I agree the comic covers are a bit closer to posters than the newsprint but I bring up the newsprint because it is much more susceptible to age being cheap and acidic. As far as the glossy comics yellowing, all you have to do is take a yellowing comic cover, place it face down (so the white interior which has the most yellowing) is floating in a tray of waterr, and remove it 30 or so minutes later. The yellowing will be gone and it will be white again. This seems to be due to the claendaring and the clays that go into the gloss cover, not the paper itself. However, another aspect of comic book yellowing is called an ink transfer or oil transfer stain. This is caused by oils in the inks on the interior pages being transferred to the cover. Not really aging but just a chemical reaction to the interior inks. Again easily reversible.
And definitely, browning due to improper storage certainly happens to comics as with any paper.
Yes, folks were collecting comics in the 50's but it really did start around '62 with serious collecting around '66.
My main point about experiencing paper from 60or more years ago was simply what did it really look like. Was it blinding white or was it duller? I AM looking at a Jungle Captive 1-sheet from about 60 years ago and I swear the white borders are the same color as my bone white walls. Actually many of my lobbiues from Mister Wong, Mister Moto, realart 50's releases and even some Monogram and PRC pieces are literally just as white as those walls.
Truth be told, this whol;e thread has made me take a fresh look at some of my pieces and I have to say - the vast majority of them are pretty bone white! And I know they are original. :-)
Anyway - it is late and way past bedtime. Be well!
J R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
J R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Michael,I knew plenty of guys... kids really... who wrapped their comics in saran wrap and kept them in trunks and suitcases in the early 1950's -- I was one myself. I believe comic-collecting -- regarding them as collectibles to be carefully handled and pains taken to preserve condition -- was going on longer than you think. Besides, it was simply easier to put comics away in a box or drawer or whatever where they would have little exposure to sun, light and air pollution. Whereas posters, which -- I think -- did not start being regarded as "collectibles" until, what, the mid-seventies at the earliest? were always harder to store in a protected way because of their size and the way they were handed "at the source" (i.e., passing through the mails and motion picture theaters instead of comic book stands).You're right that there are parallels when talking about them because they are both paper and both pop culture art, but there are a lot of divergences as well, particulary when it comes to early awareness of condition as an issue and the ease preservation of condition.One note, it's true that the interior pages of comics are of cheap news print type paper... but the covers are actually of a similar quality of paper and ink as one sheet posters of the time. In fact, glossy covers on comics were common long before the first glossy-paper movie posters started showing up. So it's more appropriate to compare the condition of comic books covers of a given vintage to movie posters of the same time period (at least where one sheets are concerned).I have seen lots of instances of comics where the interior pages were in very fine shape, but the paper of the cover (usually the interior side of the front and back covers) suffered significant yellowing -- if not outright browning -- with age. But, like I say, at some point the divergence becomes too much and the comparisons don't work well.While I never handled 60 year old paper when it was brand new, I handled plenty of it when it was only 15 or 20 years old -- not sure what that has to do with anything. I still have some of that paper from when I was a kid. It looks, feels and smells a lot older now, even though I cared for it. You can't stop the aging process, you can only retard it.-- JR----- Original Message -----From: Michael SpampinatoSent: Saturday, January 08, 2005 2:28Subject: Re: [MOPO] A good fake is always worth making"These were not comic books, which had a real base of more serious "collectors" almost from the beginning."Comic book collecting actually began in any seriousness (and in the minority) in 1962 and 1966 is probably the real start of comic book collecting.As far as the quality of 60 plus year old paper goes - really- how many of us have even seen or handled 60 year old or better paper and actually seen it in its original state?JR - I am not trying to attack you - I really am not. But generalizations taken as fact can lead to innacuracies. Comic books really did not start being seriosuly collected until the 60's.Have you ever held and examine a piece of 60 year old paper when it was first manufactured? As you say, the paper is not manufactured anymore (honestly not sure about that - the poster makers may have just shifted to different paper as times progressed).What I am trying to say is that even a casual remark can be seen as gospel by