Well that's no fun

[Marionette]

There I was, all set to spend several years building a collection of Tammy, hunting up elusive issues here and there, and what happens? Someone offers me a complete set when I've hardly started. Where's the fun in that?

Not that I'm going to be able to take them up on it. There's no way I could afford the lot in one go, and they don't want to split them.

Le sigh.

[McSCOTTYS GHOST]

Strange as it seems I know exactly what you mean I enjoy picking up titles bit by bit it's fun checking old 2nd hand shops, Amazon, fairs etc in search of that elusive issue - although it once took me over 6 years to pick up a run of 20 1970's House of Mystery (DC comics) 180 -199 (I already had issue 200 at the time I decided to get these books mostly as they have great Neal Adams covers) at a reasonable price. Good luck with your hunt.

[matrix]

Come on Marionette, don't be a spoilsport, max the card out, then start your Tammy site so we can all see them!!

Compal comics have some Tammy 1977 for sale along with Misty in the same lot, including the summer special for that year, which on its own can go for between 30 to 50 pounds depending on condition.

http://www.compalcomics.com/catalogue/lot141.htm

[philcom55]

I prefer the piecemeal approach to comic collecting as well (as does my credit card!). Also the thought of starting to scan a complete collection sounds like a positively Sisyphean labour!

Speaking of scanning Tammy I've just had a look at my own, relatively minimal, collection and I couldn't help noticing that a lot of the pages suffer from serious 'bleed through' problems (something that seemed to bedevil a number of IPC titles during the 1970s). Assuming this was a generic fault in all the copies of those issues that were printed it raises the question of whether it's feasible to attempt some kind of digital restoration? I suspect that it could be done, but only with a considerable amount of extra effort.

- Phil Rushton

[ISPYSHHHGUY]

Yes, Phil I have some 1972 WHIZZER and CHIPS issues, and although this comic has dated very well in terms of quality input, the issues I have often suffer from the 'bleed-through' defect, which spoils a lot of the pleasure---still readable, but the results remind me of the time I dropped a comic in the bath as a kid!


I bought lots of IPC comics first time around, and I can't remember seeing this bleed-through at the time: I'm pretty sure it's a natural ageing defect that gets progressively worse, but again some copies are better than others, maybe some folks on here have good examples of early WHIZZER and CHIPS comics . If not, it bodes badly for the future I'm afraid.


Conversely earlier issues of COR!! I have are in much better shape. I'm not sure if this is through the conditions the comics were kept in, or if they derived from a seperate printing plant [even the quality of the paper seems quite different between the two comics].


I honestly thought that most IPC comics would have fared better for the future than DCT material of the same vintage,-----the BEANO and DANDY were put out in terrible-quality newsprint at one time, let's face it------ but it's not always the case.



Regarding digitally restoring ageing comics: yes it can certainly be done, [I've done test examples using easily-obtainable free digital manipulation programs] by anyone with a steady hand and keen eye, but the sooner the better obviously. These comics can still be made to look 'new' again, [at least a scanned-in variation can, if the actual original comic will naturally never be in great shape again] and you don't have to fork out a fortune to employ professionals in order to make a dramatic difference.

Some organizations will charge you plenty for this privelige, though, at least in the USA, where this idea is taken very seriously.



Perhaps scanning the worst examples in now can halt the ageing process if anyone is prepared to 'fix' these comics later. It's very time-consuming though, and it would take an ardent enthusiast [they're undoubtedly out there, including some of us lot!] to make this sort of commitment.


The question is:



'does anyone out there love WONDER WORM enough to actually commit considerable free time in order to sharpen up decaying comic printing?'



I'm not convinced, but at least this dilemma is out in the open....


At this point in time though, these IPC comics are not beyond repair---but I can't speak for 2062 [arbitary timedate] some of these works may be unreadable by then.

[ISPYSHHHGUY]

If someone can scan in a hi-res example [600 dpi] of an IPC comics- frame of this bleed-through impurity, I'll try a wee test bit-repair and put it on here out of curiosity.

[Lew Stringer]

If someone can scan in a hi-res example [600 dpi] of an IPC comics- frame of this bleed-through impurity, I'll try a wee test bit-repair and put it on here out of curiosity.

If, as was said on the thread about CD-ROMS, the purpose of scanning comics is to preserve them for future generations then there's no need to clean up any impurities. Surely future enthusiasts will want to see the comics as they were, paper impurities and all?

The only reason comics are digitally restored from 600dpi scans is for printing purposes, which obviously no Comics UK member would advocate. A straightforward scan is good enough to read on screen for your private files. If future generations choose to improve the scans I'm sure their future technology will be able to sort it out with methods that'll make Photoshop restoration look like cavemen painting with sticks.

[NP]

600 dpi is way more than a regular sacn requires. For publishing, i've never used more than 300 dpi and for private use the default 200 dpi is easily adequate. I've only ever used 600 or 1200 dpi for scanning in old photos that require a lot of restoration because of rips, tears, stains, etc, not relatively good copies of low-resolution printed material.
If a comic requires that much restoration i say bin it and get a better copy.

