No. Corrections for minor coloring errors are not revisionism. It's correcting an obvious printing mistake to give you the Best Possible Presentation of the comics. I want something better than the originals. Something definitive.



Exactly. I don't comprehend the objection. This isn't the Mona Lisa, it's a comic book. If there is a consistent variation in a given issue, I agree, it should be honored. When there is an obvious problem, like Iron Man's helmet being completely red, or Bucky's pant let being green instead of blue, it should be corrected. This was very crude productions back in the 50's and 60's and you should correct any blaring errors that made the editor, artist, or colorist go "Oh S#!t" when they saw what had been printed.

The best example that unfortunately will never be reprinted is Giant Sized Spider-Man #3.

The blue plate on the lead Spider-Man Doc Savage story is at least ΒΌ" off register on a third of the pages. What would be the rational to slavishly recreate that mess just because that's the way it was originally printed?
Most of the art has been touched up or recreated for the Masterworks and you aren't dealing with the original material in the first place, so why not make this the best product possible? While a few of you think these are being done for the old timers, the fact that paperback are coming out at a better price point should tip you off that Marvel is reaching out to a younger crowd as well. When I read material for the first time like DC or EC Archives, the last thing I want to see is someone's 50 year old mistake staring back at me.
If Cap's boot is green and there is no good reason for it, it should be on the colorist to alert the editor and let him make the call. It's what they get paid to do, isn't it?


Last Edited By: BonanzaGuy Oct 22 09 12:19 PM. Edited 3 times.