• 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.

Captain America Comics #1 Club
14 14

Started by Wayne-Tec,

1,547 posts in this topic

  • Popular Post
GreatCaesarsGhost

GreatCaesarsGhost

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted (edited)

@Comics181 That’s a great way to start back!

but I do not understand the CGC policy on trimming of these individual pages. First of all, your page doesn’t even look trimmed to begin with. Second, it would seem to me that ALL single pages had to have been trimmed one way or another in the process of removal from the book.  Isn’t any cutting of paper considered trimming?

for instance, consider the below page. Clearly this page got cut out of a book. Yet, blue label

p.s. I may be speaking heresy here, but I like single pages. I think they will become more and more embraced as key books remain beyond the means of most. And in this age of encapsulation, it’s nice to catch a glimpse of the actual inside art and story(I only wish I could rekindle the magic of looking thru my eyes as a 7 year old - I guess it depends on how much I’ve had to drink)

 

F9C0B4AA-628F-45EF-9A86-F0DAD47595B6.jpeg

Edited by GreatCaesarsGhost
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Comics181

Comics181

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, GreatCaesarsGhost said:

@Comics181 That’s a great way to start back!

but I do not understand the CGC policy on trimming of these individual pages. First of all, your page doesn’t even look trimmed to begin with. Second, it would seem to me that ALL single pages had to have been trimmed one way or another in the process of removal from the book.  Isn’t any cutting of paper trimming?

for instance:

 

F9C0B4AA-628F-45EF-9A86-F0DAD47595B6.jpeg

I don't really understand it either but it really doesn't matter to me. I like to think the trimming was done by some kid trying to make the edges line up after they accidentally ripped the page out and put it back in.

Btw that page is beautiful!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wayne-Tec

Wayne-Tec

Posted
  • Author
Posted
18 hours ago, Comics181 said:

She may not be the prettiest or really anything special compared to any of the above books, but she's mine. Hope this counts. I think a good pick up to ease back in after a couple years of non-collecting.

CAC1.thumb.jpg.45373a90decb97b81526eeda97cbba34.jpg

It definitely counts. Great page with a lot of action. Congrats and welcome to the club!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
woowoo

woowoo

Posted
Posted
On ‎5‎/‎18‎/‎2020 at 2:34 AM, Comics181 said:

She may not be the prettiest or really anything special compared to any of the above books, but she's mine. Hope this counts. I think a good pick up to ease back in after a couple years of non-collecting.

CAC1.thumb.jpg.45373a90decb97b81526eeda97cbba34.jpg

Trimming is not Resto 1 day than it is the next goest to show.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chicago Boy

Chicago Boy

Posted
Posted
On 5/18/2020 at 4:34 AM, Comics181 said:

She may not be the prettiest or really anything special compared to any of the above books, but she's mine. Hope this counts. I think a good pick up to ease back in after a couple years of non-collecting.

CAC1.thumb.jpg.45373a90decb97b81526eeda97cbba34.jpg

Great page !  Trimming is NOT restoration CGC 🤫 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bluechip

bluechip

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 5/18/2020 at 5:14 AM, GreatCaesarsGhost said:

@Comics181 That’s a great way to start back!

but I do not understand the CGC policy on trimming of these individual pages. First of all, your page doesn’t even look trimmed to begin with. Second, it would seem to me that ALL single pages had to have been trimmed one way or another in the process of removal from the book.  Isn’t any cutting of paper considered trimming?

for instance, consider the below page. Clearly this page got cut out of a book. Yet, blue label

 

 

 

Even without the inconsistency, it is just inarguably incorrect to call something "restored" when a portion of it has been removed.   I've heard it defended as a means of saying the book has been "desecrated" but in the real world 'restored' and 'desecrated' are two entirely different words.

I could be convinced to go along with the logic of a micro-trimmed book being called "restored" if in fact it has created the false appearance of a book that has never acquired any wear on the edges.   

But a book which was cut to fit in a bound volume, or some kid's notebook or shoebox, has been clearly damaged and appears far worse than its original state.  Not in English, nor any other language I know of, do we call something like that restored.     

Doing so was incorrect when labeling complete books.   And to do so with single pages is even less correct.     But the policy goes to extremes I would never have anticipated when something is called "restored" because it was harshly and obviously trimmed by some kid or librarian 50 years ago, but pieces of a book that was recently and methodically taken apart and trimmed (to cut the wraps in half), are not.  

I've heard it said that this is done despite the illogic because that's the way it's been done up to now.   But perpetuating a mistake is never a good idea.   People in the hobby may get used to something illogical over time, but it undoubtedly plays a part in lessening confidence, to some degree. And every time a new person comes to the hobby, or considers coming into it, each little piece of the puzzle that doesn't quite makes sense is something that may give them pause.         

    

Edited by bluechip
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chicago Boy

Chicago Boy

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, bluechip said:

Even without the inconsistency, it is just inarguably incorrect to call something "restored" when a portion of it has been removed.   I've heard it defended as a means of saying the book has been "desecrated" but in the real world 'restored' and 'desecrated' are two entirely different words.

I could be convinced to go along with the logic of a micro-trimmed book being called "restored" if in fact it has created the false appearance of a book that has never acquired any wear on the edges.   

But a book which was cut to fit in a bound volume, or some kid's notebook or shoebox, has been clearly damaged and appears far worse than its original state.  Not in English, nor any other language I know of, do we call something like that restored.     

Doing so was incorrect when labeling complete books.   And to do so with single pages is even less correct.     But the policy goes to extremes I would never have anticipated when something is called "restored" because it was harshly and obviously trimmed by some kid or librarian 50 years ago, but pieces of a book that was recently and methodically taken apart and trimmed (to cut the wraps in half), are not.  

I've heard it said that this is done despite the illogic because that's the way it's been done up to now.   But perpetuating a mistake is never a good idea.   People in the hobby may get used to something illogical over time, but it undoubtedly plays a part in lessening confidence, to some degree. And every time a new person comes to the hobby, or considers coming into it, each little piece of the puzzle that doesn't quite makes sense is something that may give them pause.         

    

Yes. This !  Voldy differentiates. My guess is if CGC changed their policy fiscally people would be clamoring for free re slabs. ( hence this might be why they don’t change their stance ) 

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
14 14
Go to topic listing