MMC 27 9.6 Single Highest 2 2

[Sqeggs]

As most people know, a year (or two or three) ago there seemed to be a number of books that had their grades raised by slightly moving the spine so that spine ticks were now on the back cover.  There was an epic thread on it in CG (perhaps the thread was eventually zapped -- I can't remember). Iirc, the focus of the thread was an Avengers 1, although I think people came up with multiple other instances. The (supposedly) telltale sign is that, as with this book, a very thin strip of the inner pages are made visible along the open edge.

I think at some point CGC posted or stated or implied or insinuated or suggested or hinted at a change in their grading rules that would disallow spine manipulation.  That is, they would grade the book as if the ticks were still on the spine.

That's my recollection at any rate.  I love to post about stuff that I can't remember very clearly. 

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

1 hour ago, Sqeggs said:

As most people know, a year (or two or three) ago there seemed to be a number of books that had their grades raised by slightly moving the spine so that spine ticks were now on the back cover.  There was an epic thread on it in CG (perhaps the thread was eventually zapped -- I can't remember). Iirc, the focus of the thread was an Avengers 1, although I think people came up with multiple other instances. The (supposedly) telltale sign is that, as with this book, a very thin strip of the inner pages are made visible along the open edge.

I think at some point CGC posted or stated or implied or insinuated or suggested or hinted at a change in their grading rules that would disallow spine manipulation.  That is, they would grade the book as if the ticks were still on the spine.

That's my recollection at any rate.  I love to post about stuff that I can't remember very clearly. 

It’s my understanding that one of the earliest pioneers of this art just got hired by Heritage 

[buttock]

2 hours ago, Sqeggs said:

As most people know, a year (or two or three) ago there seemed to be a number of books that had their grades raised by slightly moving the spine so that spine ticks were now on the back cover.  There was an epic thread on it in CG (perhaps the thread was eventually zapped -- I can't remember). Iirc, the focus of the thread was an Avengers 1, although I think people came up with multiple other instances. The (supposedly) telltale sign is that, as with this book, a very thin strip of the inner pages are made visible along the open edge.

I think at some point CGC posted or stated or implied or insinuated or suggested or hinted at a change in their grading rules that would disallow spine manipulation.  That is, they would grade the book as if the ticks were still on the spine.

That's my recollection at any rate.  I love to post about stuff that I can't remember very clearly. 

This book, assuming it's the same copy, had what appears to be a minor spine roll that pushed the staples to the front.  They now align normally.  That's not really the same thing.

[MrBedrock]

1 hour ago, buttock said:

3 hours ago, Sqeggs said:

As most people know, a year (or two or three) ago there seemed to be a number of books that had their grades raised by slightly moving the spine so that spine ticks were now on the back cover.  There was an epic thread on it in CG (perhaps the thread was eventually zapped -- I can't remember). Iirc, the focus of the thread was an Avengers 1, although I think people came up with multiple other instances. The (supposedly) telltale sign is that, as with this book, a very thin strip of the inner pages are made visible along the open edge.

I think at some point CGC posted or stated or implied or insinuated or suggested or hinted at a change in their grading rules that would disallow spine manipulation.  That is, they would grade the book as if the ticks were still on the spine.

That's my recollection at any rate.  I love to post about stuff that I can't remember very clearly. 

This book, assuming it's the same copy, had what appears to be a minor spine roll that pushed the staples to the front.  They now align normally.  That's not really the same thing.

What he said.

The stuff being done to books like the Avengers 1 involved laying the book out and recreating the spine placement to hide defects. That certainly wasn't done to this book. We can guess that it was pressed and the pressing caused the spine to lay flat so the little spine ticks aren't as readily visible from a straight on scanner angle. But we shouldn't say "Looks like the spine defects got moved to the back" because folks might infer that we were implying unacceptable behavior.

[HRCostigan]

Yeah, but where's the drama in that?

[Badger]

54 minutes ago, MrBedrock said:

What he said.

The stuff being done to books like the Avengers 1 involved laying the book out and recreating the spine placement to hide defects. That certainly wasn't done to this book. We can guess that it was pressed and the pressing caused the spine to lay flat so the little spine ticks aren't as readily visible from a straight on scanner angle. But we shouldn't say "Looks like the spine defects got moved to the back" because folks might infer that we were implying unacceptable behavior.

