WHEN IS A FACSIMILE NOT QUITE A FACSIMILE?

Copyright DC COMICS

DC Comics have been producing facsimiles of some of their Limited Collectors' Editions for quite a while now, and for anyone who missed the originals back in the '70s, it's a less expensive way of obtaining replicas of classic comics they'd like to have owned back then, but for some reason didn't or couldn't.  Or perhaps they did, but lost, misplaced, or gave them away down through the years.  So now these 'new' presentations help them roll back the years and let them re-experience aspects of their youth that were once so dear to them.  (It's a strange concept - to reprint a reprint, as most [though not all] of those giant-size card-covered mags were.)

However (as is often the case), there's a catch.  When the original reprint editions were produced, amendments were often made to their larger-than-life presentations in what was then a new format.  Splash pages were usually extended, height-wise, to compensate for missing indicias present in the initial standard-sized printings of the tales.  Credits were sometimes added and captions and footnotes altered to bring them up-to-date, or for some other editorial reason entirely.  So having clued you in, I'll shortly demonstrate exactly what I'm talking about, using the relatively recent facsimile of LCE CR-48 (Superman Vs The Flash) to provide examples.

But why's it so?  Well, the original (altered) proofs for CR-48 probably no longer exist, so when the decision was made to reprint it, DC went with whatever sources were available of the two tales from later (restored) presentations, like hardback collected editions for example, which sought to preserve the archival aspects of the strips' first printings.  That's why the facsimile has corner page numbers and different colours, while the '70s incarnation had the numbers removed, new colouring, added credits (on the first strip), an amended end-caption, and an extended splash page.  With the facsimile, they used whatever more archival proofs for reprints that were to hand.

So these new facsimiles aren't always exact  - they're as close as they can be without going overboard in the 're-creation' stakes.  I daresay most readers wouldn't even notice the difference unless they have an original to compare to, but if they don't, then it hardly matters much, does it?  Unless you're as pernickety as me, that is.  What do you think, Crivs?  Would you rather have exact facsimiles (prices and indicias aside), or as long as they use the same covers and contain the same strips and features, do the occasional slight departures from the originals not bother you?  Comments extremely welcome, so start exercising your typing fingers now and have your say!

Note the 'pattern' in the grey of the facsimile (right).  This is usually the result of not

being scanned at the appropriate resolution 

As you can see, the original reprint (left) has been amended and extended

End caption has been slightly amended in the original reprint (left)

Original reprint page (left) has been extended downwards.  For some odd reason, in

the facsimile (right), this page was printed smaller than others (and the original)

Horizontal gutter in middle of page has been reduced in facsimile (right)

Both covers side-by-side for you to compare - click to enlarge

Not even one comment so far?  Hell's teeth, you lot are hard to please, that's a fact.  I'm off to sulk under my bed - and I may not come out for, oh - ages.  (Better hoover the carpet under it first.)