Hard to believe these are the same IHs

shylock

Toothpuller mentioned a big dropoff in Superior's imaging from Long Beach to ANA, and I have to agree they ditched the high end digital camera and dusted off their old scanner for the less impressive IHs in this sale. One coin I was curious about was an 1897 PCGS MS66RD, one of those sleeper dates you never see offered for sale higher than 65 in a PCGS holder:



Today it showed up in a dealer's online inventory. If it weren't for the spot above the 7, the odd's against two of these showing up within a week, and the fact that the dealer's markup is right in line with the auction price, I'd never think they were the same coins:

WWBillman

I can't help but wonder if they are the same. The spot above the 7 does not look to be the same size and in the second picture there appears to be a spot in the field above the 3rd feather that’s not visible on the first.

Hum

BNE

I was looking at the blemish on the "E" in cent on the reverse, and darkness along the jaw line. Can adjusting lighting, angle and camera eliminate that?

In any event, I'll take the bottom one, thanks.

shylock

I may be wrong, but I think they're the same coins based on what I mentioned as well as a few other traits (minute flecks around the date, etc...) The type of imaging used here by Superior accentuates any texture changes in the surfaces of the coin by shadowing them, but at the same time doesn't pick up other marks the more sensitive digital image does. Just another example of why coins should never be final judged through images.

Here's a comparison of another Superior IH from this auction compared to Heritage's imaging. The planchet flaws under the chin and on the cheek become heavily shadowed on the Superior image, while the spot at 9 o'clock of the reverse rim in the Heritage pic is non-existent in Superior's:

toothpuller

Paul I think its the same coin. Pop 10 in 67, no two would likely have that same spot north of the 7. Also on the Superior scan the tip of the seventh feather looks light. Their scans were so bad, it could be what shows up as dark at the tip of the seventh feather on the new scan. All the Superior scans had that burnout at the jaw line, so that is meaningless. On my auction notes I wrote badly spotted reverse for this lot 444. This was prior to reading your post mentioning that the 1900 Photo seal which you had owned previously had planchet defects which looked like spots on Superior's scan. Was asleep when that one went by.

The internet bidders get no respect. I would have most likely bid higher than the winning bids on more lots if I had images similar to the new dealer image. Hopefully the two IHC's I won are OK. Felt like a blind man in a dark cave during that auction. So far I have nothing good to say about Superior's customer service as twice I've attempted to call in a payment and was connected to voice mail. I'm just going to wait for an invoice.

I looked at all my sources and didn't see that coin for sale. Even went back to look under all the rocks and still can't find it.

IrishMike

Paul, there is also the same spot bottom left of the seven.

DrawTwo

Paul - are those Indian Head and Flying eagle cut-outs at the top of the Fly-In page your work? Very classy!

Every time you post, I find myself buying another Indian Head! And it's not even my type!

michael

for me it is a no brainer the same coins in each instance

that was great detective work paul and i can see that scans and photos can be very deceptive

sincerely michael

shylock

Michael - you and I certainly keep different EST hours. I'm just getting up while you're just getting ready for bed!

Toothpuller - the inventory it showed up in is Pinnacle's.

DrawTwo - yes, those two "Photoshopped" images are mine. Here is a much larger view of the Flying Eagle from a website in progress about classic eagles of US coinage: link.

Cam40

Sorry to stray abit,but this Peace Dollar on that Pinnacle site really got my attention.
Aint she a beauty?

medicain19

They sure look like the same coins. It is amazing how easy it is to simply adjust the lighting and the coins look like two different coins.Hmm

shylock

Lighting can make a big difference, but in this case it's the quality of the imaging source (scanner/camera) that made a huge difference.

Cam40 -- they come up with some exceptional coins, and in the past year their imaging went from very rough to top of the line so they're a fun place to browse. A while back I splurged on a RB 1955 DDO with beautiful toning I couldn't resist: link.

Elcontador

Paul,

Once again, excellent detective work on this coin! You're right; Pinnacle has excellent images. When I got my Seated Half from them on memo, I didn't have many surprises after studying the image & speaking with Scott and Mr. Imhoff (first name escapes me) about the coin. It's a first class operation.

Speaking of images, I don't collect gold, but I notice that images re Unc. copper tend to be more distorted than those of nickel and silver coins.

This thread hammers home that you really either need to see the coin, have someone you trust see it, or get a coin consultation from someone you think is honest. Otherwise, you might as well be buying it sight unseen.

shylock

Speaking of images, I don't collect gold, but I notice that images re Unc. copper tend to be more distorted than those of nickel and silver coins.

I couldn't agree with you more Jeff, and one of the reasons I've developed a side interest in coin imaging is I've had to learn this the hard way. Indian Heads and early Lincolns are the most difficult subjects because they've survived in a wider spectrum of color tones than any other coin. These tones have a habit of fooling the camera and depicting them correctly is an art form in itself.

And forget about IH proofs -- if you try to evaluate one of these by the image alone you are wasting your time.