Is this poor grading by PCGS or poor imaging by Heritage?

Shamika

Cameo???

Wolf359

Image.

The new Heritage style is great on details, but you cannot tell cameo, PL, or DMPL surfaces.

BillJones

It has to be a bad picture. It's hard to believe that PCGS blew the "cameo" designation by that much. I've seen them go more often on the conservative side with the "cameo" than the liberal side.

However, given the picture, I won’t bid cameo money for it.

airplanenut

I didn't even have to see the auction to know which choice I'd pick

Connecticoin

<< <i>Image.

The new Heritage style is great on details, but you cannot tell cameo, PL, or DMPL surfaces. >>



Heritage images are terrible on details as well. On MS coins (especially Morgans) grade-limiting hits are washed out by the lighting.

LALASD4

Image.

My coins look so bad on their auctions, what can I do? Someone please teach them how to take pictures.

Russ

It's all about angle and lighting.





Russ, NCNE

Barry

<< <i>My coins look so bad on their auctions, what can I do? >>


Consign them elsewhere, and next time they call to beg for coins tell them why you're consigning elsewhere.

It's funny - a few times I've gotten called by Heritage begging for a consignment and I always tell them I won't consign to them until they learn how to take pictures. The response is always "I didn't know that was a problem, but I'll pass it along."

We, as a group, must be very picky buyers and sellers, considering how well they do.

mozin

It is the Heritage image that is poor on the thread coin.

CU members routinely talk about the poor Heritage imaging, and I agree. What I do not see, however, is other auction houses doing much better. They all do a decent job showing the UNTONED coin DETAILS, but not the luster. B&M might do somewhat better on toned coins than the others, but normally toned coins are not imaged well.

Many CU members have shown us coins can be imaged far better than what we currently see from the auction houses. I believe it is a matter of time. The auction houses simply don't take the time to image properly. As mentioned by another CU member, I hesitate to consign coins when the images are generally so poor.

JrGMan2004

mozin: One thing you fail to see, is that Heritage and the other companies see a lot of coins coming through... they have fair sized staff, but it still takes a while... ask Jeremy how long he takes to do a picture for a toned Morgan. I've watched him spend 30 minutes on ONE coin... now imagine if you have a thousand such coins in an auction. Whatcha gonna do then? YOu have a limited time, so that staff starts cutting corner... taking crappy pictures as acceptable... the only time Heritage has their photographers spend any time on coins, is when they are expensive coins... otherwise, it's just some employee sitting there putting the coin on the scanner, hitting a button, flipping it over, and repeating... that takes less skill (And probally costs the company less for the employee) than someone who knows how to properly photograph coins with a camera... Heritage has a large operation, and they have a large staff... but I don't think they have a large enough staff to properly photograph every single coin, otherwise, they would be...

edit to add: Or it coul be that they could have a large enough staff, but have decided againest it possibly because of the time and finacial cost involved... this is just my own speculations of course...

Shamika

<< <i>they could have a large enough staff, but have decided againest it possibly because of the time and finacial cost involved >>


But what of the cost involved in NOT photographing well? I know many collectors (myself included) who won't bid on coins with crappy images. And then there are the consignors who won't consign their collections due to poor imaging.

How can you afford NOT to take good images?

airplanenut

<< <i> I've watched him spend 30 minutes on ONE coin >>

George, I haven't spent that long on a coin since the days when I was using a scanner... some 5 years ago. That said, some coins do take a while to get a good shot of. Two points to consider:

1- The shot doesn't have to be perfect--the time in photographing a toned dollar is the time it takes to get that last little bit to make the shot really great. A decent shot can be had quickly
2- Other firms seem to do just fine, albeit they have far fewer coins. This means Heritage should step up, pay a few more people, and get with it. Their site says they've done HALF A BILLION in sales in the last year--they can afford to pay a few photographers!

Myqqy

I agree with Jeremy that there is no excuse for bad pictures- with proper technique and equipment, a decent shot, if not a really good shot, can be done quickly. I'm shocked that big firms skimp with imaging....

Bear

PCGS is truly tough on Cameos and DeepCameos.