some. And that can lead to problems.:-)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Guys, guys (and gals)...I did not mean to say there are not really fine examples of old posters and lobby cards out there. Obviously there are. The point I was making is that when you hold one of these genuine old paper items, even if it is unblemished and unyellowed condition, it will still look, smell and feel "old". The paper will be recognizable as a kind of paper that is not made anymore and hasn't been for 20 or 30 years. The ink will be settled into the fibers of the paper and will not look and smell "fresh". The paper will have a kind "flex" to it rather than a crisp stiffness, as the fibers have relaxed somewhat over the 50 or 60 years (even if stacked and stored in vaults, yes). The items will not feel or smell "news stand fresh", no matter how perfect they may appear to the eye at a distance. A recently printed item will look, feel and smell different, and will be on different paper with razor sharp edges that have not had 60 years to soften a little to the touch. Eve! ! n when stacked on top of each other the edges are exposed to the air.As for those extremely really old yet super-fine posters, let's not pretend that they are anything but ultra rare. These were not comic books, which had a real base of more serious "collectors" almost from the beginning. This was advertising paper, folded by machine, slapped into unpadded envelopes and sent through the U.S. mail to the theaters who then handled them roughly, stuck them up on walls and display cases. Often, these posters were sent back to the NSS and sent out again and again as a film made the rounds. Those that weren't were thrown in a back office somewhere, or taken home by a film fan and tacked to their walls. It was only much later that movie posters became a collectible. Sure, they may have been a fun hobby for a few people when they were new, but they were still just a hobby -- and not treated as "collectibles" and handled as such. Therefore, 99% of the time you are going to have authentic old posters that are not! ! "off the press perfect". In the cases of those famous and legendary warehouse finds, or the occasional happy chance of good storage where they were forgotten and untouched for decades, yeah, you'll find some great stuff, but little if any of it will be in truly off-the-press perfect condition and untouched at least slightly by time. Talk like that is the stuff of which collector's dreams are made of, but in reality an unbacked and unrestored "mint condition" poster that is 50 or 60 years old may be superb and may be honestly called "mint" by the very loose standards of this hobby/industry -- but it will still have some patina of age.I always prefer the use of terms like fine, very fine and extremely fine to the term "mint" when it comes to movie paper. But that's just me.The point was, as I mentioned before, that with a little practice and experience you can tell genuine old paper from a reproduction when you hold it in your hand and compare it to authentic paper of the same vintage.-- JR----- Original Message -----From: Michael SpampinatoSent: Saturday, January 08, 2005 0:30Subject: Re: [MOPO] A good fake is always worth makingTo quote "It can get humid in the summer, as long as its dry in the winter."I have to argue this point. Fluctuations of tempertaure and humidity will adversely affect paper (I DID specify that in previous post).Put a piece of any paper in the condition that the heat and humidity will fluctuate like that for a few dedades and you will probably have a piece of paper no longer mint or nm.
Abe Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:You don't need a state of the art stoage facility to keep lobby cards and
posters in perfect condition. Take a few MINT lobbies right off the press...
sandwich them in between a couple thousand other lobby cards. Throw them in
a filing cabinet. Let them sit in a reasonable environment for 30, 40, 60,
80, 100 years. When you decide to pull them; they will be in virtually in
the same condition, so long as you keep your paper out of the light, and you
keep Fido from pissing on it. It can get humid in the summer, as long as its
dry in the winter. It's not rocket science. And yes, paper from the 20s and
30s shows up that is definately real and so clean you could throw it on a
slab and call it a 10. This is not the norm. But it happens from time to
time. I'm sure there is a good deal of cherry stuff out there that people
are sitting on, knowningly, ! ! ! orVisit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. unknowingly.
-abe
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com
___________________________________________________________________
How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List
Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L
The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.298 / Virus Database: 265.6.7 - Release Date: 12/30/04
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.298 / Virus Database: 265.6.7 - Release Date: 12/30/04Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content. Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
