Should DC Reissue Some of its 90s TPBs with Better Paper Stock?

[Theophilus]

DC had some really successful and significant story arcs during the 90s. Problem is, not only are a lot of their TPBs out of print they are also printed on horrible paper stock--I have a few, and after a while, they literally stink. It's a little like having old newspapers on your bookcase.

I'd like to see DC reissue some its 90s arcs in high quality format, with recoloring and the whole works. Plus now that we've got a decade of distance between a lot of these arcs you could get introductions and afterwords where writers could assess what they feel these arcs did and did not accomplish.

And I've got to say, the DC stuff always looks just phenonemal when they remaster it--like comparing the coloring from the original Crisis to the TPB.

Or am I the only one?

[DonC]

If a book was popular enough, it wouldn't be out of print. See also: Watchmen, The.

[Theophilus]

If a book was popular enough, it wouldn't be out of print. See also: Watchmen, The.

You're taking out the human equation. People make the decisions about what's worth reprinting and what's not, and those judgements aren't always right.

As for popular works never going out of print, if that were entirely true I don't suppose people would be shelling out $40+ for used copies of "Prodigal."

Never mind works that haven't been printed that should be, like Waid's "Flash: Year One." I've got the entire second volume of Flash, but I would love to have more TPBs for the sake of quality and accessibility. And that's true for me for a lot of 90s titles.

[DonC]

You're taking out the human equation. People make the decisions about what's worth reprinting and what's not, and those judgements aren't always right.

The market decides what is worth reprinting. If a company thought for a second that reprinting "Knightquest" or something like that would be profitable, then they would do it.

As for popular works never going out of print, if that were entirely true I don't suppose people would be shelling out $40+ for used copies of "Prodigal."

A small group of people willing to pay $40 for a used trade paperback doesn't mean there are thousands of people out there willing to pay $15 for a new copy of that same trade paperback.

Never mind works that haven't been printed that should be, like Waid's "Flash: Year One." I've got the entire second volume of Flash, but I would love to have more TPBs for the sake of quality and accessibility. And that's true for me for a lot of 90s titles.

Again, if DC thought there was money to be made, they'd be making it.

[Supermancho]

DC had some really successful and significant story arcs during the 90s. Problem is, not only are a lot of their TPBs out of print they are also printed on horrible paper stock--I have a few, and after a while, they literally stink. It's a little like having old newspapers on your bookcase.

I'd like to see DC reissue some its 90s arcs in high quality format, with recoloring and the whole works. Plus now that we've got a decade of distance between a lot of these arcs you could get introductions and afterwords where writers could assess what they feel these arcs did and did not accomplish.

And I've got to say, the DC stuff always looks just phenonemal when they remaster it--like comparing the coloring from the original Crisis to the TPB.

Or am I the only one?

Yes and not.

Yes because a papper of better quality, it will endure better the pass of times.
No becuase I'm a nostalgic, and I love the feel of the old paper in my fingers.

http://www.areacomic.com/Superman%203.gif

[Will.S]

I personally don't see any excuse as to why the Fourth World stuff, and a good bulk of their 90's trades are done in newsprint.

Marvel puts out all of their stuff, even old books and Omnibuses, in higher grade paper quality than DC's trades of their older material. People will buy re-issues if it offers something more than it did before, I think DC is kind of learning this with the recent Star Man Omnibus which is superior to the trades and the upcoming Morrison JLA stuff.

[dancj]

Never mind works that haven't been printed that should be, like Waid's "Flash: Year One."
There is a TPB of that. It's called Born to Run

[Theophilus]

The market decides what is worth reprinting. If a company thought for a second that reprinting "Knightquest" or something like that would be profitable, then they would do it.

Unless "the market" has recently achieved some kind of OMAC inspired sentience, it still isn't capable of thought. That's why a huge component of the market is called "speculation." It's people trying to read the market.

A small group of people willing to pay $40 for a used trade paperback doesn't mean there are thousands of people out there willing to pay $15 for a new copy of that same trade paperback.

Well on the demand side there's a really good chance that if a used newsprint stock version of "Prodigal" sells for no less than $40, there are indeed quite a few people that would shell out $15 for a new copy.

Again, if DC thought there was money to be made, they'd be making it.

Again you're assuming that DC is right about in this respect about how best to make money. The market is fluid. Seventy years ago "Moby Dick," just to give one example, wasn't considered to be worth the paper it was printed on. As a college student I work with a lot of "rediscovered" texts that are now taken for granted.

But there's a bigger picture than how much money DC can make on any individual TPB. As a marketing strategy, DC should want bookshelves to be filled with products that have the DC logo.

I think that the TPBs I've mentioned will make money, but they will function not only to let DC sell the same TPBs twice and satisfy older fans, they will also make newer fans aware of these classic stories. Just as Lucas has been able to sell "Star Wars" and "Indiana Jones" multiple times with supplemental material, DC stands to gain a lot. I absolutely loved the creator commentary on 52 in the TPB.

[Theophilus]

I personally don't see any excuse as to why the Fourth World stuff, and a good bulk of their 90's trades are done in newsprint.

I agree. There isn't any excuse. And when DC did a "Death of Superman" Omnibus, they did it on a cheaper paper stock--which negated my need to buy it, since I already have it on cheap paper.

Marvel puts out all of their stuff, even old books and Omnibuses, in higher grade paper quality than DC's trades of their older material. People will buy re-issues if it offers something more than it did before, I think DC is kind of learning this with the recent Star Man Omnibus which is superior to the trades and the upcoming Morrison JLA stuff.

And speaking of Morrison and Robinson, a lot of DC's 90s writers are hotter than ever now--which means that interest in their earlier work should be intensifying.

And again since there's some perspective now I think it would be great for these creators to discuss how their earlier works fit in with their newer ones. I know Morrison has talked about how he treated the New Gods as just superheroes in his JLA run. It'd be great to see the creators comment on how their earlier work encouraged them to take the roads they're taking now and what worked and what didn't.

[dancj]

I agree. There isn't any excuse. And when DC did a "Death of Superman" Omnibus, they did it on a cheaper paper stock--which negated my need to buy it, since I already have it on cheap paper.
I love those cheap omnibus's - at least I would if they brought one out for something I didn't already own.

Cheap paper doesn't bother me - as long as I can turn the pages without ripping them. Personally I think they should have used that format or the digest size for the current reprints of Giffen's Justice League