic book in less than ideal storage conditions (which is virtually every comic book in every collection of every person who posts here).

[FFB]

You aren't going to find that smoking gun article. The question you're asking may seem like a deep, scientific issue for you, but for a conservator, whether or not to press an artifact tends not to be a huge internal struggle. Their scholarly articles will deal with far more sophisticated topics. Pressing is "Conservation 101."

 

You aren't going to find that smoking gun article. The question you're asking may seem like a deep, moral issue for you, but for some one looking to make a buck, whether or not to press a funny book tends not to be a huge internal struggle. Their financial gains will deal with far more sophisticated topics. Pressing is "Profitering 101."

 

Fixed that for ya.

 

Think that separates a conservator from the rest.

 

Since we're trying to have a serious discussion here, maybe you could confine this useless moralizing to one of the other 800 pressing threads?

 

I figured this was one of those 800.....

 

So, please don't confuse a conservator whom preserves historical documents for future generations to a "funny book" presser looking for a buck.

 

One of us is confused by this discussion and I'm pretty sure it isn't me.

[ImageMask]

 

You aren't going to find anything like that because pressing IS fine for comics. Every comic book ever made was subjected to greater forces during the production process than it would be exposed to in a standard pressing job. .

 

 

 

 

One of us is confused by this discussion and I'm pretty sure it isn't me. Indeed.

 

[fantastic_four]

This isn't relevant to comics, but I found it interesting that parchment with pigmented ink can't be pressed. I have no idea what type of ink has been used on famous historical documents like the Magna Carta, Declaration of Independence, U.S. Constitution, etc, but it could mean that they can't be pressed. It's from Wikipedia:

 

Problems can occur when parchment is exposed to high humidity for a long period of time. For example, collagen in the pages could dissolve and stick together.[14]

 

These problems are further compounded by the fact that pigments do not dye parchment; instead, they lie on the surface of the parchment and so are rather fragile. Pressing an illuminated manuscript pushes the pigment down, altering the image itself and likely causing damage (such as a relief effect to the other side of the page) so it is very important to not put any pressure upon images on parchment, especially when it is wet.[15] This fact also has to be taken into account when cleaning dirt from the image and when encapsulating or framing illuminated parchment for an exhibition.

[szelim]

One of the main jists of the recent pressing arguments which I can't just refute out of hand is that pressing might be fine for sturdier documents, but not for the cheap pulp comics are printed on. This was one of the only useful ideas I was able to extract while quite masochistically reading that latest infinite pressing thread (99.99% of it is the same old drek tho).

Is this fact or conjecture? I can see an argument that the pulp paper may require less heat/pressure/time than sturdier paper to press out imperfections. If increased time at elevated heat and pressure increases the potential for damage, then it may be that pressing cheaper paper could be less damaging, assuming the presser knows to limit the time.

[fantastic_four]

Many other kinds of pressing use no heat at all.

 

Are you referring to just humidity + pressure? If not, what types do you mean?

[fantastic_four]

Is this fact or conjecture?

 

Everyone I've seen asserting that "pressing could be causing damage" has been offering 100% conjecture. I'm looking to either confirm it, or what I suspect is the more likely outcome, put it to bed for good.

[FFB]

Many other kinds of pressing use no heat at all.

 

Are you referring to just humidity + pressure? If not, what types do you mean?

 

There are "heatless" pressing techniques that use moisture and there are heatless pressing techniques that do not use moisture. Mechanical, localized pressing is one example.

[fantastic_four]

Mechanical, localized pressing is one example.

 

What kind of defect is this useful on? Every time I've tried any kind of pressing without heat or humidity, it doesn't do jack.

[FFB]

The engrossed copy (the one signed by Congress that is kept in the National Archives) of the Declaration of Independence is iron gall ink on parchment.

 

This isn't relevant to comics, but I found it interesting that parchment with pigmented ink can't be pressed. I have no idea what type of ink has been used on famous historical documents like the Magna Carta, Declaration of Independence, U.S. Constitution, etc, but it could mean that they can't be pressed. It's from Wikipedia:

 

Problems can occur when parchment is exposed to high humidity for a long period of time. For example, collagen in the pages could dissolve and stick together.[14]

 

These problems are further compounded by the fact that pigments do not dye parchment; instead, they lie on the surface of the parchment and so are rather fragile. Pressing an illuminated manuscript pushes the pigment down, altering the image itself and likely causing damage (such as a relief effect to the other side of the page) so it is very important to not put any pressure upon images on parchment, especially when it is wet.[15] This fact also has to be taken into account when cleaning dirt from the image and when encapsulating or framing illuminated parchment for an exhibition.

[FFB]

Mechanical, localized pressing is one example.

