|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Feb 15, 2023 14:43:12 GMT -8
How can you definitively know this?  I'm stating that it does. I have it (I'm being serious, not facetious). I will show it. Once I show it will you admit you were wrong? Once I show it will you admit you were wrong? Zod will go you one better.
In the incredibly unlikely event you present proof of how every comic book publisher between 1933 and 1973 printed each of its comic book titles from year to year, Zod will donate $100 dollars to St. Jude as well as apologize.
Will you make the same donation/apology when this proof is not forthcoming?
Please take until Sunday February 19th at 6pm EST to present this proof you claim to possess.
Zod thanks you.
You can do what you want. I give to charity and volunteer regularly.  ------------------------------------------------ The answer is in this post: boards.cgccomics.com/topic/24774-qa-comic-production-flaws/?do=findComment&comment=457493No vintage comic is cut truly "square". From the GA to the BA (and quite possibly most of the CA / MA but I can't speak with certainty yet) ALL COMICS were FOLDED, STAPLED, TRIMMED ON THE FRONT FACE (right side) AND THEN THE TOP AND BOTTOM EDGES. Here is the proof. Remember your grade 8 math classes and triangles and geometry?  The proof is in the angles that make up the comic book. Using your hypothetical method the top and bottom edges of the comic (all wraps) would be cut with the book laying open at the centerfold and then folded but if they did that, the front and rear halves of the book would rarely line up.  They also wouldn't have the "cut" markings I showed in those photographs above GOING ACROSS ALL WRAPS. They would only go across half the wraps. The reason they went with cutting all magazines AFTER FOLDING AND STAPLING was to ensure the front and rear halves of the book lined up. If they cut the comic open and folded it there would be millions of comics where the back and front halves didn't line up, making the magazines look like they were made up like two halves of a card deck. But there's an even more exact proof than this owing back to our grade 8 math. Can you guess what it is? |
|
|
|
Post by kav on Feb 15, 2023 15:17:46 GMT -8
axe elf always does the same thing when confronted with irrefutable proof as in the 2 dice thread. This should be interesting.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2023 16:09:10 GMT -8
Dice would have had to work in numerous printing facilities simultaneously to possess the information we seek, and in addition, would need to be 100+ years old at this point. While interesting and much appreciated, his point of view is not remotely definitive in terms of comic book printing from 1933 to 1973. Not true. The printing process was standardized for a VERY long time. You don't build a wheel and then use a square at times just for the heck of it. If the wheel works you continue using it. But this entire disagreement stems from you initially stating that comics weren't trimmed on all sides AFTER being folded and stapled IIRC and I'm going to show you why you're wrong. Not true. Zod speaks true.The printing process was standardized for a VERY long time. Evidence of this?
You don't build a wheel and then use a square at times just for the heck of it. Irrelevant nonsense.
Practices varied, as Zod has said.If the wheel works you continue using it. See above.But this entire disagreement stems from you initially stating that comics weren't trimmed on all sides AFTER being folded and stapled IIRC Please cite Zod having posted this.
TIA.
and I'm going to show you why you're wrong. You've failed to:
1) Prove your initial claim about Marvel cover overhang
2) Present evidence of comic book printing practices at all facilities from 1933 to 1973
3) Refrain from descending into irrelevant/raving personal attacks
4) Properly recall Zod's comments (as in your bizarre claim about trimming as cited above)
Thus Zod eagerly awaits your next failures. 
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2023 16:15:57 GMT -8
Once I show it will you admit you were wrong? Zod will go you one better.
In the incredibly unlikely event you present proof of how every comic book publisher between 1933 and 1973 printed each of its comic book titles from year to year, Zod will donate $100 dollars to St. Jude as well as apologize.
Will you make the same donation/apology when this proof is not forthcoming?
Please take until Sunday February 19th at 6pm EST to present this proof you claim to possess.
Zod thanks you.
