There's a Restored 9.4 Tec 33 Blowing up on Ebay

[MrBedrock]

Nothing beats Parker in a pink tutu

A baseball bat does.

[Gotham Kid]

Nothing beats Parker in a pink tutu

A baseball bat does.

[woowoo]

Nothing beats Parker in a pink tutu

A baseball bat does.

 

[VintageComics]

 

Thanks for the answer. I wouldn't like the use of xerox at all. How easy looking though a slabbed case would it be to spot?

 

That obviously depends on the type of work done over the xerox.

 

If, for example, it was heavily inpainted it would be difficult to spot through a slab.

[woowoo]

 

Thanks for the answer. I wouldn't like the use of xerox at all. How easy looking though a slabbed case would it be to spot?

 

That obviously depends on the type of work done over the xerox.

 

If, for example, it was heavily inpainted it would be difficult to spot through a slab.

 

 

[PovertyRow]

 

Thanks for the answer. I wouldn't like the use of xerox at all. How easy looking though a slabbed case would it be to spot?

 

That obviously depends on the type of work done over the xerox.

 

If, for example, it was heavily inpainted it would be difficult to spot through a slab.

 

Quite true. I had to rush my answer as was late for work.

[G.A.tor]

Nothing beats Parker in a pink tutu

A baseball bat does.

hadnt considered that

[Flash105]

Nothing beats Parker in a pink tutu

A baseball bat does.

hadnt considered that

 

Kings over Queens would as well.

[*matterus023*]

 

Thanks for the answer. I wouldn't like the use of xerox at all. How easy looking though a slabbed case would it be to spot?

 

That obviously depends on the type of work done over the xerox.

 

If, for example, it was heavily inpainted it would be difficult to spot through a slab.

 

Thanks. I know it may seem an obvious answer but something I am new to so best to ask all questions no matter how stupid

[VintageComics]

Last point- how to value that Tec 33. It looks like a 6.0 R sold for 14K. If they have over a hundred hours of labor on the book, a value of over 30K does not seem unreasonable to me.

 

To me, it's irrelevant how many hours igb has put into the book - it's the final product that ultimately matters.

 

While there's no denying igb's artistic skill, the overriding problem is that their work looks totally fake to my eye. Looking at their scans, the first thing that comes to mind is recreation, not restoration.

 

Something like this gives new meaning to the term "painted cover" - it looks more like a xerox copy or a poster, rather than a comic book.

 

 

So, after looking at this pic for a bit and comparing it with the pre-resto image it seems that the cover was moved to the right (relative to the interior) to compensate for the pages which were hanging out on the right edge.

 

Then the staples were moved from the front of the book and were placed on the apex of the spine for better eye appeal.

 

This would of necessity mean that all of the interior wraps would need the old staple holes filled as well as the staples were moved.

 

The book had a miscut / miswrap (white line wrapped to the front and the cover art was shortened on the open end from publishing) and so if the cover is moved to the right, relative to the interior to cover the interior pages, that is why the artwork was extended left during the restoration - to cover the area where the staples were originally placed and to fix the miswrap.

 

This is why the 'Reg U.S. Pat. Off.' and Bob Kane sig are now in a different area relative to the apex of the spine. The new artwork added to take care of the miswrap added space to the apex of the spine making the Reg and Bob Kane sit further right relative to the spine.

 

If the cover was pulled right and staples realigned, by necessity the back cover would have been short and was probably leafcast and filled / painted. Much easier to do when dealing with a solid yellow.

 

Some other visually different things are the much darker black line under the Bob Kane sig and also, the wind lines behind the car are different between the two copies. I don't know which is correct as I haven't compared those to another Tec #33.

 

 

[rodan57]

As well as creating space on the left, the "Bob Kane" is also higher up from the top of the bridge and the top line of the bridge is thicker that in the original.

[Aman619]

There are many slight imperfectly "traced" or recreated lines and things. But isn't this the case for all extensive restoration? I don't think anybody got their book back from any of the known high end restorers and got mad that the Bob Kane sig was a sloppy forgery... Or some line work wasn't perfect. These were lower grade books to begin with so since they look so much better restored, nobody really cared about such flaws unless they were unsightly.

 

But, with this new technique that goes so far to looking perfect (if a bit too plastic like a recreation) the real question should be should these flaws still exist in these grades? , or should this level of restoration demand a perfectly reproduced rendition of ALL graphic elements presented exactly the same as on the original printed comic books?

 

In other words, now that they have taken restoration up a notch or two. Should a 9.6 or 9.8 grade be unachievable WITHOUT perfect replication of the artwork?

 

Bedrock pointed out the liberties taken on the back of the Donald Duck cover. I noticed that the art near the spine of the Tec 43 was widened.. Neither of these books now look like the originals in ways beyond a shaky hand recreating Kane's sig, or some missing lines in the art. But these weren't obvious or unsightly blemishes...

