UPDATE: Test results posted, lignin removal 6 6

[427Impaler]

Picked this book obviously because it had lots of white area, but also has fine graphics.  No damage to the fine lines.

[Frank.Einstein]

On 11/3/2019 at 9:33 AM, 427Impaler said:

I’ve been working on ways to remove age yellowing/tanning without fading ink or doing damage to the paper.  After playing around with the current methods; bleaching, UV exposure, etc,  I think I may have found a solution.  Still testing things but so far no PH issues and seems color fast on everythin

Coming from the perspective of having contracted top comic conservators over the past 20 years, Bob's innovative work has me hollering a resounding "WOWZEE!!". I've seen the 'Mighty Mouse' first hand, and can attest to the quality of Bob's work and his attention to care and detail. Looking forward to more examples and great results!

[Randall Dowling]

Having collected comics for the last 40+ years, this is an incredibly depressing thread.  I’ve watched chumps with their crayons and markers and single hair paint brushes and spray gloss and all the rest ply their deceptions on unsuspecting collectors in order to make a little more money.  Just another in a very long line of attempts at restoration that can’t be detected.  I wonder, is phase 2 submitting books to CGC to see if they catch it?  And if they don’t, would you ever tell people that you’ve bleached the book when you sell it?  My guess is no, you won’t.  And that’s the whole idea.  
 

By all means, protest and tell me I’m wrong.  This is like somebody posting a thread on how they’ve figured a new method of micro trimming that CGC can’t detect.

[Frank.Einstein]

25 minutes ago, Randall Dowling said:

Having collected comics for the last 40+ years, this is an incredibly depressing thread.  I’ve watched chumps with their crayons and markers and single hair paint brushes and spray gloss and all the rest ply their deceptions on unsuspecting collectors in order to make a little more money.  Just another in a very long line of attempts at restoration that can’t be detected.  I wonder, is phase 2 submitting books to CGC to see if they catch it?  And if they don’t, would you ever tell people that you’ve bleached the book when you sell it?  My guess is no, you won’t.  And that’s the whole idea.  
 

By all means, protest and tell me I’m wrong.  This is like somebody posting a thread on how they’ve figured a new method of micro trimming that CGC can’t detect.

You make a very good point, particularly to aspects of intent and eventual sale/transfer of a conserved/restored comic. The real danger, as you say, is if it's done deceptively and people are mislead, or unknowingly buy a restored book.

However, I have no problem with people choosing to have their comics conserved. Speaking very much from personal profession experience, I work with academically trained conservators (in museum and academic contexts) whose aims with conserving artifacts (which comics are) are to (1) stop deterioration, (2) clean, as necessary, to restore to original condition, and (3) enable an item to be handled without falling apart upon study and analysis. Within these aims, methods are designed to be 100% reversible and non-damaging to the artifact. As such, from a conservation standpoint cleaning the Sistine Chapel frescoes is no different from trying to remove yellowing from a comic. Nor is using archival paper to seal tears on either the dead sea scrolls or comics.

Within my own collection I have several Golden Age books which I have had professionally conserved so as to halt deterioration, reduce brittleness, remove staining, and mend tears - all so that I can safely handle them and read them without having to worry about further damage. I have always planned on keeping these books, but if I change my mind to sell I have the restoration certificates to go along with them. Of course, as you say, not everyone will disclose the truth in the same situation.

Lastly, to the heart of this thread. I believe that the person that started this thread has a deep love of comics and is sincerely interested in, and fascinated by,  conservation, and not helping people pull a fast one. The risk though is that once a book is out of his possession he loses control over future disclosure of any work done. The old " if this falls in the wrong hands..." scenario. Hopefully CGC and the other third party grading companies can keep pace with conservation advances and be able to detect everything.

[427Impaler]

14 hours ago, Randall Dowling said:

Having collected comics for the last 40+ years, this is an incredibly depressing thread.  I’ve watched chumps with their crayons and markers and single hair paint brushes and spray gloss and all the rest ply their deceptions on unsuspecting collectors in order to make a little more money.  Just another in a very long line of attempts at restoration that can’t be detected.  I wonder, is phase 2 submitting books to CGC to see if they catch it?  And if they don’t, would you ever tell people that you’ve bleached the book when you sell it?  My guess is no, you won’t.  And that’s the whole idea.  
 