Thank you, Richard. This makes me feel much better about the situation. I was reliving that whole face job thread and I was thinking, "Oh boy! Here we go again!"

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

1 hour ago, MrBedrock said:

What he said.

The stuff being done to books like the Avengers 1 involved laying the book out and recreating the spine placement to hide defects. That certainly wasn't done to this book. We can guess that it was pressed and the pressing caused the spine to lay flat so the little spine ticks aren't as readily visible from a straight on scanner angle. But we shouldn't say "Looks like the spine defects got moved to the back" because folks might infer that we were implying unacceptable behavior.

I like you Richard. Doesn’t mean I agree with you. I do not agree with you. 

[MrBedrock]

Just now, GreatCaesarsGhost said:

I like you Richard. Doesn’t mean I agree with you. I do not agree with you. 

Not being argumentative, but what is not to agree with. You may not like pressing, and so you may not like the book. That is cool with me and there is nothing to disagree about. Just a matter of preference.

But if you are saying that you think more has been done to this book than simply a press...that some reconstructive, manipulative, nefarious act which changed the very nature of the book and was done under the cloak of darkness to deceive the entire hobby....well, I would ask you for some proof.

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

11 minutes ago, MrBedrock said:

Not being argumentative, but what is not to agree with. You may not like pressing, and so you may not like the book. That is cool with me and there is nothing to disagree about. Just a matter of preference.

But if you are saying that you think more has been done to this book than simply a press...that some reconstructive, manipulative, nefarious act which changed the very nature of the book and was done under the cloak of darkness to deceive the entire hobby....well, I would ask you for some proof.

Where does it end. Only 2 people know the extent of the work: the owner and the presser. The rest of us are left to guess and I don’t want to guess. That makes me uncomfortable. And I don’t need to. I’ll leave that to others.

Once you let the camels nose in the tent it’s only a matter of time before you got a camel in your tent

i seriously considered that 9.6 and I would have not enjoyed learning of its tortured(to me)  history

Edited February 15, 2019 by GreatCaesarsGhost

[MrBedrock]

1 minute ago, GreatCaesarsGhost said:

Where does it end. Only 2 people know the extent of the work: the owner and the presser. The rest of us are left to guess and I don’t want to guess. That makes me uncomfortable. And I don’t need to. I’ll leave that to others.

Once you let the camels nose in the tent it’s only a matter of time before you got a camel in your tent

It sounds then like you agree with me completely that we don't know what was done to this book.

 

[Cat-Man_America]

6 hours ago, GreatCaesarsGhost said:

Where does it end. Only 2 people know the extent of the work: the owner and the presser. The rest of us are left to guess and I don’t want to guess. That makes me uncomfortable. And I don’t need to. I’ll leave that to others.

Once you let the camels nose in the tent it’s only a matter of time before you got a camel in your tent

i seriously considered that 9.6 and I would have not enjoyed learning of its tortured(to me)  history

Yeah, unhealthy any way you look at it. Was that a filtered or unfiltered Camel? 

[batman_fan]

This day and age you have two choices 

1. If you don’t know if a book has been worked on to improve the grade, assume it hasn’t and bid/buy accordingly  

2.  If you don’t know if a book has been worked on to improve the grade, assume it has and bid/buy accordingly. 

Personally I would say option 2 is the better path and then it just becomes a matter of looking at the pictures of the book to see if it has any of the damage associated with poor pressing that CGC doesn’t downgrade. 

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

10 minutes ago, batman_fan said:

This day and age you have two choices 

1. If you don’t know if a book has been worked on to improve the grade, assume it hasn’t and bid/buy accordingly  

2.  If you don’t know if a book has been worked on to improve the grade, assume it has and bid/buy accordingly. 

Personally I would say option 2 is the better path and then it just becomes a matter of looking at the pictures of the book to see if it has any of the damage associated with poor pressing that CGC doesn’t downgrade. 

You’re right. I choose the blue pill. 

[Sqeggs]

20 hours ago, GreatCaesarsGhost said:

Where does it end. Only 2 people know the extent of the work: the owner and the presser. The rest of us are left to guess and I don’t want to guess. That makes me uncomfortable. And I don’t need to. I’ll leave that to others.

