CGC et al To Aggressively Defend Against Lawsuit Filed In Pennsylvania 11 11

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

1 minute ago, lou_fine said:

I am a bit surprised you actually wasn't aware of this as this specific topic has already been discussed many times before in the past.  

Especially since it indicates that you've been with us here on the boards since way back in 2005.  

I musta been in the bathroom

[Larryw7]

[DanCooper]

16 minutes ago, lou_fine said:

this specific topic has already been discussed many times before in the past.  

Enough to inspire a board member's user name with over 10,000 posts!

@NP_Gresham

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

9 minutes ago, DanCooper said:

Enough to inspire a board member's user name with over 10,000 posts!

@NP_Gresham

After reading about him being a mystery Heritage bidder, I thought he was just a figment of somebody’s imagination 

[James J Johnson]

9 minutes ago, GreatCaesarsGhost said:

After reading about him being a mystery Heritage bidder, I thought he was just a figment of somebody’s imagination 

Oddly enough, NP is the standard acronym for "nurse practitioner". 

[lou_fine]

45 minutes ago, James J Johnson said:

57 minutes ago, GreatCaesarsGhost said:

After reading about him being a mystery Heritage bidder, I thought he was just a figment of somebody’s imagination 

Oddly enough, NP is the standard acronym for "nurse practitioner". 

Well, that's a new one as I always thought the "NP" stood for "non-paying" when it came to Heritage's use of the acronym.  

[James J Johnson]

3 hours ago, lou_fine said:

Well, that's a new one as I always thought the "NP" stood for "non-paying" when it came to Heritage's use of the acronym.  

Ironically, there is an acronym for that was in use on ebay NPB (either non-paying bidder or non-paying buyer).  I think they changed it to UPI, un-paid item, around the time when ebay's entire buyer/seller outlook started to heavily favor the buyer. They eliminated the negative feedback for buyers and other changes, and didn't want that intimation that a buyer could possibly be in the wrong thus getting rid of the inference that a buyer wouldn't pay and the buyer was the party in the wrong. That's when the NPB became the UPI, the focus on the item instead of rightfully, the buyer/bidder. . 

[BlowUpTheMoon]

[Aman619]

one of the things I recall of the Myers books is that the covers are so heavily painted over and resurfaced is that there is little or no dot pattern left. This means that the new cover image is no longer a printed effect from the 4 inks.. just LOOKS like what it used to look like off the presses.  This is what ( I believe) caused CGC to differentiate these books from restored, where areas are repainted but NOT the entire cover image from trim to trim.  The telltale marks of this were that overlaid on top of a real cover, many lines were painted lines and in different places.

[MatterEaterLad]

2 hours ago, Aman619 said:

one of the things I recall of the Myers books is that the covers are so heavily painted over and resurfaced is that there is little or no dot pattern left. This means that the new cover image is no longer a printed effect from the 4 inks.. just LOOKS like what it used to look like off the presses.  This is what ( I believe) caused CGC to differentiate these books from restored, where areas are repainted but NOT the entire cover image from trim to trim.  The telltale marks of this were that overlaid on top of a real cover, many lines were painted lines and in different places.

Have you seen one in person? I'd love to take a look at one up close, with a loupe. 

[Aman619]

I saw a few... didn't have my loupe.  You can get up close with the better scans that are floating around, and compare with a normal copy.

 

heres the ASM 1:

 

[Aman619]

heres what Im saying about the overpainting and loss of printing dots

[Aman619]

here's the logo area, before and after:

 

 

Edited September 21, 2020 by Aman619

[Aman619]

notice how the new painted webbing is thicker, and in this overlay, how they made up some of the lines (you see double where they dont align perfectly) .  Granted, when restored books needed overpainting on added paper, it was often done poorly and was the most obvious tell that something was added, so a not 100% perfect recreation has never been the norm.  But I think its kinda important here since they have the appearance of of a "perfect HG copy", until you compare it to the real thing.

 

 

[James J Johnson]

26 minutes ago, Aman619 said:

here's the logo area, before and after:

 

 

Among many, many other areas, look at the web line directly under the "D'. Where's that little "knot", the kink in the line that appears at about midway near the bottom of the 'D'? 

