Home U.S. Coin Forum

Heritage photography - what are they thinking ????

Here are two photographs by Heritage of the SAME coin, which is to be offered in the upcoming February Long Beach Signature sale. Am I the only one who sees this as completely ludicrous? How can they post two radically different images without comment? Which one is the more realistic? (Probably neither.) If this tells you nothing else, it tells you at least two things: (1) NEVER judge the appearance of a toned silver coin from an image; and (2) Heritage photography of toned silver coins is still suspect. Go to lot viewing yourself !! Caveat emptor !!

imageimage

Best,
Sunnywood

Comments

  • fcfc Posts: 12,788 ✭✭✭
    the first coin is after the dip.

    but seriously, i can at least tell they are the same coin!
  • MyqqyMyqqy Posts: 9,777
    I would guess that they are both acccurate with 2 different light sources. I still think that heritage has its head up its own butt when it comes to professinal quality photography. And that morgan is pretty fugly too......
    My style is impetuous, my defense is impregnable !
  • tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,146 ✭✭✭✭✭
    One is how it looks in the holder without light, the other is how it looks with lots of light on it.

    Just reinforces the credo not to buy a coin in auction without seeing it firsthand.
  • CladiatorCladiator Posts: 17,918 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Perfect example of why I wouldn't use Heritage to consign my coins to unless they were blast white coins. It's widely known that their photos pretty much suck and I think alot of potential bids are lost because of it.
  • A picture may be worth a thousand words, but what's a thousand pictures say? I see these variations in different images of the same coin both on a particular site, as well as in presentations of the same coin on different sites, all the time, not just on Heritage. What you say may be true, but if it's not confined to Heritage, why single them out? This is a universal problem relative to both photographic expertise and computer technology, not to mention the occasional deliberate visual misrepresentation. As was stated earlier, caveat emptor, especially over the internet.
  • MacCrimmonMacCrimmon Posts: 7,051 ✭✭✭
    That "67" Morgan looks to have 2 significant marks on the cheek. That would be a 67 alright.image


  • << <i>What you say may be true, but if it's not confined to Heritage, why single them out? This is a universal problem ... >>



    I agree entirely that this is a universal problem. However, I found it particularly amazing that Heritage could post two such radically different images in juxtaposition without addressing the issue. Yes, I suppose you could argue that it is even WORSE when someone posts just one image ... then there is no basis for comparison !! The problem of overly "juiced" images is very widespread, as anyone with basic knowledge can "Photoshop" an image (to use the noun as a verb). Simple enhancements of color balance, brightness, contrast, saturation, luminosity, etc, can make an image more accurate - or more idealized and disingenuous. On the other hand, under-representing colorful coins with poor images that fail to capture the colors is just as bad as over-representing them with falsely fluorescent and intensified colors.

    One thing I have found entirely amazing is that given one coin and two images, not everyone seems to agree as to which image more fairly depicts the coin. Images that I have found to be completely fantastical (although pretty) were thought to be entirely realistic by other seasoned collectors. In addition, there is definitely an issue with monitors ... the same image viewed on different monitors may present different colors and intensities.

    Best,
    Sunnywood
  • CladiatorCladiator Posts: 17,918 ✭✭✭✭✭
    romarub...you have some good points.
  • The right image (showing the whole slab) is scanned and was flat on the scanner - to cature he color it needed to be slightly tilted on one edge (top or bottom). The other is a digital photo, ptobably the more "accurate" in terms of the color (at least as accurate as a Heritage photo can be). That's just my educated guess - the coin may also be a bit PL which complicates the imaging process.

    If you have a choice, pass on the right coin and buy the left one - it looks nicer! image
    Collecting eye-appealing Proof and MS Indian Head Cents, 1858 Flying Eagle and IHC patterns and beautiful toned coins.

