Regarding the timelines -- the b&w books almost entirely are reprints of material from the 60s and 70s WITH THE EXCEPTION of X-Men and a few other X-titles. Essential X-Men began reprinting starting from Giant Size X-Men #1 (1975), and thus has run through the 70s and into the 80s. Essential X-Factor and Essential Wolverine also reprint 80s material because of when the comics were originally published.
Marvel would eventually reprint the 1960s X-Men stuff as Essential UNCANNY X-Men. Essential Avengers is know knee-deep in the 1970s just because of how many volumes have been published, but it has not reached the 1980s yet. On the DC side, the only one I know of which reprints 80s stuff in b&w is Showcase Presents Batman And The Outsiders, although some of the collections of The Brave And The Bold might be into the 80s now, I don't know. ~Luke On Jul 20, 3:12 pm, Luke <[email protected]> wrote: > Jason, the black and white collections you saw are called either > Essentials (for Marvel) or Showcase Presents (for DC), and a few other > publishers use the format (such as Dark Horse). They collect usually > about 20-25 issues and are black and white in order to keep the cost > down. A 500+ page "phonebook" style collection will cost about $18, > compared with ~$18 for six issues/~140 pages of color glossy pages in > a regular collection. This latter style is what "waiting for the > trade" is all about -- since six issues is the size the publishers > want to collect, most authors "write for the trade" by making their > stories six issues long, and the fans simply wait and buy the trades > as they are released, getting a single story arc in each book. > > The phonebooks are good for getting a LOT of stuff at once. It's a > trade off with the color but for the price they net you a lot of > comics, especially considering the age of the material. They tend to > be used for bulk reprints of comics from the 60s and 70s (along with > stuff originally in b&w, like Dark Horse's Savage Sword of Conan > collections). If you want to give someone a lot of classic X-Men > stories to read, for instance, that is a very economical way to do it. > > I don't collect comics for the potential value. I collect comics > because I like comics. I have several longboxes filled with just Iron > Man comics because I love Iron Man. I don't want to wait for months > or years to get Iron Man stories, and I don't want all of my comics in > hardcovers or trades. I like the format of the periodical comic book > and have since I was a kid reading Richie Rich comics. > > But yes. There is a schism in the comic collectors world (I don't > know of a more entitled fanbase expect possibly anime otaku) between > those who need their "Wednesday fix" and "trade waiters." And it can > get pretty nasty. One angle used by trade waiters is to say that > those who buy the monthly issues are acting a barricade to the > publishers simply publishing the stories as original graphic novels -- > that is to say, putting out ~140 page collections twice a year instead > of 12 22 page issues. Because they want to read their comics as > trades so they assume that everyone does, and that we are dumb for NOT > wanting our comics that way. > > It goes both ways as well. Monthly buyers routinely blame the trade > waiters for the death of "done in one" or other non-long form stories > in comics. Since the trade waiters buy the 6 issue collections so > readily, writers (as I mentioned earlier) tend to "write for the > trade," often "decompressing" stories out so that they fit the > length. So a story which traditionally could be told in two or three > issues now is stretched out to six. And this is seen as "ruining" the > industry. > > So yeah. I bring a lot of bias on that front when I hear comics > derided. That's my fault and no one elses. But I still dislike the > term "pamphlet." > > ~Luke > > PS: Jason, regarding the b&w collections -- give one a shot. You > might enjoy them. I fell in love with them in ~2002 when I got > Essential Iron Man v.1, which reprinted something like the first 40 > Iron Man stories from Tales of Suspense. > > On Jul 20, 2:52 pm, Cary Preston <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I stopped buying single issues when the quality of the writing and art took > > a nosedive in my favorite titles. It's a pain to store all those issues, > > too- I'd much rather have the collected trades so if I want to reread the > > story arc (and I often do) it's in one volume that can be kept on a > > bookshelf, instead of multiple Mylar bags in a longbox hidden in a closet. > > > On Jul 20, 2011, at 2:45 PM, Jason Service <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > i don't read comics any longer, haven't for probably 15+ years. That > > > being said, it is established how "out of the loop" i am with regard to > > > comics. > > > > So have Trade paperbacks become "the thing" now? And when i say Trade > > > paperback, is that the same thing as the collected group of single issues > > > (or "pamphlets" as some are referring to them now based on the above...) > > > that are not in color? > > > > Last D*C i was looking for a good collected edition of X-Men for Dr Jen > > > and all i saw were these (what i call trade paperbacks) which had maybe > > > 10-15 issues of comics together but were not in color. I HATED that. If > > > they are all just black and white that take a lot of the fun out of a > > > comic...unless you want to give your kid a coloring book. > > > > I have seen collected issues in color also, but those tend to be > > > significantly more expensive, have fewer issues compiled together and the > > > publishers still seem to go out of their