@ironmanl63 said:
One of the coins that crossed at grade Legacy.
That's quite a difference between that picture and the two slab shots that follow.
Which truly represents the coin in hand?
How do you feel about the grade not being included in the Image Secure?
The slab shots are not a good representation of how the coin looks in hand. They will not be a plus for those selling coins. Customers are going to wonder why there is such a difference in how the coin looks. Although I believe in time collectors will learn how to read the photos. I also hope CACG figures out that customers are not happy at all with the slab shots!
I am in favor of the grade being shown on the Image Secure shots. I feel the same way about Tru Views.
My slab shots are far from perfect. Mine have hot spots from the lights reflecting off the slab I know. My main objective was to show off the coin while still getting a decent view of the slab. I'm sure a different light setup would achieve both, but this is what I have now. I'm hoping Justin will figure out which method works best to bring out the coin better than it is now.
@robec said:
My slab shots are far from perfect. Mine have hot spots from the lights reflecting off the slab I know. My main objective was to show off the coin while still getting a decent view of the slab. I'm sure a different light setup would achieve both, but this is what I have now. I'm hoping Justin will figure out which method works best to bring out the coin better than it is now.
Gorgeous coin! Did you use 3 lights on the obverse? Two on the reverse?
Yes I too have seen CACG coins bin on eBay (“optimistic prices” per another poster) - Jimmy bought 3 or 4 as marketing display for his cases at shows charging to advertising expense. Confidence level low he can get that. He does retain the bay price paid as reference on back of holder (in code). If people ask he will quote that price plus 5pct and say “this the lowest the consignor will go.” Who knows maybe they will sell at that.
@FlyingAl said:
Hotspots can be avoided by careful placement of lights, and of course the correct lights.
That’s true, but my lights have a strong narrow beam of light even diffusing won’t completely make them disappear. Depending on the coin I can make it work but I don’t dwell much on slab shots. I only make a small fraction of slab shots……less than a half of one percent of what I shoot are slab shots. Great job on yours.
Gorgeous coin! Did you use 3 lights on the obverse? Two on the reverse?
I use 3. One just sort of hangs back on these slab shots. I don’t do enough to have it dialed in. I know with these particular lights if I back them up off the slab most of the coin features and luster disappear.
@stockdude_ said:
So what happens next? PCGS holdered coins are looked down on as not being worthy of the same grade at CACG ? I'm glad I collect coins and not plastic. Cant blame the "grading" companies though since its such a great moneymaker LOL!!
PCGS coins will never be looked down on nor would I ever pay more for CACG material than PCGS or NGC. Right now on eBay PCGS - 140,000 items, CACG 970. I don’t believe they will ever get close to PCGS.
For some reason you regularly point out that the VOLUME of CACG coins listed on eBay is far far less than than the volume listed of coins graded by PCGS and NGC. So once again I’ll give the same reply:
CACG has absolutely no goal of competing in volume/quantity with PCGS and NGC. My understanding of the goals of CACG are to:
Provide a grading service that uses the grading standards used decades ago that happen to be more conservative than grading standards currently used by the two other TPG’s.
Not grading as MS (or Proof Unc) coins that have physical rub marks on the high points of a coin.
Not straight grading coins which have undergone certain types of surface treatments that in the opinion of CACG are not acceptable, but apparently are acceptable to the two other TPG’s.
To be more consistent in grading than the other two TPG’s.
The volume of coins listed by a TPG on eBay is not a reflection of the quality of the product!
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
@robec said:
My slab shots are far from perfect. Mine have hot spots from the lights reflecting off the slab I know. My main objective was to show off the coin while still getting a decent view of the slab. I'm sure a different light setup would achieve both, but this is what I have now. I'm hoping Justin will figure out which method works best to bring out the coin better than it is now.
As we all agree, the quality of your slab shots is far superior to the quality of slab shots being produced by CACG. This is something they MUST address sooner than later, as it’s a poor reflection (no pun intended) of the quality of their product! The slab shots produced by CACG in your example and my example can legitimately be described as poor, far from representative of the actual coin! That’s so unfortunate and disappointing!
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
You may be surprised on the turnaround. I don’t think it will take several weeks……..I’ll bet 2 weeks tops (fingers crossed).. I have a 3 coin Regular submission at our hosts here that is still in the Received stage even though it was logged in a week before CACG received this submission (9/28 at PCGS). You may get your grades back before my PCGS sub finally reaches the Grading stage.
Received my grades today! That was a very quick turnaround for my econ submission, only 9 calendar days, I am very happy with the speed of the service. The grades were about what I expected, only one moderate surprise from my 7 coin submission. This was a great experience for me and I leaned from it.
You may be surprised on the turnaround. I don’t think it will take several weeks……..I’ll bet 2 weeks tops (fingers crossed).. I have a 3 coin Regular submission at our hosts here that is still in the Received stage even though it was logged in a week before CACG received this submission (9/28 at PCGS). You may get your grades back before my PCGS sub finally reaches the Grading stage.
Received my grades today! That was a very quick turnaround for my econ submission, only 9 calendar days, I am very happy with the speed of the service. The grades were about what I expected, only one moderate surprise from my 7 coin submission. This was a great experience for me and I leaned from it.