By all means, protest and tell me I’m wrong.  This is like somebody posting a thread on how they’ve figured a new method of micro trimming that CGC can’t detect.

I don’t need to protest and tell you that you’re wrong.  It might have been more civil and intellectual to ask me what my intent was and what my qualifications are.  That way you wouldn’t have made a post that couldn’t be incorrect in so many aspects.  Contempt prior to investigation.

 

i have been collecting comics since 1969, not bragging, just letting you know I am no punk kid.  I have a lengthy academic background, and have recently retired from business management after 30 long years.  For the last decade I have been studying conservation, working with and speaking to conservators across the country, through that I understand we have a long way to go when it comes to paper conservation.  Library of Congress has tried many way to preserve their many books and are still actively seeking new methods to do so.  Problem is it is a still growing science and there is no magic bullet.

 

i have been working on a method of chelating for a while, as I stated right at the beginning this is not a eureka moment, third party testing would have to confirm that the paper is not being comprised by this process.  My main and only mantra is to make the collectibles we love last longer.  I don’t do restoration at all, only de-acidification, mending, and low temperature pressing.  
 

I am sorry you find this thread distasteful, I was excited that there may be a way to make books look better and last longer.  At this stage of my life Im not looking to make a fast buck or even big bucks, I’m doing something I love.

[Randall Dowling]

3 hours ago, 427Impaler said:

I don’t need to protest and tell you that you’re wrong.  It might have been more civil and intellectual to ask me what my intent was and what my qualifications are.  That way you wouldn’t have made a post that couldn’t be incorrect in so many aspects.  Contempt prior to investigation.

 

i have been collecting comics since 1969, not bragging, just letting you know I am no punk kid.  I have a lengthy academic background, and have recently retired from business management after 30 long years.  For the last decade I have been studying conservation, working with and speaking to conservators across the country, through that I understand we have a long way to go when it comes to paper conservation.  Library of Congress has tried many way to preserve their many books and are still actively seeking new methods to do so.  Problem is it is a still growing science and there is no magic bullet.

 

i have been working on a method of chelating for a while, as I stated right at the beginning this is not a eureka moment, third party testing would have to confirm that the paper is not being comprised by this process.  My main and only mantra is to make the collectibles we love last longer.  I don’t do restoration at all, only de-acidification, mending, and low temperature pressing.  
 

I am sorry you find this thread distasteful, I was excited that there may be a way to make books look better and last longer.  At this stage of my life Im not looking to make a fast buck or even big bucks, I’m doing something I love.

Taking everything you say as sincere, allow me to clarify my concern about what you're posting.

I understand legitimate conservationists and restoration experts studying various methods of paper recomposition.  However, there is an increasingly slippery slope that may be summed up as "If you can't easily detect it, it's not restoration".  You stated "I don’t do restoration at all, only de-acidification, mending, and low temperature pressing.", all of which by very definition are restorative processes, and thus restoration.  The fact that CGC doesn't consider it so, doesn't mean it isn't.  It only means they won't consider these processes while grading a book.  As sad as this decision was, sadder still is the avalanche of amateur tinkerers, actively working on books and getting them slabbed where prospective buyers can't do their own evaluation to detect the various methods employed.   This is at the heart of the CPR game which is expanding now into chemical cleaning and beyond.  As someone who just likes comics that have not been tampered with at all, I find an increasingly smaller and smaller pool of books to buy from.

As to "Contempt prior to investigation", it's a fair criticism.  I've just seen way too much of this and there are always those very proud of their ability to perform these alterations without detection.  That is the source of my contempt.  If you're intentions are pure, then accept my apologies.  However, if you disagree with what I've written here, then I'm sorry, you are engaged in a deceptive practice and deserve the condemnation.  It's wrong to present and sell something as new, when it isn't.  

