[JonTheScanner]

I'm uploading most of the rest of Advs into the Unknown through the end of 1959.  Going up now are: 88 92 93 99-112. 

This leaves only #59 76 82 to complete this series through 1959.

My JVJon project part II status is

Posted (18)
Barker (Quality) #4 added ads and some pages
Fightin' Marines (St John) #11  (editing by Mouse 5150)
Lawbreakers (Charlton) #1 2 (editing by Mouse 5150)
Lucy the Real Gone Gal (St John) #3
National (Quality) #52 added some pages
Red Band (Rural Home) #2
Rusty (Gleason) #1  (editing by Mouse 5150)
Strange Terrors (St John) #4 improved to ctc
War Heroes (Dell) #4 5 6 7 9 10 (editing by Dell4C)
War Stories (Dell) #5 6 7  (editing by Dell4C)

Scanned not yet posted (9)
Adventures of Alice #2
Crack #54
Cutie Pie (Gleason) #1
Johnny Law Sky Ranger #4
Pixies #2
Red Circle #4
Uncle Charlie's Fables #3
War Comics (Dell) #2  another copy posted first
War Stories (Dell) #8 (missing cf editing by Dell4C)

Remaining to be scanned (10)
Buster Crabbe #4
Crack #22 24
Golden Lad #5 (missing cf)
Johnny Law Sky Ranger #2
National #11 30 36
Police #105
Red Hawk #5

[Yoc]

Wow, lovely work Jon and gang!

Hmm, I see Aussie has a note on Adv. Into The Unknown - "Please only upload up to issue #78"
We better let JC double check and see if there's an obvious reason for that cutoff issue.

-Yoc

[narfstar]

That is probably the last 1959 issue. I a previous thread about when to stop, it was nothing beyond 1960. So it can be double checked as to the last 1959 issue.

[John C]

That seems about right.  Issue #78 actually has a cover date of November 1956, but I can imagine easily imagine that being a provisional end of the Golden Age.

I don't see any renewals for the series, though, meaning that it could (barring a policy decision I don't recall or was never announced) potentially be available through the 1963 issues, in theory.  I mean, I definitely don't see any difference between, say, #72 and #80 or even later.

[JonTheScanner]

What I uploaded was the last 1959 issue.  I did so because I noticed that someone had borrowed issues from JVJ that I already had a scan of so I didn't want any wasted effort.

[Yoc]

Ok, thanks for checking Jon and JC.
Aussie has noted 1959 as the cutoff date a few times and if there was no copyrights made or renewed I think it's safe to add those uploads.

[Geo (R.I.P.)]

I'm uploading most of the rest of Advs into the Unknown through the end of 1959.  Going up now are: 88 92 93 99-112. 

This leaves only #59 76 82 to complete this series through 1959.

I have #86 and #96 (missing isbc and osbc) scanned, just awaiting editing from JVJ collection.

Geo

[JonTheScanner]

Geo,

See my PM to you.

[Geo (R.I.P.)]

Got it Jon and sent one back to you.

Geo

[JonTheScanner]

Now uploading

Advs into the Unknown #86 96 (to save Geo some work)

Crack #22 GA-UK's third effort but finally complete ctc thanks to JVJ.

Plastic Man #32 also finally ctc thanks to HP scanning the text page and ifc.

This Crack scan is the same as the unattributed 2008 scan with the centerfold filled from JVJ and just for kicks a scan of the printer's color proof of the cover.  Note that the text in Black Condor's cloak must have been added after this proof was run.

[narfstar]

Thanks Jon all up and ready

[JonTheScanner]

Next JVJon upload is

Spark's Golden Lad #5 replacing the woefully incomplete and small scan we had.  Unfortunately JVJ's copy was missing its centerfold which is supplied from a fiche scan by Dell4C

[Yoc]

Thanks Jon and Jim.
The book is now up.

[JonTheScanner]

Adventures of Alice #2 now uploading.  This goes in the unsorted section, but the series *is* now complete.  It's a JVJon production.  I got no file card for this one and have no idea who this artist is.  The art is quite unusual.

[rez]

yep, that is a pretty unique book. 
Thanks

[Yoc]

Thanks Jon, now up.

[narfstar]

But my copy of #3 was signed and looks like the same artist George O. Muhlfield

[JonTheScanner]

Dell comics War Stories #8 is uploaded to FTP.  This is a JVJon scan with Dell4C edits.  Unfortunately the centerfold is missing.

[Yoc]

Thanks Jon.  It's now up.

[JonTheScanner]

Now uploading Shield Wizard #13 a ctc reconstruction.  This scan combines the existing incomplete scan with the missing Wizard story and text story provided by Paw Boom from the reprint in Miss Liberty #1.  The inside front, inside back and back covers are from Black Hood #9 since SW #12 and earlier issues had the same covers as Hangman (which became Black Hood with issue #9.  The indicia was copied from the indicia in SW #12 with the date and number changed.

In other news, I've just started scanning my last JVJ comic in batch two.  More on that later.