You can do what you want. I give to charity and volunteer regularly. ------------------------------------------------ The answer is in this post: boards.cgccomics.com/topic/24774-qa-comic-production-flaws/?do=findComment&comment=457493No vintage comic is cut truly "square". From the GA to the BA (and quite possibly most of the CA / MA but I can't speak with certainty yet) ALL COMICS were FOLDED, STAPLED, TRIMMED ON THE FRONT FACE (right side) AND THEN THE TOP AND BOTTOM EDGES. Here is the proof. Remember your grade 8 math classes and triangles and geometry? The proof is in the angles that make up the comic book. Using your hypothetical method the top and bottom edges of the comic (all wraps) would be cut with the book laying open at the centerfold and then folded but if they did that, the front and rear halves of the book would rarely line up. They also wouldn't have the "cut" markings I showed in those photographs above GOING ACROSS ALL WRAPS. They would only go across half the wraps. The reason they went with cutting all magazines AFTER FOLDING AND STAPLING was to ensure the front and rear halves of the book lined up. If they cut the comic open and folded it there would be millions of comics where the back and front halves didn't line up, making the magazines look like they were made up like two halves of a card deck. But there's an even more exact proof than this owing back to our grade 8 math. Can you guess what it is? You've descended into raving, incomprehensible deflection, and of course will not put your money where your mouth is to help children in need, just as when previously afforded this opportunity. You've failed to: 1) Prove your initial claim about Marvel cover overhang 2) Present evidence of comic book printing practices at all facilities from 1933 to 1973 3) Refrain from descending into irrelevant/raving personal attacks & bizarre deflections 4) Properly recall Zod's comments (as in your false claim about trimming as cited in my prior post) |
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Feb 15, 2023 16:24:19 GMT -8
Once I show it will you admit you were wrong? Zod will go you one better.
In the incredibly unlikely event you present proof of how every comic book publisher between 1933 and 1973 printed each of its comic book titles from year to year, Zod will donate $100 dollars to St. Jude as well as apologize.
Will you make the same donation/apology when this proof is not forthcoming?
Please take until Sunday February 19th at 6pm EST to present this proof you claim to possess.
Zod thanks you.
You can do what you want. I give to charity and volunteer regularly. ------------------------------------------------ The answer is in this post: boards.cgccomics.com/topic/24774-qa-comic-production-flaws/?do=findComment&comment=457493No vintage comic is cut truly "square". From the GA to the BA (and quite possibly most of the CA / MA but I can't speak with certainty yet) ALL COMICS were FOLDED, STAPLED, TRIMMED ON THE FRONT FACE (right side) AND THEN THE TOP AND BOTTOM EDGES. Here is the proof. Remember your grade 8 math classes and triangles and geometry? The proof is in the angles that make up the comic book. Using your hypothetical method the top and bottom edges of the comic (all wraps) would be cut with the book laying open at the centerfold and then folded but if they did that, the front and rear halves of the book would rarely line up. They also wouldn't have the "cut" markings I showed in those photographs above GOING ACROSS ALL WRAPS. They would only go across half the wraps. The reason they went with cutting all magazines AFTER FOLDING AND STAPLING was to ensure the front and rear halves of the book lined up. If they cut the comic open and folded it there would be millions of comics where the back and front halves didn't line up, making the magazines look like they were made up like two halves of a card deck. But there's an even more exact proof than this owing back to our grade 8 math. Can you guess what it is? Here is the final proof, @zodislove that shows that comics were all printed the same way, meaning FOLDED, stapled, THEN TRIMMED AFTER THEY WERE FOLDED. If take a comic book and open it up so that the centerfold is exposed and staple prongs pointed to the sky and you press the comic flat, you will notice that the line from top left corner to top right corner of the book DO NOT form a straight line. The book does a "V" across the edge of the top of the wraps. Same with the bottom edge. This grade 8 geometry lesson definitively proves that comics were NOT trimmed BEFORE they were folded. It DOES prove they were trimmed AFTER they were folded. Additional clues include the bindery tears which often happen at the corners of the spine cover. Because the cover is cut AFTER it's folded. These would NOT happen if the book was cut while open. You would not get bindery tears at the corners of the spine. These DO happen if the book is cut after it's folded because all the paper bunches at the top and bottom edges of the spine AFTER it's folded and met with the shearing action of the cutting blade. You will find that nearly every single mass produced comic and magazine follows these rules with little to no exceptions. Up to you on whether you will donate to charity or not. ------------------------------------------------------------------- As an FYI, I learned all of this from DiceX's posts on the topic...I just couldn't be bothered reading the whole thread again to find it. Case closed.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2023 16:34:36 GMT -8