Beano and Dandy comics of 1960s vintage still look pretty good while 70s and 80s Knockout, Whizzer and Chips etc do suffer from print bleed-through- but as I remember Knockout in particular looked that way after only a few months, certainly the worst colour printing/cheap paper interface I can think of.

[wilsia]

Ive been collecting comics since the 1970s and its amazing how some have stood the test of time better than others.

I agree about the Whizzer and chips, my early ones from the 70s look as if they have taken the "measles". Brown spots everywhere. The Tigers and Roy of the Rovers are better along with Krazy and I put that down to the fact that thay used better quality paper. I also found Beanos and Dandys fine I have loads from the 70s and again no nasty spots.

I recently sold 2000ad on ebay and thought it had been in a plastic bag for 35 years it had discoloured really badly not only on the front but in most of the inside pages.

The IPC annuals of course brown very quickly whilst the DC Thompson annuals using better paper are in great condition. My pride of joy is a Wham 1969 annual whos pages are still as white as the day it was published.

[ISPYSHHHGUY]

I'm happy with removing blemishes and grain from old I SPY issues, Lew----ideally I would love DCT to sanction an official release book sourced directly from the original inkings.

This ain't likely gonna happen, so if I don't do it nobody else likely will. Yes in the future people will likely be able to restore old comics beautifully at the vocal-command of a futuristic computer, but as sadly I'm a prisoner of the time we have now, and I'm not going to see this development......

I'm not altering original artwork or even the comics, so I'm not creating works of creative vandalism. I know for a fact the versions I am doing are clearer and brighter, which is the best technology can offer at the moment. Disney often upgrade the clarity of their old cartoons [albeit for profit as well as for restoration purposes, and that's good enough for me].

Working at 600 dpi feels like working in 'Vistavision' which appeals to me more: I don't have to watch a film at the cinema, but I enjoy it more than seeing a film on youtube [equivalent of 150 dpi].

I'm sorry to hear that the general consensus is that early WHIZZER and CHIPS seem to suffer quite badly with 'bleed' problems, I kinda hoped this was just the copies I had. I just hope that someone somewhere has bleed-free issues. There's a limit to the extent that technology can repair damaged stuff , a blurred mass will be a real challenge even to the restoration boys of 2062.


NP: I've tried digital manipulation at 150 dpi, and it was a pain....600 is easier for me personally [though 300 dpi would probably do the job]. Just my own preference, I often shrink artwork down etc for composites and stuff. Stuff can easily be scaled down in size later.


wilsia---totally agree about Odhams [or maybe Fleetway/IPC by 1969?] annuals staying pristine-white inside.

[philcom55]

Here's a panel from a 1974 issue of Tammy where the cover artwork has bled through quite catastrophically (to be fair it was rarely this bad!).



Quite apart from the question of resolution, of course, one also has to decide whether to scan in colour, greyscale or b&w. For this example I've used colour mode at 600dpi.

- Phil R.

[dandy mad]

I've been getting most of my collection bit by bit over the past 18 or so years and finally got some items I've been after for 10+ years and in quite quick succession as they say patience is a virtue....

[ISPYSHHHGUY]

Thanks for this scan, Phil: yes, it's a pretty brutal example!


But it illustrates perfectly the state of affairs that is blighting some IPC comics [from not that long ago in the grand scheme of things] .

It's a real problem this, and I sympathize with IPC fans whose collections are likely prone to this sort of unwanted distortion.


I prefer scans at 600 dpi as you can zoom right in and do a pixel-by-pixel adjustment if neccessary.


One of the most difficult images to 'get right' is a your attractive girl's face, but if I can sort this one out, then surely any problem could be fixed in theory.


I'll have a bash at trying to fix the girl's face, to see if restoration is worthwhile or not.


I'll post any results back on this thread.


It's still connected to your theme, Marrionette!

[stevezodiac]

I have a long run of Whizzer & Chips from early 1970 but haven't looked at them in decades - I'm anxious to dig them out and have a look. My copies of IPC Smash from the same era are more easily accessible so I'll look at them first.

[David McDonald]

I used 300dpi for Both My Doomlord and 13th Floor collection, no photoshop involved, used a simple program and the results were great.
I think scanning of comics it great and especially for complete runs, Titan had problems getting hold of complete runs of the Steel Claw and The Spider, I helped out with My collection as did a few others.
It would be interesting to have a database using all the scanners that are out there, mayby using this site.
I am in no way advocating the selling of the CDs on Ebay,I have let Egmont know of these in the past, but nothing was done.
The one positive of the CDs for sale, like torrents of movies on the net has forced movies to be made availabe on sites like netflicks.
Mayby it will do the same of back catalogue of comics. Imagine downloading the complete run of the Steel Claw, scanned, restored, with all the oddball annuals and specials. Legally and say for a price like(plucked out of the air!) £10. What I like about this idea is; I dont really read digital comics, I have tried 2000ad and I prefer the feel of paper, This file I have downloaded could be taked to a local printer and have my Steel claw printed professionally and put on my shelf.


Id buy them Tammys by the way, it has happened to me before, left a collection behind and regretted it.