Lamination on the covers of rare books
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 2 of 21, 2
Author

User avatar

Grandstanding Collector
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 6402
Joined: Jan 03, 2005
Last Visit: Sep 25, 2021
Location: UK

Post Posted: Fri May 13, 2011 10:57 am 
 

FWIW, Ed Konstant, one of the guys who ran/owned Little Soldier Games, and the co-author, is or has been a member here. He's posted on Acaeum. The author's/publisher's word that they never laminated would trump any bullsh!t an eBay seller pulls from his asre.

If it is the little soldier book we're talking about here, I only see this being a $10-15 loss if you elected to resell. If it were a laminated Dwarven Glory or Deep Delve, or something of that ilk, maybe I'd be pissed.


This week I've been mostly eating . . . minestrone soup.

 WWW  

User avatar

Long-Winded Collector

Posts: 3155
Joined: Nov 21, 2005
Last Visit: Feb 05, 2016
Location: UK

Post Posted: Fri May 13, 2011 7:47 pm 
 

Crush their woodgrains, drive a Hummer over their shop displays and hear the lamination of their women.... erm, Little Soldiers?

Ouch... Not quite as bad as that, perhaps, IMHO, but would've hoped that might've been spotted/noted by the seller even if the wording used in the auction just about weasels its way around the issue even if they did realise the lamination wasn't original. :? ("in" the book)

Return for refund sounds best since I'm also pretty much 100% certain these were never laminated "as sold".

stratochamp wrote:to me lamination means it is a reading copy only, i.e. poor condition....

Personally, I prefer my reading copies a bit better than "poor condition". :)

mbassoc2003 wrote:All that said, I have seen really professional laminants applied to 80's collectables, and I did sell a UK Basic with a fairly professionally applied laminate to the cover with no decernable drop in value...

Lamination on the GW PHB and MM is about the only way to obtain a really nice looking copy (/one that would look wonderful in a museum behind glass). Pretty much taken for granted on the original GW Basic book, too, and agreed re. value for that one in particular. A different matter on US product, admittedly.

mbassoc2003 wrote:The other question to ask is, are you more agrieved at losing percieved investment value than you are in having paid more than you would have paid had you known?

I once paid maybe $200 over the odds for a PoVQ, shelling out for a ziplock 1st print what I should have paid for a black foldered 1st. I subsequently sold it on at a $200 loss, but I chalked it up to my own inexperience, and in the grand scheme of things Somethimes I've lost a chunk, and sometimes I've made a big profit. Maybe if I didn't take the chances and lost occasionally, I wouldn't have the nerve to take the chances and win when I win big time.

Good attitude, Ian. :)
(Albeit the postal delivery worker will still fold that big-time win through the letter box as karmic revenge if you're feeling too happy about such wins ;)).


"7.3 ORGANIZING THE PARTY: Always have a keg, even if it's BYOB...
7.4 TAKING THE GAME SERIOUSLY: Don't"

  


Verbose Collector

Posts: 1727
Joined: Feb 12, 2005
Last Visit: Sep 22, 2021

Post Posted: Sat May 14, 2011 12:08 am 
 

while we are on the topic of grading, i do not agree with the acaeum grading parameters. while i of course see the need for an industry standard, i personally find the description used for fair, would be better applied to poor. in the good category there is a reference to mustiness: i would never allow a musty smelling item to co-mingle with my lovelies (even though all module sized items go in their own bag). not including magazines, i probably have only 10 items that are worse than VG by the acaeum standard (so yes David, i too like my reading copies better than poor; the point i was attempting to make was that from my perspective a laminated cover is a ruined cover).

  

User avatar

Long-Winded Collector
JG Valuation Board

Posts: 3826
Joined: Jul 12, 2007
Last Visit: Sep 24, 2021

Post Posted: Sat May 14, 2011 12:14 am 
 

stratochamp wrote:while we are on the topic of grading, i do not agree with the acaeum grading parameters. while i of course see the need for an industry standard, i personally find the description used for fair, would be better applied to poor. in the good category there is a reference to mustiness: i would never allow a musty smelling item to co-mingle with my lovelies (even though all module sized items go in their own bag). not including magazines, i probably have only 10 items that are worse than VG by the acaeum standard (so yes David, i too like my reading copies better than poor; the point i was attempting to make was that from my perspective a laminated cover is a ruined cover).