Hopefully it was a nice surprise. That’s a great turnaround for any kind of submission. Reholders usually y take longer than that.
Was: PC-OGH 64 CAC(Holder was in terrible shape)…. Now: CACG 65 L.
So that was a regular 64 CAC in an ogh, green sticker not gold, and they upgraded it a full point with the legacy designation?
BadaBling is not familiar with CACG policy's. No coin that upgrades a full point will receive the L designation.
Thats what i'm trying to figure out here. The only coins that were supposed to be able to upgrade by a full point and still get the L were gold beaned coins. If that OGH was a green cac 64, it would contradict the purpose of the L designation, unless i'm missing something here.
Was: PC-OGH 64 CAC(Holder was in terrible shape)…. Now: CACG 65 L.
So that was a regular 64 CAC in an ogh, green sticker not gold, and they upgraded it a full point with the legacy designation?
BadaBling is not familiar with CACG policy's. No coin that upgrades a full point will receive the L designation.
I fully agree with you that is indeed the policy CACG has stated - if a CAC green stickered coin upgrades a full point, then no L - only the same grade or addition of a plus gets the L.
With that said, if indeed the 65 coin shown was in a 64 (or even a 64+) holder, then either CACG made an error in labeling it with the L suffix, OR it had a GOLD sticker, OR CACG changed their policy!
Steve
A day without fine wine and working on your coin collection is like a day without sunshine!!!
Was: PC-OGH 64 CAC(Holder was in terrible shape)…. Now: CACG 65 L.
So that was a regular 64 CAC in an ogh, green sticker not gold, and they upgraded it a full point with the legacy designation?
BadaBling is not familiar with CACG policy's. No coin that upgrades a full point will receive the L designation.
I fully agree with you that is indeed the policy CACG has stated - if a CAC green stickered coin upgrades a full point, then no L - only the same grade or addition of a plus gets the L.
With that said, if indeed the 65 coin shown was in a 64 (or even a 64+) holder, then either CACG made an error in labeling it with the L suffix, OR it had a GOLD sticker, OR CACG changed their policy!
Steve
I’m very sorry guys! You’re all 100% correct re: CACG policy…. I screwed up my original post by erroneously describing the coin in its OGH as a ‘64’…. This is NOT the case. To be clear, the coin was originally housed in a PCGS MS65 holder…. So it did NOT upgrade. The only reason I chose to cross it, was that the reverse side of the slab had unsightly scratches and scuffing. My apologies for inciting confusion.
You may be surprised on the turnaround. I don’t think it will take several weeks……..I’ll bet 2 weeks tops (fingers crossed).. I have a 3 coin Regular submission at our hosts here that is still in the Received stage even though it was logged in a week before CACG received this submission (9/28 at PCGS). You may get your grades back before my PCGS sub finally reaches the Grading stage.
Received my grades today! That was a very quick turnaround for my econ submission, only 9 calendar days, I am very happy with the speed of the service. The grades were about what I expected, only one moderate surprise from my 7 coin submission. This was a great experience for me and I leaned from it.
Hopefully it was a nice surprise. That’s a great turnaround for any kind of submission. Reholders usually y take longer than that.
Sadly no not a nice surprise, but this was a learning submission in my view so very educational for very little cost. I was expecting to see the results perhaps by next Wednesday, so you were correct the turnaround was much faster than advertised.
Was: PC-OGH 65 CAC(Holder was in terrible shape)…. Now: CACG 65 L.
Your OGH coin looks a lot nicer than it's CACG pictures!
Until you see the reverse of the OGH…. I thought I had taken pics of both the obv and rev prior to sending it to CACG but apparently I didn’t, otherwise I would post it here. The reverse had egregiously bad scuffing/scratches that gave me no choice but to submit it for a Legacy cross. 🙁
Your OGH coin looks a lot nicer than it's CACG pictures!
Until you see the reverse of the OGH…. I thought I had taken pics of both the obv and rev prior to sending it to CACG but apparently I didn’t, otherwise I would post it here. The reverse had egregiously bad scuffing/scratches that gave me no choice but to submit it for a Legacy cross. 🙁
I'm actually referring to the pictures I'm seeing of your coin that you posted. No criticism was meant of you sending the coin to CACG.
Your OGH coin looks a lot nicer than it's CACG pictures!
Until you see the reverse of the OGH…. I thought I had taken pics of both the obv and rev prior to sending it to CACG but apparently I didn’t, otherwise I would post it here. The reverse had egregiously bad scuffing/scratches that gave me no choice but to submit it for a Legacy cross. 🙁
I'm actually referring to the pictures I'm seeing of your coin that you posted. No criticism was meant of you sending the coin to CACG.
Comments
That's quite a difference between that picture and the two slab shots that follow.
Which truly represents the coin in hand?
How do you feel about the grade not being included in the Image Secure?
The slab shots are not a good representation of how the coin looks in hand. They will not be a plus for those selling coins. Customers are going to wonder why there is such a difference in how the coin looks. Although I believe in time collectors will learn how to read the photos. I also hope CACG figures out that customers are not happy at all with the slab shots!
