Detective Comics #35 (Larson Pedigree) no longer PLOD 1 1

[oakman29]

5 hours ago, Tony S said:

Cleaning of a book IMHO opinion is conservation, not restoration. The new label more accurately reflects the books grade and status. 

We don't have a clear picture  -  yet - as to if the collector market will value conserved books higher than restored. But there is a difference and I'm glad CGC has the conserved label

 

You and I see things differently.  I see cleaning a book to be restoration. 

Funny how pressing opened the door to other manipulation that seems to just be "okay" now.

[Gotham Kid]

2 hours ago, Larryw7 said:

Who's the seller?

filter

[Timely]

I have talked to many experienced collectors & dealers on the topic of cleaning over the last few years.  All but 1 agreed cleaning should be classified as restoration. I had a long chat with John Verzyl about it just a few months ago. He felt it made sense for cleaning to be classified as restoration for many of the reasons already laid out in this thread.

The type of cleaning we are talking about here alters the book in a way that cannot be reversed. Cleaning removes the original sizing. Cleaning artificially whitens the cover. Cleaning shrinks the cover.  None of those results are conservation in my book.

 

 

Edited October 17, 2017 by Timely

[badback83]

"Gold jacket, green jacket, who gives a...."  Anyway you slice it, still a crazy book!

[batman_fan]

2 hours ago, Timely said:

I have talked to many experienced collectors & dealers on the topic of cleaning over the last few years.  All but 1 agreed cleaning should be classified as restoration. I had a long chat with John Verzyl about it just a few months ago. He felt it made sense for cleaning to be classified as restoration for many of the reasons already laid out in this thread.

The type of cleaning we are talking about here alters the book in a way that cannot be reversed. Cleaning removes the original sizing. Cleaning artificially whitens the cover. Cleaning shrinks the cover.  None of those results are conservation in my book.

 

 

That would be my take as well. All that said, that Larson Detective 35 is a spectacular book even with the cleaning. 

[rjpb]

15 hours ago, N e r V said:

Conservation Repairs
Conservation repairs are performed with the intent of preserving the structural or chemical integrity of a comic book using professional techniques and materials. It excludes aesthetic repairs such as color touch and piece fill. All conserved grades must satisfy the CGC quality scale of "A" and quantity scale of "1".
Tear seals
Spine split seals
Reinforcement
Piece reattachment
Some cover or interior cleaning (water or solvent)
Staples cleaned or replaced
Some leaf casting
De-acidification
Materials Used for Conservation Repairs:

Rice paper
Wheat glue
Vintage staples
Archival tape

 

The above is from CGC. I think you could say most of that fits into the general meaning of conservation with the cleaning aspect being the one item challenged.

Using the wording “some” does that mean there’s a limit to how much cleaning is allowed on a book to get the conserved label? If so, how limited is it?

Also besides the possible enhancements to a book with cleaning is there any reason it would be used to aid in maintaining the books condition from getting worse in some way over time? For example cleaning or replacing a rusty staple makes perfect sense in a conserved book because left untouched it will continue to damage a book over time.

 

From that list conservation is pretty much what used to be called slight restoration minus color touch and trimming. People should think more about what the label says has been done to a book, than what it's called. If the blue/grey label is acceptable to you but the purple isn't, you are buying the label not the book.

[drotto]

Can someone list the tequniques which are now considered conservation vs. restoration?  I saw the conserved Action 1 at NYCC, and was wondering how this was going to affect price vs. the 9.0 blue that sold 3 years ago.

Edited October 17, 2017 by drotto

[Sqeggs]

5 minutes ago, drotto said:

Can someone list the tequniques which are now considered conservation vs. restoration?  I saw the conserved Action 1 at NYCC, and was wondering how this was going to affect price vs. the 9.0 blue that sold 3 years ago.

Here's a link to CGC's announcement from a few years ago:  https://www.cgccomics.com/news/viewarticle.aspx?IDArticle=4030&

[Sqeggs]

4 hours ago, Timely said:

I have talked to many experienced collectors & dealers on the topic of cleaning over the last few years.  All but 1 agreed cleaning should be classified as restoration. I had a long chat with John Verzyl about it just a few months ago. He felt it made sense for cleaning to be classified as restoration for many of the reasons already laid out in this thread.

The type of cleaning we are talking about here alters the book in a way that cannot be reversed. Cleaning removes the original sizing. Cleaning artificially whitens the cover. Cleaning shrinks the cover.  None of those results are conservation in my book.

What about the case where cleaning removes mold that might otherwise damage the book over time?  Seems as if cleaning with that goal in mind would fit "conservation" in the everyday sense of the word. 

[sfcityduck]

Here is a fine art conservator's view of the issue:  http://www.audubonart.com/page/art-restoration

What is the Difference between Conservation and Restoration?