way to do "silly shit" to them > > > like making a foil cover or some such junk. > > > > And Luke made mention that he is ridiculed for buying single issues, the > > > implication being that he is propping up a dying relic. Really? Isn't > > > there something to be said for collecting a comic any longer? If you get > > > your comics in Trade Paperback or digital format there isn't the > > > potential bonus of an issue actually increasing in value. > > > On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Luke <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Oh and regarding "blog" -- I had a Livejournal for years, and never > > > called it a "blog." It was my "journal" exclusively. Still is, even > > > though I do not update anymore. > > > > But my two sites on Blogger? I call them "blogs." Mostly because by > > > the time I created them that was the accepted term and I never gave it > > > much thought. Saying "my comics journal" or "my Hawkman journal" > > > sound strange now. > > > > ~Luke > > > > On Jul 20, 2:02 pm, Luke <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I was operating from an incorrect assumption when I responded to Van > > > > initially. Like all humans I bring my own preconceptions and biases > > > > to a conversation. One of the reasons I abandoned CGS was the over- > > > > abundance of "trade waiters" and their utter disdain for those of us > > > > who bought "pamphlets" and were not "evolving" to the current market > > > > by abandoning them entirely and were "propping up" a "dead" market. > > > > > Nevermind the fact that now "spoiler range" extended literally for > > > > months if not YEARS after a story ended because the majority of > > > > posters were "waiting for the trade." > > > > > I use the term "comics" almost exclusively. I only use "singles" in > > > > the context of someone else buying a series in "trade." > > > > > ~Luke > > > > > On Jul 20, 1:43 pm, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > It is weird how a term no one was using, (for 100 years we just > > > > > called them comic books or comic book magazines), will suddenly > > > > > become the "educated" way to discuss something. I also dislike the > > > > > term "pamphlets," but kids who never owned any can view them from a > > > > > distance and see them for the archaic old-media format they are. > > > > > Since single issues is how I bought them for thirty years, I just saw > > > > > them as comics and not as....product with a product's name. I > > > > > thought I was a dude buying comics, but they see it as a "Male in > > > > > Meatspace Transacting for Pamphlets" > > > > > > Another term like this is "blog" People who didn't keep an online > > > > > journal spread that one around, and then it was too late to fix it. > > > > > What a gross and reductive word it is. > > > > > > So, I think Van was just using a word he thought was up to date or > > > > > what all the kids were using. He's obviously an old-school comics > > > > > guy, but is keeping with the times. He's often very very wrong but I > > > > > don't think he was pretentious here. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Luke <[email protected]> > > > > > To: The Unique Geek <[email protected]> > > > > > Sent: Wed, Jul 20, 2011 1:55 am > > > > > Subject: [The Unique Geek] Re: Re DC new #1s giant hardcover coming > > > > > > I regretted posting that message after I did because I posted in anger > > > > > due to something else. Hence why I removed it. So my apologies. > > > > > > My vehement objection is due partly to my bad mood. > > > > > > It is also more attributed to the term being used as a perjorative by > > > > > a lot (like, A LOT) of comics fans online to deride buying individual > > > > > issues. The idea being that a "pamphlet" is disposable and without > > > > > value. Over at ComicGeekSpeak, for example, that's essentially a > > > > > codeword for "I buy in trades and if you don't you're a moron who is > > > > > killing our industry." > > > > > > As a side note, its not an accurate statement, at least not according > > > > > to our wonderful federal government. A "pamphlet" by the definition > > > > > of the Federal Depository Library Program is a monograph or what we > > > > > would call a one-shot. Anything which is published on some regular > > > > > basis is called a "periodical." (I spent nearly 3 years as a document > > > > > cataloger handling federal documents.) > > > > > > I wouldn't take anything I say as being representative of the opinions > > > > > or feelings of anyone else on this group let alone the group in > > > > > general. I don't know how much longer I'll be here anyway. > > > > > > So use whatever term you would like. I like the term "singles." I > > > > > liken it to buying trading cards back in the day as "singles" as > > > > > opposed to "sets." > > > > > > On Jul 20, 8:38 am, Van Allen Plexico <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Topic: > > > > > > Luke <[email protected]> Jul 19 06:03AM -0700 ^ > > > > > > > > ...I much preferred buying > > > > > > > those TPBs to buying the individual pamphlet issues. > > > > > > >>Oh get over yourself. "Pamphlet," ugh. Do you want a latte with > > > > > > >>your > > > > > > > pretension?<< > > > > > > > I'm not sure I get your meaning here, Luke. Disrespectful tone, > > > > > > sure, but > > > > > meaning, not so much. > > > > > > > That's a term we've used for years on the Avengers group, to > > > > > > differentiate > > > > > between trade paperbacks/ hardcover collections of comics and > > > > > individual > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Unique Geek" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en.
