Doug MedicAR

Correct. The name on the cover indicates "Ashcan" but I would compare them to mini comics. The paper is slightly heavier than copy paper. I would guess that they were made on a what was a high end copier at the time and are roughly 5.5" x 8.5" I'm not certain how they were distributed but think that I remember ordering them at my local shop. It has been far too long on a very obscure book.

Agreed. They're all signed. I've only seen one AP come up for sale and, as I recall, the price was not significantly different from any of the numbered copies. I'm not sure what it is about Moebius, but anything he signed seems to hold value far better than most.

By that logic, do we need 275 variants? Each one has a different number written on it. 1/250, 2/250, 3/250...

This is correct. The limited edition is 250, numbered 1-250. Artist Proofs are generally the first copies, but given that these are more or less photo copies there is no real difference in quality between the first copies and the last copies. I have a few Artist Proofs of other items and they are numbered similar to "AP/25." In comics, there is generally no real difference between the regular run and artist proofs. The proofs tend to be given to the creator(s) of the material. In the art world, Artist Proofs can take on a different meaning. They are often the first prints reproduced and sent to those involved in the production of the print/lithograph in order for them to verify the quality, paper, colors, and anything else that may arise. AP's are usually more desirable because they are a smaller limitation of an already limited edition. As a rule, no. There is no discernible difference aside from the numbering.

The signatures appear consistent and both have a limitation with with signature, so I would say yes.

Looking around, I can't find any evidence of a stand alone series "Traci Lords" in 1992. She was the subject of Personality Comics #2 in 1991 which is the same publisher listed in "Traci Lords." I think we're safe to remove the "Traci Lords" title.

When you say "missing data" do you mean that the fields are present but are now empty? Or are the fields/columns not there at all?

I think magazines would be more appropriate solely based on my memory of it. I believe it is slightly larger than digest sized, probably 8-12 pages. I will try to pull it out today to verify.

I believe Pete addressed scanner problems on this past week's ComicBase TV. Honestly, I skipped past because my scanner has been working fine but there was some information in there about the systems that the scanners use.

The update fixed it! Thank you Steven, Pete, and everyone else that worked on this!

Yeah, I don't see #3 at double the value of #1, low distribution or not. Looking at eBay sales, it's hard to compare as there aren't comparable grades moving of each issue. Heritage has sold a few over the last five years or so. #1 brings a premium and #3 edges out #2 in the same grade. 9.6 #3 hovers around $600 while #2 is $400-500. There have been more #3s sold than #2s, likely helping bring the price down. I'm guessing that more #3s were slabbed due to the supposed rarity but with extra sales, the scarcity may not be as big a deal as once thought. Oddly #4 seems to outdo #3 pretty regularly.

I got this a few times too but it cleared itself up with no real input from me. I might have turned the computer off after one of the events, I can't say for certain.

I can't find any evidence online but Vampirella #3 may actually be higher than #1. I was thinking that it was a low distribution issue. I'll keep digging, I'm hoping I'll find an Overstreet to confirm the reasoning.

Pete's working on it. I sent him the absolutely gigantic file for the pic so there is absolutely no way it could be misconstrued as a smaller version than the Preliminary Artwork. I went into the picture file deleted the Prelim, exited everything, put my pic into the file and as soon as I try to pull it up in CB, the Prelim is back. I am glad that you had a similar, if not the same, problem. I know I'm not crazy!

I think I remember. I wound up copying the files to my Desktop and repointed CB to look there. I renamed each one to "001," let CB import it and removed it when I finished so I could rename the next one "001" in order. It's not really ideal but it worked.

I think I had a similar problem with the DVDs. Let me play with it and see if I can remember what I changed.

As much as we have talked about this, have you tried to replicate it?

Doesn't the Collection Overview Report do all of this? It displays "Owned" and "Missing" issues within a given title so that every issue of the series is accounted for, whether owned or not.

All the recent talk about X-Force #1 recently made me think about visual aids to identify particular books or differences. In the case of X-Force #1, a significant difference is whether the Captain America in the UPC box is black and white or a negative image (white and black?). Within CB, these two books used appear to be the same because only the front cover was displayed. The fully displayed wrap around cover solves it with this specific issue but others are more subtle. I'm not necessarily saying that we need a second full cover photo, but something possibly zoomed in on the difference that might come up with the main pic when it is selected might help though. Another possibility is that once selected, the user could select from one of two or three pics available. Aside from the X-Force thing, I have submitted books in the past that were rejected because they appeared to be the same as a previously entered book, particularly at a casual glance. An example would be Locke & Key #1-AUT. I have submitted it several times, including during the time I'm typing this post. I have done all that I can to indicate that it is different from #1 even though they share the same UPC. It came from IDW with the gold foil seal on it and the upper left corner has Issue "#1 Signed Edition" actually printed on it where the price is on #1. With additional picture fields, I could zoom in on the seal and the upper left corner to better support my case for it being in the Master DB and users could quickly and easily see what sets this particular book aside from the others that look very much like it. Another use would be for collector sets where the primary book would be the primary photo but we could have an additional pic or pics to display the additional items. We could also display both the cover of a book along with a slipcase, should one be included. It might even solve the polybagged/unbagged question as well. Along the same lines, possibly a functional link in an item to the CB site where the pics could be stored so as not to hinder the db with additional pics for a million or so books. The link would allow rapid and easy identification while pointing out small differences and even putting the differences side by side.

I don't know that I ever would have caught that.

Mysteriously, Plunderer has Preliminary Artwork in it that returns similarly to Plunge #1-A. I poked around until I found "Poets Prosper: Rhyme & Revelry" and followed your instructions. It worked in that it came up empty before I added a cover and found the title after I added the cover. I deleted the cover file and ran it again out of curiosity. It still brought up the title even though no pic is present. I'm guessing that this happened because I had an item in that position, removed it, and didn't rebuild lists?

I started to do as you suggested but it hit me before I did it, "What if #3 really is 505 wide?" I looked, and it is. I tried to download the cover again but it tells me no larger cover is available.

I would say that printing does need to be kept in either location, Notes or Item Description. The rationale is that with so many variants out there, in the past CB used the printing field to aid in tracking them. With the recent changes in variant tracking, most or all of this should have been alleviated. Staring at a screen for long periods of time, it's easily to lose track of things like -A, -3, -A-2, -B-2 and having a backup like "Second Printing" can be very beneficial as not all later printings are so easily identified as X-Force #1-2 with the gold cover.

Weird.

I'm able to sit here typing this because I have had redundancy at critical times in my life. Things fail, they get used incorrectly, they get misplaced but redundancy allows us to move forward when it happens. That's very different from a database, I get that. Having seen redundancy in action, I will take it any day of the week.