The Phantom and Buck Rogers collections, yet the price remains the same.

I’m sure Hermes Press would argue that the value is the same since each collection reprints the same number of strips, but I’m sure a volume half the size of another costs less to produce. I’d like to see some of those savings passed on to the consumer.

You need to be a member of Captain Comics to add comments!

Join Captain Comics

Votes: 0
Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • I'm thinking of ordering one or another of the volumes (I've had the second edition of The Collected Works of Buck Rogers in the 25th Century since I was a kid, and have always wanted to see more). If I might ask, what point does volume one get to, what is the colouring like in the Sunday volumes (I don't like the use of modern style colouring in reprints), and are there any issues I should be aware of?

  • Wow, I must have had a formatting error when I posted that initial post and didn't even notice. What I was complaining about at the time was that the then-recently-released collection of Roy Rogers comic strips was significantly smaller than Hermes other collections, yet the price was the same. Because Phantom and Buck have so much blank space on each page, however, those series are no better value.

     

    Questions noted, Luke. Answers forthcoming.

  • So far, Hermes Press has released five volumes of dailies and one volume of Sundays.

    1. 1929-1930
    2. 1930-1932
    3. 1932-1934
    4. 1934-1935
    5. 1935-1936

    Sundays: March 1930 through December 1933

    I am completely satisfied with the dailies. The line-work is clean and crisp. The coloring in the Sundays is the same as the original, my only quibble being that the paper stock is shiny and glossy rather than flat, but a flat, more “absorbent” paper stock is a personal preference of mine. Other than that, I have no complaints.

  • Jeff, what strips are you talking about in the just above post?

  • Buck Rogers.

  • Thanks.

  • Thanks, Jeff. I feel the same way about shiny paper.

This reply was deleted.