Someone as perceptive as Lion, a grader that notices when things like numbers on a coupon are different so the back cover married would catch just that difference in a heartbeat, even if subliminally, "This doesn't look right", and then referencing images of previously graded unrestored AS 1s would match up all the webbing of the cover, picture it overlain, and realize that a lot more than that was off. 

About a year or more ago (has it been that long), I remember posting about some of these and mentioned that it looked to me as though someone painted a cover over a cover,. 

[Aman619]

yes. however as I suggested, perfect overpainting has never been a criteria for grading demerits because it has always been crudely hand painted.  To me, if I had recreated the covers so well, Id be shocked and scratching my head if someone said " yeah -  but you missed a broken line by the inker, and didn't match up the webbing 100% perfectly!".  A forger has to be perfect, not a restorer.

[James J Johnson]

46 minutes ago, Aman619 said:

yes. however as I suggested, perfect overpainting has never been a criteria for grading demerits because it has always been crudely hand painted.  To me, if I had recreated the covers so well, Id be shocked and scratching my head if someone said " yeah -  but you missed a broken line by the inker, and didn't match up the webbing 100% perfectly!".  A forger has to be perfect, not a restorer.

Thing of it is though, if you're painting a new rendition over the old cover, is it even a "paint by numbers" type of project any longer. A restorative paint over? Does the original cover even need to be there? Wouldn't a blank page to start with do, especially if you're taking the type of artistic license to draw this and that thicker, add artwork here and there, like the continuation of the webbing between the R and the M, at the hyphen extended all the way down to the green circle. for what ever reason I can't begin to guess? And then why paint it over anyway? Wouldn't a photocopy be just about the same? At least the dot patterns would still be intact instead of painted over. And if you're as good an artist as the Myers appear to be, why can't they leave the field white and just paint in the sky blue dots? Maybe mix in a few pale green dots also into the patterns to give the book the impression of a little age that even a pristine 60 year old book would certainly have? 

[Aman619]

I’m not disagreeing with you I think about whether these books are outside the norm, right?  Or cross a line. As for why the painted lines dont match, again, heck, they did so much beautiful work they’ve got to be thinking what if a few lines arent perfect?  And as thickly as they lay on the paint etc, they probably can’t see any lines to trace anymore. 
 

also, sorry about my images I posted.  They were Re resed down so much they lost the dot patterns I was trying to show, I should have prepped them better. 

[lou_fine]

On 9/17/2020 at 4:53 AM, RonS2112 said:

I mean, it's great the CGC is trying to draw a line somewhere, but once you open the can of worms -- e.g. accepting restored books in the first place -- it can be hard to limit what comes out of the can. 

Sad to say, but I believe CGC only have themselves to blame as they were the ones who really opened this whole can of worms and started to slide down the slipperly slope when they declared that certain forms of what were deemed to be restoration practices at the time were really sanctioned and spunned as nothing more than "maximization of potential" of a book. 

They really could have stopped this whole artifical manipulation of books before it could even get out of the starting blocks if they had wanted to by declaring all of these practices (i.e. not just micro-trimming) as destruction of a comic book.  Then again understandably, CGC is a business and the objective of any business is to generate as many streams of revenue as possibe in order to maximize both their top line and their bottom line.    

Edited September 21, 2020 by lou_fine

[MatterEaterLad]

11 hours ago, Aman619 said:

yes. however as I suggested, perfect overpainting has never been a criteria for grading demerits because it has always been crudely hand painted.  To me, if I had recreated the covers so well, Id be shocked and scratching my head if someone said " yeah -  but you missed a broken line by the inker, and didn't match up the webbing 100% perfectly!".  A forger has to be perfect, not a restorer.

Thanks for posting the images. I hear what you're saying. I still want to see one up close. 

The insinuation has been that these are somehow fake covers, as in, complete fabrications. Which I've heard from others who have handled these books, that that's not the case. Joey Post said these are not frankenbooks, but have a high level of resto. I don't quite get the animus from CGC toward these books, which appear to me to be similar to books from the Restoration Lab. CBCS doesn't seem to have a problem with them. 

Is it possible that at some point, CGC said, "Tell us how you're doing this," and IGB said, "We'd love to, but since you have an in-house company doing similar work, we'd like to keep our techniques to ourselves?" That seems reasonable.