 

What kind of defect is this useful on? Every time I've tried any kind of pressing without heat or humidity, it doesn't do jack.

 

Bent overhanging edges and certain hard creases in the white area of the front or back cover - the kinds of defects where a dry mount press oftentimes won't do jack.

[ImageMask]

Many other kinds of pressing use no heat at all.

 

Are you referring to just humidity + pressure? If not, what types do you mean?

 

There are "heatless" pressing techniques that use moisture and there are heatless pressing techniques that do not use moisture. Mechanical, localized pressing is one example.

 

 

 

And you have, yourself, conducted these techniques in the same manner as a LBC conservator would?

 

[fantastic_four]

Bent overhanging edges and certain hard creases in the white area of the front or back cover - the kinds of defects where a dry mount press oftentimes won't do jack.

 

Yea a dry mount press sucks for that, but isn't a heated tacking iron better for that than simple pressure?

[FFB]

Many other kinds of pressing use no heat at all.

 

Are you referring to just humidity + pressure? If not, what types do you mean?

 

There are "heatless" pressing techniques that use moisture and there are heatless pressing techniques that do not use moisture. Mechanical, localized pressing is one example.

 

 

 

And you have, yourself, conducted these techniques in the same manner as a LBC conservator would?

 

Do you have a point, or are you just trying to pick a fight? You obviously have nothing of substance to add to the discussion, so why don't you just head on back to the kiddie pool.

[FFB]

Bent overhanging edges and certain hard creases in the white area of the front or back cover - the kinds of defects where a dry mount press oftentimes won't do jack.

 

Yea a dry mount press sucks for that, but isn't a heated tacking iron better for that than simple pressure?

 

Not really. A tacking iron is helpful for drying a fresh tear seal, but to remove edge bends, there are better ways that use no heat.

[FFB]

Bent overhanging edges and certain hard creases in the white area of the front or back cover - the kinds of defects where a dry mount press oftentimes won't do jack.

 

Yea a dry mount press sucks for that, but isn't a heated tacking iron better for that than simple pressure?

 

Not really. A tacking iron is helpful for drying a fresh tear seal, but to remove edge bends, there are better ways that use no heat.

 

Also, for hard creases, tacking irons are worse than useless.

[fantastic_four]

Also, for hard creases, tacking irons are worse than useless.

 

By hard creases, you mean ones that break fibers? Those are pressable? I figured fiber-breaking creases were permanent damage. Isn't that what the Pacific Coast Hulk 1 (previously an 8.5, now an 8.0) supposedly has on the back that nobody could press?

 

BTW--WTF happened to that pressing thread you and povertyrow filled up with useful info a few years ago??? They appear to have LOCKED it very recently, and you can't get to it now. ???

[ImageMask]

Many other kinds of pressing use no heat at all.

 

Are you referring to just humidity + pressure? If not, what types do you mean?

 

There are "heatless" pressing techniques that use moisture and there are heatless pressing techniques that do not use moisture. Mechanical, localized pressing is one example.

 

 

 

And you have, yourself, conducted these techniques in the same manner as a LBC conservator would?

 

Do you have a point, or are you just trying to pick a fight? You obviously have nothing of substance to add to the discussion, so why don't you just head on back to the kiddie pool.

 

 

 

Did you avoid the question for a reason? Do you have an answer or are you just avoiding the fight? If you wanna play expert on what you have read researched on web plaese do so. But if you think that qualifies you as an expert in print and press technology when you haven't heard the presses roll in that warehouse in the less desirable side of town...step off.

 

Stick to the law books sonny..............

[FFB]

Also, for hard creases, tacking irons are worse than useless.

 

By hard creases, you mean ones that break fibers? Those are pressable? I figured fiber-breaking creases were permanent damage. Isn't that what the Pacific Coast Hulk 1 (previously an 8.5, now an 8.0) supposedly has on the back that nobody could press?

 

BTW--WTF happened to that pressing thread you and povertyrow filled up with useful info a few years ago??? They appear to have LOCKED it very recently, and you can't get to it now. ???

 

Those are the creases that I'm talking about, although "break fibers" is not exactly what is going on in most cases. Comic book cover stock is impregnated with kaolinite clay and pressed between two heavy, smooth rollers in order to make it glossy. A hard crease does not necessarily break fibers. Some hard creases do have broken paper fibers, but many hard creases are really just a bent/frayed fiber matrix where the clay has started to unbond. With a certain kind of pressing technique, you can recompress the clay and flatten out the bent fibers, which will remove a hard crease. It doesn't completely eliminate every hard crease, but it will at least minimize the great majority of them and will eliminate many of them.

 

As for the old pressing thread, I don't know what happened to it.