 

The question for the graders if not the hobby now is how close to the original should be reflected in the grade... or should be it be at this point where it's now possible to make the colors etc so realistic.

 

 

 

 

[Jaydogrules]

There are many slight imperfectly "traced" or recreated lines and things. But isn't this the case for all extensive restoration? I don't think anybody got their book back from any of the known high end restorers and got mad that the Bob Kane sig was a sloppy forgery... Or some line work wasn't perfect. These were lower grade books to begin with so since they look so much better restored, nobody really cared about such flaws unless they were unsightly.

 

But, with this new technique that goes so far to looking perfect (if a bit too plastic like a recreation) the real question should be should these flaws still exist in these grades? , or should this level of restoration demand a perfectly reproduced rendition of ALL graphic elements presented exactly the same as on the original printed comic books?

 

In other words, now that they have taken restoration up a notch or two. Should a 9.6 or 9.8 grade be unachievable WITHOUT perfect replication of the artwork?

 

Bedrock pointed out the liberties taken on the back of the Donald Duck cover. I noticed that the art near the spine of the Tec 43 was widened.. Neither of these books now look like the originals in ways beyond a shaky hand recreating Kane's sig, or some missing lines in the art. But these weren't obvious or unsightly blemishes...

 

The question for the graders if not the hobby now is how close to the original should be reflected in the grade... or should be it be at this point where it's now possible to make the colors etc so realistic.

 

 

 

 

So many questions it boggles my mind.

 

I can see now why CGC was debating whether or not to even continue grading these books. Why put their reputation and discretion on the line just to make some over zealous restore-ers (sic) and sellers a bunch of extra money with an artificially high grade that really doesn't mean anything? These books look great in slabs so why not just slab them and give them the NG designation they truly deserve and leave it at that since they are essentially just eye candy ? Except in this case it will stand for "Not Grade-able".

 

-J.

[VintageComics]

There are many slight imperfectly "traced" or recreated lines and things. But isn't this the case for all extensive restoration? I don't think anybody got their book back from any of the known high end restorers and got mad that the Bob Kane sig was a sloppy forgery... Or some line work wasn't perfect. These were lower grade books to begin with so since they look so much better restored, nobody really cared about such flaws unless they were unsightly.

 

But, with this new technique that goes so far to looking perfect (if a bit too plastic like a recreation) the real question should be should these flaws still exist in these grades? , or should this level of restoration demand a perfectly reproduced rendition of ALL graphic elements presented exactly the same as on the original printed comic books?

 

In other words, now that they have taken restoration up a notch or two. Should a 9.6 or 9.8 grade be unachievable WITHOUT perfect replication of the artwork?

 

Bedrock pointed out the liberties taken on the back of the Donald Duck cover. I noticed that the art near the spine of the Tec 43 was widened.. Neither of these books now look like the originals in ways beyond a shaky hand recreating Kane's sig, or some missing lines in the art. But these weren't obvious or unsightly blemishes...

 

The question for the graders if not the hobby now is how close to the original should be reflected in the grade... or should be it be at this point where it's now possible to make the colors etc so realistic.

 

 

 

 

My point is not about the colours (although I agree, the book does not look real in the scans - but I know enough about scans to understand that a book in hand can be completely different than a scan represents it to be).

 

It's about moving the staples to a non-original location, adding artwork that was not on the original to repair a miscut that used to be there, making the cover larger than the original was to cover interior pages AND moving and changing the artwork within the borders so that things don't line up to an original.

 

These things go beyond production variations.

 

My personal opinion is that restored books should recreate what a book looked like when it was new on the newsstand. Not be a recreation that doesn't resemble a newsstand copy.

 

 

[Aman619]

I don't know enough about the restriction processes, but I'm guessing that leaf casting has in some measure, led to what we are seeing here. The ability to recreate real estate, virgin white paper -- and start over -- has allowed the restorers to paint in what they want or need to, in these areas, as well as shift the staples etc.

 

 

Also, to your last point, to my eyes extensively restored books, aka frankenbooks have never looked real to my eyes, just better than what they used to look like in their beat up original condition.

[gadzukes]

There are many slight imperfectly "traced" or recreated lines and things. But isn't this the case for all extensive restoration? I don't think anybody got their book back from any of the known high end restorers and got mad that the Bob Kane sig was a sloppy forgery... Or some line work wasn't perfect. These were lower grade books to begin with so since they look so much better restored, nobody really cared about such flaws unless they were unsightly.

 

But, with this new technique that goes so far to looking perfect (if a bit too plastic like a recreation) the real question should be should these flaws still exist in these grades? , or should this level of restoration demand a perfectly reproduced rendition of ALL graphic elements presented exactly the same as on the original printed comic books?

 

In other words, now that they have taken restoration up a notch or two. Should a 9.6 or 9.8 grade be unachievable WITHOUT perfect replication of the artwork?