May I make a suggestion?  If I were going to post a new process of altering the condition of older books which is unequivocally restoration (which what you've shown definitely is), I would be clear to state that this is restoration and should be considered so.  There aren't any serious experts on restoration of any kind, in any field, that think you can engage in such practices without stating very directly that the item in question has been restored.  To do otherwise, is to operate without integrity and practice deception on unsuspecting collectors who just love the genre and are willing to part with their hard earned money for high grade books.

Unfortunately, it is almost certain that at least a few less scrupulous people have read this thread and want to figure out if they can do the same, get books certified with a blue label and then sell for substantial profits to anyone who doesn't know better.  If your motivations are not financial but rather academic to explore new methods of conservation and restoration, then the prospect of this should concern you most of all.

Edited November 6, 2019 by Randall Dowling
grammar

[427Impaler]

You still don’t get it.  My intent is to prevent destruction of a collectible, and removing the yellowing in a non destructive way is a benefit to the paper.  I won’t get into a long drawn out chemistry disposition here, but ultimately very comic produced will require a conservation process at some time.  Paper even under stringent conditions will deteriorate eventually due to its less than desirable chemistry:  

I don’t know where you jumped on the band wagon that I’m trying to deceive CGC?  Or put this out there as a way to trick someone.   
 

What you consider restoration is your business, all I said is this process falls under the category of conservation as far as CGC denotes it.  
 

I do disagree with your initial post as it was derogatory and incorrect.  You attempted to paint me as someone trying to deceive and said I was “bleaching” books.  Not the case.

[aardvark88]

2 hours ago, Randall Dowling said:

 You stated "I don’t do restoration at all, only de-acidification, mending, and low temperature pressing.", all of which by very definition are restorative processes, and thus restoration.  The fact that CGC doesn't consider it so, doesn't mean it isn't.  It only means they won't consider these processes while grading a book.     This is at the heart of the CPR game which is expanding now into chemical cleaning and beyond.  As someone who just likes comics that have not been tampered with at all, I find an increasingly smaller and smaller pool of books to buy from.

If I were going to post a new process of altering the condition of older books which is unequivocally restoration (which what you've shown definitely is), I would be clear to state that this is restoration and should be considered so. 

Unfortunately, it is almost certain that at least a few less scrupulous people have read this thread and want to figure out if they can do the same, get books certified with a blue label and then sell for substantial profits to anyone who doesn't know better.  If your motivations are not financial but rather academic to explore new methods of conservation and restoration, then the prospect of this should concern you most of all.

I understand your concern and your desire to collect pure Blue label CGC comics. My concern is that my GA comics are about 80 years old now and indeed need some conservation or de-acidification. CGC's own definition of conservation allows for a small amount of color touch or paper piece in-fill, rice (Japan) paper, small amount of re-gloss, married interior wrap(s), solvent cleaning and archival tape. I hope we live to 100, and can still enjoy GA comics that are not brown/black and flaking apart as we attempt to flip the lignin pages.

[Randall Dowling]

7 minutes ago, aardvark88 said:

I understand your concern and your desire to collect pure Blue label CGC comics. My concern is that my GA comics are about 80 years old now and indeed need some conservation or de-acidification. CGC's own definition of conservation allows for a small amount of color touch or paper piece in-fill, rice (Japan) paper, small amount of re-gloss, married interior wrap(s), solvent cleaning and archival tape. I hope we live to 100, and can still enjoy GA comics that are not brown/black and flaking apart as we attempt to flip the lignin pages.

Agree 100%. 

[namisgr]

A couple of questions about the results.  First, what do the whitened pages smell like?  The old deacidification methods leave a noticeable and not entirely pleasant odor behind.  And second, what does the method do to the whiteness and color inks of interior pages?

