Centerfold wear and tear opinions? Normal or concerning? 0

[CMW_Collection]

5 hours ago, James J Johnson said:

The staples have definitely been removed and replaced. Either the same, original staples or a different pair. Whoever opened them up at the centerfold butchered the surrounding paper doing so. Now, main question is if there's any reinforcement on the inside of the cover at the staples. That is, the underside of where the staples enter the outside of the cover. Do you see any added material or glue bolstering the staples' entry holes? Open the cover, separating it from the splash page only open enough to see where the staple tines meet the paper, and look for foreign material or glue. What do you see? 

I’ll get back to you on this, thanks.

[James J Johnson]

8 hours ago, CMW_Collection said:

I’ll get back to you on this, thanks.

Because they damaged the paper at the centerfold while removing them, and the seating position of them externally, it's hard for me to tell for sure if these are the original staples, or the correct period staples for this book. One of the staples was closed awkwardly, you can see one of the tines angling to the side rather than almost back upon itself with the ends of the staple touching each other. At this point, the staple appears to be too thin to be proper for that production year, so if I had to venture a guess, it would be that the staples are not original and not the "proper" replacement for this book. Let us know about the inside of the spine when you can. 

[CMW_Collection]

55 minutes ago, James J Johnson said:

Because they damaged the paper at the centerfold while removing them, and the seating position of them externally, it's hard for me to tell for sure if these are the original staples, or the correct period staples for this book. One of the staples was closed awkwardly, you can see one of the tines angling to the side rather than almost back upon itself with the ends of the staple touching each other. At this point, the staple appears to be too thin to be proper for that production year, so if I had to venture a guess, it would be that the staples are not original and not the "proper" replacement for this book. Let us know about the inside of the spine when you can. 

Again, I really appreciate you taking a look and giving me your insight.  I will post some better photos once I receive it, should be within a week or 2.  I will be sure to take a look at the inside cover as well to check for glue etc.  I agree with you, one of the staples is not closed completely. Once I post more photos I would really appreciate opinions on whether the staples were replaced, or look correct for the age of the book.  

[James J Johnson]

41 minutes ago, CMW_Collection said:

Again, I really appreciate you taking a look and giving me your insight.  I will post some better photos once I receive it, should be within a week or 2.  I will be sure to take a look at the inside cover as well to check for glue etc.  I agree with you, one of the staples is not closed completely. Once I post more photos I would really appreciate opinions on whether the staples were replaced, or look correct for the age of the book.  

Also, remember not to separate the front cover too severely from the splash page when you peer inside. Look there, and then turn the book over and do the same looking from the back cover side. make sure the book is cradled in a slight arc in your palm; don't open it flat and unsupported, like on a table or other flat surface. The holes the top staple enter through on the front cover look very enlarged, the result of careless re-assembly. So reinforced or not, the cover is weak and care must be exercised to separate it as little as possible while examining the underside of that area. I state this because reinforced or not, staple issues aside, the book does have significant value ad collectability warranting condition-conscious handling care. 

Edited November 6, 2020 by James J Johnson

[CMW_Collection]

26 minutes ago, James J Johnson said:

Also, remember not to separate the front cover too severely from the splash page when you peer inside. Look there, and then turn the book over and do the same looking from the back cover side. make sure the book is cradled in a slight arc in your palm; don't open it flat and unsupported, like on a table or other flat surface. The holes the top staple enter through on the front cover look very enlarged, the result of careless re-assembly. So reinforced or not, the cover is weak and care must be exercised to separate it as little as possible while examining the underside of that area. I state this because reinforced or not, staple issues aside, the book does have significant value ad collectability warranting condition-conscious handling care. 

Roger that, excellent suggestion.  I also plan to compare staple size to some of my other silver age books from similar years.  Also, I agree regardless of staples it’s a very nice book, I am looking forward to investigating its potential manipulation over the years.

Edited November 6, 2020 by CMW_Collection

[EC Star&Bar]

I've seen a couple of good youtube videos on staple replacement, there is good info out there.  Since it's pretty certain (if not 100%) that the original staples were opened up and the paper suffered damage, perhaps the best option will be to open and remove the existing ones, very carefully, in order to smooth out the paper.  This then affords the opportunity to change to proper replacements if needed.  If doing that type of work yourself, also look into using a steel ball bearing for rolling the paper back to "flatness." 

There are definite positives here, as so often rust migration is an issue and I didn't see that here.

One thing I learned in recent years is how the restorer can heat a staple to very high temps in order to get just the exact bending needed.  Not many of us own a kiln, however...!

 

Edited November 10, 2020 by EC Star&Bar

[James J Johnson]

14 hours ago, EC Star&Bar said:

One thing I learned in recent years is how the restorer can heat a staple to very high temps in order to get just the exact bending needed.  Not many of us own a kiln, however...

If you own one of these, you can shape a staple however you wish, heat unnecessary. 

 

[James J Johnson]

2 hours ago, James J Johnson said:

If you own one of these, you can shape a staple however you wish, heat unnecessary. 

 

Just to follow up, if you own 2 of these, you can open a staple at the centerfold into a perfect bracket shape, like this:   [    , or bend at any angle necessary to remove the staple from the entire book without the surrounding paper having to incur damage. 

[CMW_Collection]

Thanks for all the responses again, I received the book today and wow it’s a beaut.  It was really fun flipping through these pages, I have wanted this one for awhile.  The staples definitely look “not-tight” as suspected, and the centerfold is barely attached.  All the paper throughout looks consistent and there are plenty of bleed through a to confirm.  I guess best case scenario somebody disassembled and reassembled using original staples(?). Would really appreciate opinions on if these staples look right for the year (1964, Jul).  I’ll attach a bunch of photos below.  Oh yea, and I checked the staples on the inside cover and did not recognize any patchwork or glue.  

[CMW_Collection]

Staples on Pages 12, 13-14 (centerfold), and 15.

[CMW_Collection]

Inside cover photos.

[CMW_Collection]

I think I cracked it, not the staples but why the book was disassembled in the first place.  Looks like the pinup spread was replaced.  I’ll attach some photos but the spine crease looks off, and it appears there are staple holes not being used!!!

[James J Johnson]

43 minutes ago, CMW_Collection said:

I think I cracked it, not the staples but why the book was disassembled in the first place.  Looks like the pinup spread was replaced.  I’ll attach some photos but the spine crease looks off, and it appears there are staple holes not being used!!!

Looks like Robert Duran did the work (manos de piedra = hands of stone). 

[CMW_Collection]

18 minutes ago, James J Johnson said:

Looks like Robert Duran did the work (manos de piedra = hands of stone). 

Had to google it, very true!  😂