    “It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” Mark Twain
    Newmismatist
  • michaelmichael Posts: 9,524 ✭✭
    if i had any monster toned coins to sell at auction the auction company would
    need to do a much better job of capturing the eye appeal in a photo for me
    pending my approval in order for me to sign a contract with them

    unfortunately things do not work this way when consigning

    i can see why the auction companies miss great opportunities to auction special coins


  • tmot99tmot99 Posts: 5,238 ✭✭✭
    The close up pictures on Heritage are much closer to coin in hand than a full slab image. If the coin isn't truly incredible or very rare, they don't spend the time to adjust lighting. They have too many coins to deal with. Either they scan them or just do a straight on picture. Coins such as this they will do a close up picture with different lighting conditions to show it off. many times you can even see some glare from the slab itself. If it's a close up image, you can count on the coin being halfway decent.
  • mgoodm3mgoodm3 Posts: 17,497 ✭✭✭
    My pictures of this coin below. here's a link to Heritage's. In this case the full slab pics are much better than the fancy pics.

    link

    image
    image
    coinimaging.com/my photography articles Check out the new macro lens testing section
  • BAJJERFANBAJJERFAN Posts: 30,977 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i> Heritage photography - what are they thinking ???? >>



    Apparently they weren't.
  • What's so wrong with their photography??? Seriously, EVERY coin can look a thousand different ways by just turning it. I thought their pics looked pretty good. And yes, the internet small time stuff sholdn't/wouldn't get any pic favoritism.

    P.S. Mark, I am still mad I had to sell that nickel...imageimage
    The Accumulator - Dark Lloyd of the Sith

    image
  • CoxeCoxe Posts: 11,139
    There are much better examples. Some are drowned in light so badly that it is impossible to pick out features. I go through hundreds of their lots looking for die varieties weekly and know this quite well. Despite their excellent zoom view technology, the underlying photography is often lacking too much to make it worthwhile. I don't know if they are trying to make the coins more marketable by minimizing the hairlines, ... In time, I am sure they will get better, as they always have. There are faults with every operation out there, but I cannot think of one that has been more responsive and eager to make the experience better for both consignors and buyers. They want higher bids. They want your consignments and your bids and will listen to constructive criticism.
    Select Rarities -- DMPLs and VAMs
    NSDR - Life Member
    SSDC - Life Member
    ANA - Pay As I Go Member


  • << <i>....And that morgan is pretty fugly too...... >>



    My sentiments exactly. Yuck.
    image
  • ziggy29ziggy29 Posts: 18,668 ✭✭✭
    While their images often suck, I actually like that there is a big difference here. It's particularly important for toners because they can look quite different depending on the type and angle of lighting.
  • RussRuss Posts: 48,515 ✭✭✭


    << <i>What's so wrong with their photography??? >>



    image

    image

    Russ, NCNE
  • mgoodm3mgoodm3 Posts: 17,497 ✭✭✭
    I was disappointed in Heritage's "fancy" pics of the 16 nickel. I figured if they're going through the trouble of taking real pictures that they should do a nicer job. They are just so washed out, you'd think that the 16 is untoned by them. In this case the scanned shots are actually pretty good and show a pretty accurate image of the look in hand.
    coinimaging.com/my photography articles Check out the new macro lens testing section
  • LeeGLeeG Posts: 12,162
    I agree with what Russ is trying to show. If you have Cameo or Deep Cameo Coins don't send to Heritage until they can improve their pic's of these type of coins. You're loosing money.


  • << <i>

    << <i>What you say may be true, but if it's not confined to Heritage, why single them out? This is a universal problem ... >>



    I agree entirely that this is a universal problem. However, I found it particularly amazing that Heritage could post two such radically different images in juxtaposition without addressing the issue. Yes, I suppose you could argue that it is even WORSE when someone posts just one image ... then there is no basis for comparison !! The problem of overly "juiced" images is very widespread, as anyone with basic knowledge can "Photoshop" an image (to use the noun as a verb). Simple enhancements of color balance, brightness, contrast, saturation, luminosity, etc, can make an image more accurate - or more idealized and disingenuous. On the other hand, under-representing colorful coins with poor images that fail to capture the colors is just as bad as over-representing them with falsely fluorescent and intensified colors.

    One thing I have found entirely amazing is that given one coin and two images, not everyone seems to agree as to which image more fairly depicts the coin. Images that I have found to be completely fantastical (although pretty) were thought to be entirely realistic by other seasoned collectors. In addition, there is definitely an issue with monitors ... the same image viewed on different monitors may present different colors and intensities.

    Best,
    Sunnywood >>

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------NO, I disagree that it's a universal problem. The coins I have bought FROPM ANR/BOWERS based on catelog images, internet, and dealer on sight description indicate the images have been extreemly close to holding the coin in hand!!!!!!!! ALL other auctions aren't a crap shoot, you have to trust your onsight bidders "eye"--at best, always a surprise when the coin arrives!!imageimage
    morgannut2

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file