 

Bedrock pointed out the liberties taken on the back of the Donald Duck cover. I noticed that the art near the spine of the Tec 43 was widened.. Neither of these books now look like the originals in ways beyond a shaky hand recreating Kane's sig, or some missing lines in the art. But these weren't obvious or unsightly blemishes...

 

The question for the graders if not the hobby now is how close to the original should be reflected in the grade... or should be it be at this point where it's now possible to make the colors etc so realistic.

 

 

 

 

My point is not about the colours (although I agree, the book does not look real in the scans - but I know enough about scans to understand that a book in hand can be completely different than a scan represents it to be).

 

It's about moving the staples to a non-original location, adding artwork that was not on the original to repair a miscut that used to be there, making the cover larger than the original was to cover interior pages AND moving and changing the artwork within the borders so that things don't line up to an original.

 

These things go beyond production variations.

 

My personal opinion is that restored books should recreate what a book looked like when it was new on the newsstand. Not be a recreation that doesn't resemble a newsstand copy.

 

 

One of my favorite things about GA books are the production variations. Almost every GA book has a quirky production flaw. That's part of the reason these ultra restored books look wrong to me... because they don't look like GA books to me. They're too perfect.

[Mr. 10%]

Guess it just a matter of time before we se a HG Tec 27 / Action 1 as a cloned extensive.

 

Whatl it go fer ... ?

 

Just crossed my mind. So I throw it out here without further ado.

[Mr. 10%]

Ball park fig: half a milly.

[woowoo]

Guess it just a matter of time before we se a HG Tec 27 / Action 1 as a cloned extensive.

 

Whatl it go fer ... ?

Just crossed my mind. So I throw it out here without further ado.

 

 

I saw 10% lol

[bluechip]

There are many slight imperfectly "traced" or recreated lines and things. But isn't this the case for all extensive restoration? I don't think anybody got their book back from any of the known high end restorers and got mad that the Bob Kane sig was a sloppy forgery... Or some line work wasn't perfect. These were lower grade books to begin with so since they look so much better restored, nobody really cared about such flaws unless they were unsightly.

 

But, with this new technique that goes so far to looking perfect (if a bit too plastic like a recreation) the real question should be should these flaws still exist in these grades? , or should this level of restoration demand a perfectly reproduced rendition of ALL graphic elements presented exactly the same as on the original printed comic books?

 

In other words, now that they have taken restoration up a notch or two. Should a 9.6 or 9.8 grade be unachievable WITHOUT perfect replication of the artwork?

 

Bedrock pointed out the liberties taken on the back of the Donald Duck cover. I noticed that the art near the spine of the Tec 43 was widened.. Neither of these books now look like the originals in ways beyond a shaky hand recreating Kane's sig, or some missing lines in the art. But these weren't obvious or unsightly blemishes...

 

The question for the graders if not the hobby now is how close to the original should be reflected in the grade... or should be it be at this point where it's now possible to make the colors etc so realistic.

 

 

 

 

So many questions it boggles my mind.

 

I can see now why CGC was debating whether or not to even continue grading these books. Why put their reputation and discretion on the line just to make some over zealous restore-ers (sic) and sellers a bunch of extra money with an artificially high grade that really doesn't mean anything? These books look great in slabs so why not just slab them and give them the NG designation they truly deserve and leave it at that since they are essentially just eye candy ? Except in this case it will stand for "Not Grade-able".

 

-J.

 

It does not threaten CGC's reputation to grade these books. Especially when they are given ample evidence of what the book looked like in the first place and details about the work that was done. If they chose to say that inaccurate artwork meant the old defect was not restored and a new defect was added, and grade it accordingly, I would applaud that.

 

I don't know what you mean in saying that it might put their "discretion" on the line.

 

Neither CGC nor anyone else should refuse to grade something just because they think somebody might be trying to make money with the label. I have seen many books that got higher grades than I think I would have gotten for the same book. And I've seen more than a few of my books get higher grades then I got for them, once the books parted from me; should I be insisting the next owners be prevented from getting a better grade in any way? Grading companies should not ever make a judgment on a label based on the desires of the sellers or the buyers to brand a book valuable or collectible.

 

There will always be something that drives one or more of us crazy. I hate it when I see a book without a cover (or a xerox cover) in a slab that says one of its values is a "classic cover." Or it says "first appearance of" and casually mentions pages missing but doesn't mention that missing pages mean the "first appearance of..." isn't contained in the slab. (Or, conversely, it says that a missing page or panel "affects story" but doesn't tell you that the story which makes the book valuable is all there and "affects story" might only mean that it's missing half a word balloon in half a panel from some back up feature nobody knows or cares about. (and, strangely, meanwhile, a chunk missing from a cover cutting into art and text doesn't get the book called incomplete) I hate ambiguities, whether they cut for or against the value of a book. But perhaps at some point you just gotta say maybe buyers need to be able to read words and ask questions before they purchase.