[narfstar]

Thanks for all the extra effort Jon now up

[boox909]

Now uploading Shield Wizard #13 a ctc reconstruction.  This scan combines the existing incomplete scan with the missing Wizard story and text story provided by Paw Boom from the reprint in Miss Liberty #1.  The inside front, inside back and back covers are from Black Hood #9 since SW #12 and earlier issues had the same covers as Hangman (which became Black Hood with issue #9.  The indicia was copied from the indicia in SW #12 with the date and number changed.

In other news, I've just started scanning my last JVJ comic in batch two.  More on that later.

Thank you! 

[JVJ]

Now uploading Shield Wizard #13 a ctc reconstruction.  This scan combines the existing incomplete scan with the missing Wizard story and text story provided by Paw Boom from the reprint in Miss Liberty #1.  The inside front, inside back and back covers are from Black Hood #9 since SW #12 and earlier issues had the same covers as Hangman (which became Black Hood with issue #9.  The indicia was copied from the indicia in SW #12 with the date and number changed.

In other news, I've just started scanning my last JVJ comic in batch two.  More on that later.

I've got a problem with such reconstructions, Jon.
I haven't looked at the file itself, but even if there's a page in the download detailing all of the assumptions made to recreate the c2c, isn't it possible for a. the assumptions to be wrong and b. the page listing them to be removed from the file? I guess I just don't see the purpose of the site to be approximating the comics but rather to be documenting the actual comics for posterity. Once we begin to collage pieces together we're calling into question all of the efforts on all of the actual scans of real comics. What if the actual indicia for this comic was the one time that some paste-up guy forgot put in a copyright, or the correct date? Historically, that's an important fact for future researchers, and as fewer and fewer copies survive or surface, our scan MIGHT be taken as gospel truth by a casual historian. As unlikely as such glitches are, they DO happen and they generally only happen in one issue. Can we be certain that this wasn't THE issue?

I guess I just don't see what we're buying with such constructs. Take a step back and try to see what it is that's important about such a patchwork quilt of a comic. I don't see C2C as a goal to be achieved in any way possible. I see it as a goal for anyone who has the whole comic at hand when doing the scanning. I certainly don't mean to belittle anyone's efforts, especially yours, but it seems to me that the efforts are misguided and misleading is this regard.

Are there aspects of these assemblages that I'm simply not seeing? Enlighten me!

Peace, Jim (|:{>

[JonTheScanner]

There is such a page because you're right they are my assumptions.  All of this is also stated in the first comment on the download page, which cannot be removed.  If I knew I had it right, I'd not have bothered.  I guess I can't assure that no one will remove the page, but then we can't assure no one will do all kinds of nefarious edits either -- though that's much less likely.

I did this mostly to put the final story and text page in place. 

I suspect you'll find there are many such reconstructions already on the site not so identified.  Maybe not indicia, but ad pages and the such.

[JVJ]

There is such a page because you're right they are my assumptions.  All of this is also stated in the first comment on the download page, which cannot be removed.  If I knew I had it right, I'd not have bothered.  I guess I can't assure that no one will remove the page, but then we can't assure no one will do all kinds of nefarious edits either -- though that's much less likely.

I did this mostly to put the final story and text page in place. 

I suspect you'll find there are many such reconstructions already on the site not so identified.  Maybe not indicia, but ad pages and the such.

I KNEW you would put in such a page, Jon, and I understand the possibilities of nefarious mischief after the scans are out in the public.
There's nothing that we can do to prevent that - I agree. It simply concerns me that we're guessing at things.

Here's a true experience I had TONIGHT. I just got a list of books that Ontology wants to scan and he said the following:

(2) CHARLTON - This Magazine is Haunted v1 15,16 (1954)

NOTE: If your CHARLTON This Magazine is Haunted are vol 2 - 15 and 16 (1957), then they have been scanned already, and you can remove them from the list.

So I went and checked and guess what? If someone had put together an indicia for TMIH #15 based on the March 1954 issue #16, they would have gotten the year wrong. For whatever reason, TMIH #15 is not listed as February 1954, it's listed as February 1953. (and, actually, both issues are Vol. 3, not Vol. 1.)

Is this significant? I have no idea. Was it published in 1953 or 1954? Again, I have no idea, but someone making a list of, say, all the comics published in 1953 would probably want to know of this discrepancy. If, as you say, there are "many such reconstructions already on the site not so identified," that only makes my point more emphatically than I ever could. I don't download comics from GAC to read. I use them for art identification and for research purposes and I'm probably exactly the kind of guy who would bypass your disclaimer page out of impatience and go right to the indicia page. And the kind of guy who wouldn't question the validity of some other doctored indicia page because I wouldn't expect anyone to make it up simply to have "something" there. I simply don't see the point if it's not real. Maybe I'm being too anal about this, but it just strikes me, especially in conjunction with ad pages and indicia, to be harmful rather than helpful.

But in the end it's just one man's opinion, that's all.

Peace, Jim (|:{>