In art conservation, the objective is to arrest any progressive deterioration that is occurring so that the piece in question will remain intact, as it is, for as long as possible given what we know today. An example of conservation would be mending a tear using mulberry tissue and a neutral-pH, starch-based adhesive to prevent the tear from enlarging due to the natural expansion and contraction that occurs from variations in temperature and humidity levels in a sheet of paper. Another example of conservation would be deacidification, a chemical stabilization process. Restoration involves a cosmetic treatment that is intended to return the object to its original appearance, while retaining any patina of age that is considered an attribute. For instance, if a tear has progressed in a manner that detracts from the composition of the piece, we can graft new paper fibers into the tear, rendering it nearly invisible, thus restoring the object. An example of painting restoration would be replacing pigment losses to match the original as closely as possible. Restoration of a photograph may include a chemical bleaching and redevelopment process, as well as simulating a new emulsion surface. 

 

[mackenzie999]

Buy the book not the label.

The book is what it is no matter what color or terms are applied. Care about the hard facts, such as whether or not it was cleaned. Don't like cleaning? Don't buy the book. I'm not naive enough to ignore that labels affect the selling price, but the bottom line is the reality of the book itself, and there is the collector-speak surrounding it. One is real, the other are arbitrary definitions. The fact that a price can change while the book itself remains the same does not speak well of this hobby.

Edited October 17, 2017 by Mackenzie999

[Mmehdy]

sounds like some big upswing if you can purchase the books from purple and turn them into "gold"...opps I mean blue....

[woowoo]

2 minutes ago, Mmehdy said:

sounds like some big upswing if you can purchase the books from purple and turn them into "gold"...opps I mean blue....

         

[rjpb]

4 minutes ago, Mmehdy said:

sounds like some big upswing if you can purchase the books from purple and turn them into "gold"...opps I mean blue....

Is this an assumption or fact.

[Timely]

2 hours ago, Sqeggs said:

What about the case where cleaning removes mold that might otherwise damage the book over time?  Seems as if cleaning with that goal in mind would fit "conservation" in the everyday sense of the word. 

If the type of cleaning we are talking about here did not alter the book in a way that cannot be reversed, did not remove the original sizing, did not artificially whiten the cover & did not shrink the cover & only removed mold then I would say it is conservation. Unfortunately we do not have that. However,  conservation & restoration processes are always evolving.

[N e r V]

9 minutes ago, Timely said:

If the type of cleaning we are talking about here did not alter the book in a way that cannot be reversed, did not remove the original sizing, did not artificially whiten the cover & did not shrink the cover & only removed mold then I would say it is conservation. Unfortunately we do not have that. However,  conservation & restoration processes are always evolving.

That’s what I was posting earlier. Conservation in the antique books markets allows types of cleaning for things like mold, foxing, etc. that could impact negatively the condition of the book over time. 

 

What I don’t know is the difference in methods that conservationist use in books vs comics. I also don’t know but based on the CGC statement that if the amount of cleaning is limited in keeping it a conserved book vs a restored book. Their charts seem to have different levels of things that slot a book into whatever label covers it.

[MrBedrock]

7 hours ago, Timely said:

I have talked to many experienced collectors & dealers on the topic of cleaning over the last few years.  All but 1 agreed cleaning should be classified as restoration.

Can you list them all? Unless by many you mean two, in which case Verzyl has now changed his mind and is cool with the conservation label.

[N e r V]

25 minutes ago, MrBedrock said:

Can you list them all? Unless by many you mean two, in which case Verzyl has now changed his mind and is cool with the conservation label.

[batman_fan]

5 hours ago, Sqeggs said:

What about the case where cleaning removes mold that might otherwise damage the book over time?  Seems as if cleaning with that goal in mind would fit "conservation" in the everyday sense of the word. 

The problem I have with that approach is CGC has to make an assumption of intent. They basically have to guess at why something was done. I know they do it lots of places but I think it is a slippery slope to go down. I prefer the approach of grading the book in front of them and don't try to guess why something may have been done. 

[Sqeggs]

37 minutes ago, batman_fan said:

5 hours ago, Sqeggs said:

What about the case where cleaning removes mold that might otherwise damage the book over time?  Seems as if cleaning with that goal in mind would fit "conservation" in the everyday sense of the word. 

The problem I have with that approach is CGC has to make an assumption of intent. They basically have to guess at why something was done. I know they do it lots of places but I think it is a slippery slope to go down. I prefer the approach of grading the book in front of them and don't try to guess why something may have been done. 

I agree that's a practical problem.  I was responding to the broader issue of whether cleaning might ever be considered conservation in the sense of being undertaken to preserve a book rather than just to improve its appearance.  I think there are instances whether it can, but, as you note, figuring out why a cover has been cleaned may be beyond what the graders can be expected (or want) to do.

CGC does say that "certain kinds of cleaning" will receive a Conserved label.  The implication is that, presumably, there are types of cleaning that will get the Restored label.  I don't know whether in the three years since CGC began using Conserved labels they've ever spelled out which type of cleaning is which.  

Is this how it works? (Honest question)

1.  Dry cleaning -- blue label

2.  Chemical cleaning -- Restored

3.  Water cleaning -- Conserved