I am in favor of the grade being shown on the Image Secure shots. I feel the same way about Tru Views.
My slab shots are far from perfect. Mine have hot spots from the lights reflecting off the slab I know. My main objective was to show off the coin while still getting a decent view of the slab. I'm sure a different light setup would achieve both, but this is what I have now. I'm hoping Justin will figure out which method works best to bring out the coin better than it is now.
- Bob -
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Central Valley Roosevelts
Gorgeous coin! Did you use 3 lights on the obverse? Two on the reverse?
Hotspots can be avoided by careful placement of lights, and of course the correct lights.
Coin Photographer.
This is one of the coins that upgraded by a plus.
Yes I too have seen CACG coins bin on eBay (“optimistic prices” per another poster) - Jimmy bought 3 or 4 as marketing display for his cases at shows charging to advertising expense. Confidence level low he can get that. He does retain the bay price paid as reference on back of holder (in code). If people ask he will quote that price plus 5pct and say “this the lowest the consignor will go.” Who knows maybe they will sell at that.
That’s true, but my lights have a strong narrow beam of light even diffusing won’t completely make them disappear. Depending on the coin I can make it work but I don’t dwell much on slab shots. I only make a small fraction of slab shots……less than a half of one percent of what I shoot are slab shots. Great job on yours.
- Bob -
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Central Valley Roosevelts
I use 3. One just sort of hangs back on these slab shots. I don’t do enough to have it dialed in. I know with these particular lights if I back them up off the slab most of the coin features and luster disappear.
- Bob -
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Central Valley Roosevelts
Those Peace dollars are awesome
For some reason you regularly point out that the VOLUME of CACG coins listed on eBay is far far less than than the volume listed of coins graded by PCGS and NGC. So once again I’ll give the same reply:
CACG has absolutely no goal of competing in volume/quantity with PCGS and NGC. My understanding of the goals of CACG are to:
The volume of coins listed by a TPG on eBay is not a reflection of the quality of the product!
Steve
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
As we all agree, the quality of your slab shots is far superior to the quality of slab shots being produced by CACG. This is something they MUST address sooner than later, as it’s a poor reflection (no pun intended) of the quality of their product! The slab shots produced by CACG in your example and my example can legitimately be described as poor, far from representative of the actual coin! That’s so unfortunate and disappointing!
Steve
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
Lost in all the side banter of photos, this is a very nice coin!
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
Received my grades today! That was a very quick turnaround for my econ submission, only 9 calendar days, I am very happy with the speed of the service. The grades were about what I expected, only one moderate surprise from my 7 coin submission. This was a great experience for me and I leaned from it.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
Was: PC-OGH 65 CAC(Holder was in terrible shape)…. Now: CACG 65 L.
Hopefully it was a nice surprise. That’s a great turnaround for any kind of submission. Reholders usually y take longer than that.
- Bob -
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Central Valley Roosevelts
The OGH had it right IMO
So that was a regular 64 CAC in an ogh, green sticker not gold, and they upgraded it a full point with the legacy designation?
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
BadaBling is not familiar with CACG policy's. No coin that upgrades a full point will receive the L designation.
Thats what i'm trying to figure out here. The only coins that were supposed to be able to upgrade by a full point and still get the L were gold beaned coins. If that OGH was a green cac 64, it would contradict the purpose of the L designation, unless i'm missing something here.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
I fully agree with you that is indeed the policy CACG has stated - if a CAC green stickered coin upgrades a full point, then no L - only the same grade or addition of a plus gets the L.
With that said, if indeed the 65 coin shown was in a 64 (or even a 64+) holder, then either CACG made an error in labeling it with the L suffix, OR it had a GOLD sticker, OR CACG changed their policy!
Steve
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
I’m very sorry guys! You’re all 100% correct re: CACG policy…. I screwed up my original post by erroneously describing the coin in its OGH as a ‘64’…. This is NOT the case. To be clear, the coin was originally housed in a PCGS MS65 holder…. So it did NOT upgrade. The only reason I chose to cross it, was that the reverse side of the slab had unsightly scratches and scuffing. My apologies for inciting confusion.
Oy vey!
Steve
My collecting “Pride & Joy” is my PCGS Registry Dansco 7070 Set:
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/design-type-sets/complete-dansco-7070-modified-type-set-1796-date/publishedset/213996
Turns out you were actually right, and wrong.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
Sadly no not a nice surprise, but this was a learning submission in my view so very educational for very little cost. I was expecting to see the results perhaps by next Wednesday, so you were correct the turnaround was much faster than advertised.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
Even a broken clock is right aaaaaafugetaboutit...
Your OGH coin looks a lot nicer than it's CACG pictures!
Until you see the reverse of the OGH…. I thought I had taken pics of both the obv and rev prior to sending it to CACG but apparently I didn’t, otherwise I would post it here. The reverse had egregiously bad scuffing/scratches that gave me no choice but to submit it for a Legacy cross. 🙁
I'm actually referring to the pictures I'm seeing of your coin that you posted. No criticism was meant of you sending the coin to CACG.
Lol…. No worries! 👍🏻😊