[comicwiz]

I have my own reservations, partially informed by years of consulting a Master Bookbinder who practices period conservation and restoration. My impression has always been that most paper reconditioning is done with short term goals, and very little to no thought on long term consequences. Beyond this, I also remember him telling me that his treatments are a precise science, and not a marketable product, otherwise he'd be sitting on a beach somewhere. It's good to hear that you have been following a process to track your testing and results. I do share the concerns of previous posters with yet another stealth procedure to make books appear better than it was for the seemingly short-sighted pursuit of making a quick buck. That may not be your intent, but the negative trickle-down effects are inevitable. What happened to appreciating things for what they are, and appreciating the character of their aged appearance?

[Aweandlorder]

On 11/4/2019 at 10:19 AM, Get Marwood & I said:

That's the normal reaction to a good joke PooPiece, yes 

Not everyone will get it though, as our two 'sad facers' prove:

 

Nothing sucks the joy out of a funny post more than a sad face. 

 

 

In their defense, I think it was Yom Kippur that day

[427Impaler]

3 hours ago, comicwiz said:

I have my own reservations, partially informed by years of consulting a Master Bookbinder who practices period conservation and restoration. My impression has always been that most paper reconditioning is done with short term goals, and very little to no thought on long term consequences. Beyond this, I also remember him telling me that his treatments are a precise science, and not a marketable product, otherwise he'd be sitting on a beach somewhere. It's good to hear that you have been following a process to track your testing and results. I do share the concerns of previous posters with yet another stealth procedure to make books appear better than it was for the seemingly short-sighted pursuit of making a quick buck. That may not be your intent, but the negative trickle-down effects are inevitable. What happened to appreciating things for what they are, and appreciating the character of their aged appearance?

Thank you for your post and I share your concerns.  There are other ways of achieving the kind of results shown but they involve bleaches (chlorinates and peroxides) or aqueous exposure to UV rays.  Both have consequences on the long term life of the paper.  Also notable that most conservation labs use these methods despite the risk factors.  
 

This may or may not be a better option, testing will be the deciding factor.  So far we have a neutral affect on PH which a a good sign, strength and long term have to be determined (paper aging can be done without waiting).  
 

I get the concerns expressed here, there have been a lot of attempts by unscrupulous people to make money with questionable practices.  If this works as I hope it would become an optional part of de-acidification.  Pricing would  likely be close to a wash (pun) financially.

De-acidification itself removes some yellowing as the acids leach out, this just helps the process chelate yellowing:  The only problem with leaving books “untreated” is that brittleness is an inevitability due to the amount of lignan and alum fixative.  Done correctly, de-acdification should leave little or no smell and texture difference.  
 

All books that I submit go to CGC with notes outlining everything I have done to them, I currently have a Timely Subby 1 there with full conservation disclosed.
 

 

[D84]

Just now, 427Impaler said:

Thank you for your post and I share your concerns.  There are other ways of achieving the kind of results shown but they involve bleaches (chlorinates and peroxides) or aqueous exposure to UV rays.  Both have consequences on the long term life of the paper.  Also notable that most conservation labs use these methods despite the risk factors.  
 

This may or may not be a better option, testing will be the deciding factor.  So far we have a neutral affect on PH which a a good sign, strength and long term have to be determined (paper aging can be done without waiting).  
 

I get the concerns expressed here, there have been a lot of attempts by unscrupulous people to make money with questionable practices.  If this works as I hope it would become an optional part of de-acidification.  Pricing would  likely be close to a wash (pun) financially.

De-acidification itself removes some yellowing as the acids leach out, this just helps the process chelate yellowing:  The only problem with leaving books “untreated” is that brittleness is an inevitability due to the amount of lignan and alum fixative.  Done correctly, de-acdification should leave little or no smell and texture difference.  
 

All books that I submit go to CGC with notes outlining everything I have done to them, I currently have a Timely Subby 1 there with full conservation disclosed.
 

 

Thanks for taking the time to work on saving these comics.

I personally loved conserved/restored books.  They insure our comics we be enjoyed for as long as possible. 

[Frank.Einstein]

2 hours ago, Aweandlorder said:

In their defense, I think it was Yom Kippur that day

I don't want to even begin to try to understand the reference to Yom Kippur, or why you chose to link a Jewish holiday – but Yom Kippur was over a month ago.