Once you let the camels nose in the tent it’s only a matter of time before you got a camel in your tent

i seriously considered that 9.6 and I would have not enjoyed learning of its tortured(to me)  history

Or maybe just the presser knows.  I'm not bothered by pressing and have no idea whether this book received a normal press or whether it was subject to the deconstruction/reconstruction process.  I'm willing to accept the opinion of the learned Bedrock and Buttock that it was a normal press.

As I recall that Avengers 1 thread, it devolved into people displaying other examples where they believed the de/re process had happened only to be met by responses that someone had seen the book when it was raw and the supposedly tell-tale page peak on the open edge was already there. 

I also had the vague impression that if you send a presser a book with a humongous spine roll, he may well remove the staples and take the book apart to fix the spine roll more easily, without the intention of hiding spine ticks.

[Cat-Man_America]

5 hours ago, batman_fan said:

This day and age you have two choices 

1. If you don’t know if a book has been worked on to improve the grade, assume it hasn’t and bid/buy accordingly  

2.  If you don’t know if a book has been worked on to improve the grade, assume it has and bid/buy accordingly. 

Personally I would say option 2 is the better path and then it just becomes a matter of looking at the pictures of the book to see if it has any of the damage associated with poor pressing that CGC doesn’t downgrade. 

Alas, FC and BC photos ...even with grader's notes... probably won't supply all the info that matters to a collector.  Third party graders aren't obliged to provide upgrade manipulation info in grader's notes.  High grade GA collectors seeking virgin books that've passed through a third party grading bordello should take solace in the fact that pressing isn't considered damage in today's more liberated world.

What I consider important in discussions like these are that scanned images of books can often be identified and mulled over by those familiar with prior ownership and gradings prior to auction biding.  Whether anecdotal information is enough to restrain itchy trigger fingers hovering over Heritage's "madness button" during an auction is anyone's guess, but any input is useful and appreciated.

In my not-so-humble opinion ...which goes without saying (grin), the most obvious insurance collector's have that a book hasn't been manipulated is the age of the original third party grading.  If the CGC label dates back to the earliest days of CGC ...the original Jurassic period label, before the introduction of a grade box... then the book probably hasn't been the beneficiary of "SOTA" pressing methods.  Of course, there's no insurance of a book's virginity in an auction (caveat emptor), but rest assured, the premiums will always come due.

Caution: Sarcasm has been known to cause caustic burns. 

[batman_fan]

On 2/15/2019 at 1:57 PM, Sqeggs said:

Or maybe just the presser knows.  I'm not bothered by pressing and have no idea whether this book received a normal press or whether it was subject to the deconstruction/reconstruction process.  I'm willing to accept the opinion of the learned Bedrock and Buttock that it was a normal press.

As I recall that Avengers 1 thread, it devolved into people displaying other examples where they believed the de/re process had happened only to be met by responses that someone had seen the book when it was raw and the supposedly tell-tale page peak on the open edge was already there. 

I also had the vague impression that if you send a presser a book with a humongous spine roll, he may well remove the staples and take the book apart to fix the spine roll more easily, without the intention of hiding spine ticks.

There was actually a long list of books that went through the treatment.  I saved several examples.  Here are some of my favorites.

Edited February 17, 2019 by batman_fan

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

First of all, that upsets me. Ill keep further opinions to myself because I understand there’s many boardies ok with it.

but how do you know those 2 Bat 1s are the same book?

[batman_fan]

1 minute ago, GreatCaesarsGhost said:

First of all, that upsets me. Ill keep further opinions to myself because I understand there’s many boardies ok with it.

but how do you know those 2 Bat 1s are the same book?

It was researched quit a bit at the time.  Here are full images

[batman_fan]

12 minutes ago, GreatCaesarsGhost said:

First of all, that upsets me. Ill keep further opinions to myself because I understand there’s many boardies ok with it.

but how do you know those 2 Bat 1s are the same book?

This one shows how certain restoration can be removed. Pretty easy to tell they are the same book from the writing. 

[thehumantorch]

On 2/14/2019 at 11:57 PM, Cat-Man_America said:

Yeah, unhealthy any way you look at it. Was that a filtered or unfiltered Camel? 

1 hump or 2?