You can do what you want. I give to charity and volunteer regularly. ------------------------------------------------ The answer is in this post: boards.cgccomics.com/topic/24774-qa-comic-production-flaws/?do=findComment&comment=457493No vintage comic is cut truly "square". From the GA to the BA (and quite possibly most of the CA / MA but I can't speak with certainty yet) ALL COMICS were FOLDED, STAPLED, TRIMMED ON THE FRONT FACE (right side) AND THEN THE TOP AND BOTTOM EDGES. Here is the proof. Remember your grade 8 math classes and triangles and geometry? The proof is in the angles that make up the comic book. Using your hypothetical method the top and bottom edges of the comic (all wraps) would be cut with the book laying open at the centerfold and then folded but if they did that, the front and rear halves of the book would rarely line up. They also wouldn't have the "cut" markings I showed in those photographs above GOING ACROSS ALL WRAPS. They would only go across half the wraps. The reason they went with cutting all magazines AFTER FOLDING AND STAPLING was to ensure the front and rear halves of the book lined up. If they cut the comic open and folded it there would be millions of comics where the back and front halves didn't line up, making the magazines look like they were made up like two halves of a card deck. But there's an even more exact proof than this owing back to our grade 8 math. Can you guess what it is? Here is the final proof, @zodislove that shows that comics were all printed the same way, meaning FOLDED, stapled, THEN TRIMMED AFTER THEY WERE FOLDED. If take a comic book and open it up so that the centerfold is exposed and staple prongs pointed to the sky and you press the comic flat, you will notice that the line from top left corner to top right corner of the book DO NOT form a straight line. The book does a "V" across the edge of the top of the wraps. Same with the bottom edge. This grade 8 geometry lesson definitively proves that comics were NOT trimmed BEFORE they were folded. It DOES prove they were trimmed AFTER they were folded. Additional clues include the bindery tears which often happen at the corners of the spine cover. Because the cover is cut AFTER it's folded. These would NOT happen if the book was cut while open. You would not get bindery tears at the corners of the spine. These DO happen if the book is cut after it's folded because all the paper bunches at the top and bottom edges of the spine AFTER it's folded and met with the shearing action of the cutting blade. You will find that nearly every single mass produced comic and magazine follows these rules with little to no exceptions. Up to you on whether you will donate to charity or not. ------------------------------------------------------------------- As an FYI, I learned all of this from DiceX's posts on the topic...I just couldn't be bothered reading the whole thread again to find it. Case closed. You're refuting a claim Zod never made about trimming. Obviously, you are in a state of profound confusion and possible distress, and Zod wishes you well. As previously noted... You've failed to: 1) Prove your initial claim about Marvel cover overhang 2) Present evidence of comic book printing practices at all facilities from 1933 to 1973 3) Refrain from descending into irrelevant/raving personal attacks & bizarre deflections 4) Properly recall Zod's comments (as in your false claim about trimming as cited in Zod's prior posts) Note also that DiceX primarily regurgitated assumptions about comic book printing as presented elsewhere. In order for his claims to be considered of even minor possible value, we'd need to know the following: 1) His name 2) The facility/facilities he worked in 3) The years he worked in this facility or facilities 4) Whether he ever worked hands on in printing comics 5) What comic publishers he may have done hands on work for 6) What months, years and titles he did hands on work for In the absence of this information, his claims do not carry even minor, partial weight. |
|
|
|
Post by kav on Feb 15, 2023 16:41:05 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Feb 15, 2023 17:14:03 GMT -8
Yeah. I've proven everything I've asserted from more than one logical angle. Oh well. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2023 17:14:43 GMT -8
Truly, Zod has never witnessed such epic failure.  |
|
|
|
Post by kav on Feb 15, 2023 17:16:14 GMT -8
You say that every time you declare unilateral victory.