And for the record, the humour in the original post was not lost on me; many of my good buddies could seriously benefit from some teeth whitening.

[427Impaler]

22 hours ago, namisgr said:

A couple of questions about the results.  First, what do the whitened pages smell like?  The old deacidification methods leave a noticeable and not entirely pleasant odor behind.  And second, what does the method do to the whiteness and color inks of interior pages?

Sorry it took a while to get back to you.  I haven’t noticed any smell from this process or from my de-acidification.  I know it was common practice to douse paper with isopropyl alcohol prior to de-acidification at one time, that tends to leave an odour.  It also makes inks prone to bleeding so it’s not part of my practice.  Interior pages also have no signs of ink bleed or fade.  The effects are not as pronounced on interior pages

Edited November 8, 2019 by 427Impaler
Spelling

[427Impaler]

Some initial testing has been completed, results look good.  Test is artificial aging, which is done in a hydrating oven at 85 degrees Celsius at 60% humidity.  Three different samples are being tested over three weeks.  The first sample is a 50’s comic cover with yellowing turning tan at edges.  This is the type of testing done by Library of Congress.  It is not an exact measure of aging, but currently it is the closest for this comparison.  The aging takes about a week, these are the results after 48 hours.  The page was aged but not brittle and withstand ten fold test without separating.  The pics show only the beginning of the aging but after 48 hours the untreated paper was four fold brittle while the treated after four folds barely began to break color.  After a week we will see some final conclusions but so far thumbs up!

1. Treated and untreated before aging 

 

after 48 hours

four fold test untreated

four fold test treated

[427Impaler]

I have had a few people contact me curious about what’s going on here, so I will elaborate a bit on how this works.  It may be a little dry but I’ll keep it short.

Some background:  In about 1850 the method to make paper pulp changed.  The old method was to mechanically “beat” it into a pulp, when someone discovered it was simpler and cheaper to chemically treat wood pulp to break it down to make paper.  The drawback is that the chemical method left something in that the mechanical method did not; LIGNIN

Lignin is what speeds paper breakdown starting with yellowing and ending with the paper becoming brittle and disintegrating.  In 1990ish, new post pulping methods removed most of the lignin and printed matter from then is long lasting.  
 

Paper whitening has been around a long time, generally involving bleaches and chloramines, peroxide products, and other bleaching methods such as UV rays.  Despite these methods having a negative effect on paper lots of conservators still use them in their practice.  I have ZERO interest in any of these less than desirable methods.

So, I thought why not just remove the lignin from existing printed matter?  Sounds reasonable, I thought, and so commences the research.  This has been attempted a few times, only modest success which involves incredibly expensive chemicals, and some that are on a restricted list and inaccessible.  
 

I got lucky, while working with this idea I found a process while working on de-acidification that seems to have worked.  It qualifies as aqueous bath, which is allowed in Conserved grade.  That is great, but the really great thing is if this passes some chemistry testing (upcoming) it will allow our collectibles and other paper objects to last for multiple of their current lifetimes.  Whitening is nice, even better if it doesn’t hurt paper, if it extends e life of paper then that really would be something 

[427Impaler]

Results after another 48 hours of accelerated aging.  At this point the untreated piece is showing signs of distress with some wrinkling and at the mid point is now two fold brittle, the treated piece still holding color well and does not crack even at a four fold test.  This was also done at the mid point and keep in mind this is the outside edge, which generally ages quicker than the Center area of the book.  Back in the heat/humidity torture test, see what another 48 hours gives us, as long as the untreated piece doesn’t catch fire 😁

 

[aardvark88]

I have seen the results of the chemical bath in person. Initially, I thought the cover may have been reglossed, as the cover stock was firmer/stronger than I remembered plus the cover colors were now brighter. Took off my glasses so I could see better. No chemical smell to covers. No telltale signs of a possible light re-gloss could be detected on covers or inside of covers. Bottom line: 427Impaler's conservation process seems to have no downside if u wish your GA or SA comics to last longer than you  plus have a more vibrant appearance in or out of one's mylars.

Edited November 15, 2019 by aardvark88
sp.