Please, guys,
I'm not trying to insult or censure anyone. I'm simply asking what is it that is gained by this? I fully understand getting a cover or backcover from Heritage. It's analogous to putting a color xerox on a coverless book. And I'm ALL for fiche or photos or whatever it takes to reproduce a book. It's just that we have no idea what is going to be important or critical or even of mild interest to future viewers of the scans.
A simple example might be some future researcher who combs the coupons in ads to isolate subtle changes in addresses to mail to. What if there were different suffixes in different books on the same ad? Sticking a copy of an ad from one title into another one might invalidate a perfectly good theory or research project. And what if the "assembled" comic happens to be one of the really freaky books where the indicia was on the inside back cover, or not present at all? These things actually do occur. VERY rarely, for certain, but they DO.
Now, who knows if such things ever happened in any of the books that have been reconstructed here or on other sites? Not me. Not any of us. My question is simply, why GUESS at something like this? What is the advantage the GAC perceives in a mock-up of the comic? Putting pieces together from various copies of the same issue seems harmless enough and I can't argue too much against the practice. I think the advantages greatly outweigh the possibility of error - though there ARE two entirely different printings of Tally-Ho Comics in two different physical dimensions and with two different indicias! So the possibility DOES exist.
Perhaps I've simply seen too many comics that fall just outside the expected norm to be confident that anyone can predict EXACTLY what appeared in a book if they haven't seen an actual copy. ...and I'm beating a dead horse here, so I'll just stop.
Sorry. I didn't mean to cause a problem.
Peace, Jim (|:{>