Get real.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2023 17:21:39 GMT -8
Yeah. I've proven everything I've asserted from more than one logical angle. Oh well. Wagon, you've proven nothing other than your lack of capacity for logical thinking and expression. You've failed to: 1) Prove your initial claim about Marvel cover overhang
2) Present evidence of comic book printing practices at all facilities from 1933 to 1973
3) Refrain from descending into irrelevant/raving personal attacks & bizarre deflections
4) Properly recall Zod's comments (as in your false claim about trimming as cited in Zod's prior posts)You've also failed to provide any of the following supporting evidence regarding DiceX and his claims: 1) His name
2) The facility/facilities he worked in
3) The years he worked in this facility or facilities
4) Whether he ever worked hands on in printing comics
5) What comic publishers he may have done hands on work for
6) What months, years and titles he did hands on work for
But you have managed to refute a claim Zod never made about trimming, and are doing a victory dance as a result. Is Zod being punked, or are you truly this incompetent? |
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Feb 15, 2023 17:24:29 GMT -8
You say that every time you declare unilateral victory. Get real. That's another telling pattern of Chuck's behavior. Everything spins into "we'll never know for sure" territory. He's done it with politics, Covid, comics and everything else. Anyone can take any GA, SA or BA comic from the 30's to the 70's and the MAJORITY of them will exhibit the same tell tale printing signs. Of course there are probably exceptions. There are always exceptions to every rule but I would venture to say that 98% of all vintage comics and magazines printed are printed the same way. Now it's on someone to prove otherwise. |
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Feb 15, 2023 17:25:58 GMT -8
Yeah. I've proven everything I've asserted from more than one logical angle. Oh well. Wagon, you've proven nothing other than your lack of capacity for logical thinking and expression. You lied and got caught months ago when you stated you didn't call TheCapra by his previous, CGC forum moniker. Why, I have no idea. No matter. After that it was all downhill. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2023 17:28:36 GMT -8
You say that every time you declare unilateral victory. Get real. That's another telling pattern of Chuck's behavior. Everything spins into "we'll never know for sure" territory. He's done it with politics, Covid, comics and everything else. Anyone can take any GA, SA or BA comic from the 30's to the 70's and the MAJORITY of them will exhibit the same tell tale printing signs. Of course there are probably exceptions. There are always exceptions to every rule but I would venture to say that 98% of all vintage comics and magazines printed are printed the same way. Now it's on someone to prove otherwise. You've failed to: 1) Prove your initial claim about Marvel cover overhang 2) Present evidence of comic book printing practices at all facilities from 1933 to 1973 3) Refrain from descending into irrelevant/raving personal attacks & bizarre deflections 4) Properly recall Zod's comments (as in your false claim about trimming as cited in Zod's prior posts) You've also failed to provide any of the following supporting evidence regarding DiceX and his claims: 1) His name 2) The facility/facilities he worked in 3) The years he worked in this facility or facilities 4) Whether he ever worked hands on in printing comics 5) What comic publishers he may have done hands on work for 6) What months, years and titles he did hands on work for But you refuted a claim Zod never made about trimming. Truly, thou art a marvel. |
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Feb 15, 2023 17:32:23 GMT -8
That's another telling pattern of Chuck's behavior. Everything spins into "we'll never know for sure" territory. He's done it with politics, Covid, comics and everything else. Anyone can take any GA, SA or BA comic from the 30's to the 70's and the MAJORITY of them will exhibit the same tell tale printing signs. Of course there are probably exceptions. There are always exceptions to every rule but I would venture to say that 98% of all vintage comics and magazines printed are printed the same way. Now it's on someone to prove otherwise. You've failed to: 1) Prove your initial claim about Marvel cover overhang It's really easy. Since comics were all cut on 3 sides when published, the Marvel cover overhang is a product of paper shrinkage with the interior newspring pages shrinking at a different rate than the exterior cover. |
|