Mustiness/Mold means worthless trash to me. Not even reading copies, and storing something like that can trasnfer mold spores. You don't want to be breathing that stuff. It is a pain in the ass to see something ruined, especially a well loved or valuable item, but sometimes it happens and the place for a book or game like that is the garbage.


"You get more with a kind word and an excruciator than with just a kind word."

  

User avatar

Verbose Collector
JG Valuation Board
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 1614
Joined: Aug 19, 2008
Last Visit: Jul 13, 2021
Location: Chicago, IL

Post Posted: Sat May 14, 2011 8:19 am 
 

stratochamp wrote:while we are on the topic of grading, i do not agree with the acaeum grading parameters. while i of course see the need for an industry standard, i personally find the description used for fair, would be better applied to poor. in the good category there is a reference to mustiness: i would never allow a musty smelling item to co-mingle with my lovelies (even though all module sized items go in their own bag). not including magazines, i probably have only 10 items that are worse than VG by the acaeum standard (so yes David, i too like my reading copies better than poor; the point i was attempting to make was that from my perspective a laminated cover is a ruined cover).


Reading Copies?

You'd have to break them out of the shrink to have them be called... Reading Copies....    :lol:


RPG’s, D&D in particular has had a major influence in my life. It’s bonded me together with life long friends...it’s that bond in life not just as friends, but in our jokes, our mannerisms, and what we find funny. Invincible Overlord

 ICQ  

User avatar

Long-Winded Collector

Posts: 3155
Joined: Nov 21, 2005
Last Visit: Feb 05, 2016
Location: UK

Post Posted: Sat May 14, 2011 9:08 am 
 

Invincible Overlord wrote:You'd have to break them out of the shrink to have them be called... Reading Copies....    :lol:

*lol*

Does Bill not have the tech installed to read books and boxes inside their shrink? Would come in rather useful, that. ;)


stratochamp wrote:while we are on the topic of grading, i do not agree with the acaeum grading parameters. while i of course see the need for an industry standard, i personally find the description used for fair, would be better applied to poor. in the good category there is a reference to mustiness: i would never allow a musty smelling item to co-mingle with my lovelies (even though all module sized items go in their own bag). not including magazines, i probably have only 10 items that are worse than VG by the acaeum standard (so yes David, i too like my reading copies better than poor; the point i was attempting to make was that from my perspective a laminated cover is a ruined cover).

Those laminated GW paperbacks would still look good in a museum context though. :)

Rather more than 10 below VG (to which items gravitate if graded /strictly/ by the Acaeum standards) here! Agreed re. grading parameters and also noted previously that overgrading in conjunction with valuation activities could easily drive down the market.
Personally I still prefer a "list all faults" approach: failing that, scoring and describing against a variety of categories (per old banknote grading schema or suchlike - fabric, faults, inscriptions, aging, etc.) and tallying to obtain an approximate overall grade sits better with me but I don't think anyone's overly bothered so long as the item they receive doesn't have too many (any?) nasty surprises!

JasonZavoda wrote:Mustiness/Mold means worthless trash to me. Not even reading copies, and storing something like that can trasnfer mold spores. You don't want to be breathing that stuff. It is a pain in the ass to see something ruined, especially a well loved or valuable item, but sometimes it happens and the place for a book or game like that is the garbage.

"Mustiness" is an open invitation to be used as a descriptor where "mold" is concerned. Avoid like the plague, agreed.
Persistent strong tobacco smells thankfully ain't quite as common nowadays but that's the sort of issue that would cause a downgrade or re-evaluation, IMO.


"7.3 ORGANIZING THE PARTY: Always have a keg, even if it's BYOB...
7.4 TAKING THE GAME SERIOUSLY: Don't"

  

User avatar

Verbose Collector
JG Valuation Board
Acaeum Donor

Posts: 1614
Joined: Aug 19, 2008
Last Visit: Jul 13, 2021
Location: Chicago, IL

Post Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 11:11 am 
 

faro wrote:
Invincible Overlord wrote:
You'd have to break them out of the shrink to have them be called... Reading Copies....    Laughing

*lol*

Does Bill not have the tech installed to read books and boxes inside their shrink? Would come in rather useful, that. Wink


The Superior Intellect probably absorbs the books through osmosis (I was watching Star Trek 2 Friday night... still awesome...).


RPG’s, D&D in particular has had a major influence in my life. It’s bonded me together with life long friends...it’s that bond in life not just as friends, but in our jokes, our mannerisms, and what we find funny. Invincible Overlord

 ICQ  
Previous
Post new topic Reply to topic Page 2 of 21, 2