Its the picture thats the problerm. Angle, lighting and type camera

are the suspects here.

jdcheers

I wouldn't say all auction company's have bad images. Some of ANR pictures, specifically noticeable on their website, are mouth watering.

ColonialCoinUnion

<< <i>It is the Heritage image that is poor on the thread coin.

CU members routinely talk about the poor Heritage imaging, and I agree. What I do not see, however, is other auction houses doing much better. They all do a decent job showing the UNTONED coin DETAILS, but not the luster. B&M might do somewhat better on toned coins than the others, but normally toned coins are not imaged well.

Many CU members have shown us coins can be imaged far better than what we currently see from the auction houses. I believe it is a matter of time. The auction houses simply don't take the time to image properly. As mentioned by another CU member, I hesitate to consign coins when the images are generally so poor. >>



Are you serious?

Have you ever seen an ANR catalog? Doug Plasencia does a terrific job for them. Stack's is a close second. Everyone else is abysmal, particularly B&M.

jdcheers

<< <i>

<< <i>It is the Heritage image that is poor on the thread coin.

CU members routinely talk about the poor Heritage imaging, and I agree. What I do not see, however, is other auction houses doing much better. They all do a decent job showing the UNTONED coin DETAILS, but not the luster. B&M might do somewhat better on toned coins than the others, but normally toned coins are not imaged well.

Many CU members have shown us coins can be imaged far better than what we currently see from the auction houses. I believe it is a matter of time. The auction houses simply don't take the time to image properly. As mentioned by another CU member, I hesitate to consign coins when the images are generally so poor. >>



Are you serious?

Have you ever seen an ANR catalog? Doug Plasencia does a terrific job for them. Stack's is a close second. Everyone else is abysmal, particularly B&M. >>



Stack's are o.k., but to me ANR is in a league of there own when it comes to coin images. Better than True View even.

morgannut2

ANR and Stacks are the only auctions I would send or buy an imaged nice coin. Heritage is the only place I'd sell a hairlined coin.

majorbigtime

probably both

Shamika

ANR is great, but Stacks is not in the same class. Images of Buffalo nickels posted by Stacks make the coins looks as if they're made from modeling clay.

mozin

Here is an example of an ANR image that does not come close to the coin in hand. The ANR description is fairly close. The coin is a medium toned multicolored original, typical of the PCGS AU50 grade. Had I not called ANR, and asked for a further description, I would not have bid and won this beautiful coin.

1817/3 ANR

Coxe

It's the volume. Teletrade and Heritage both do what about 8,000 lots in their internet auctions each week. Even with recycling of images for relisted unsold lots, that's a lot of work to image everything. Neither spends time on catalogue descriptions for those auctions. I figured Teletrade must scan their lots and I am not sure what Heritage does either, but I bet it is quick and dirty. Their Signature sales are another story. One would hope for the best possible images within reason for those sales. I know I was disappointed with some of mine in my consignment. Perhaps when the market cools off some there will be fewer lots to image and quality will improve, also with the catalogue descriptions. Too much for too few to do right now.

Barry

Volume is no excuse. The MGM Grand Hotel has 5000+ rooms. Does that mean their service is abysmal compared with a 100 room hotel? No, it means they hire sufficient staff handle the volume and do a quality job.

I agree that ANR is in a league by itself when it comes to pics. Buyer beware - some auction houses just take poor pics, others Photoshop their pics to hide flaws and give them more color. When it doubt, if you don't see the coin yourself, have a dealer evaluate the coin for you. It's worth the fee.

RYK

Volume is no excuse. The MGM Grand Hotel has 5000+ rooms. Does that mean their service is abysmal compared with a 100 room hotel? No, it means they hire sufficient staff handle the volume and do a quality job.

That's an excellent point, Barry. ANR sells primarily high-end coins, and in its defense, Heritage sells a lot of lower value coins, in addition to the high dollar coins. Perhaps, they feel that the lower value coins do not deserve the same attention as the high dollar coins (ie. you get more attention on the concierge level at the MGM than on the "closet" level). The problem with this approach is that the lower tier of service inexorably bleeds into the higher priced material and lowers the overall quality of your effort.

I thought that the Duke's Creek Dahlonega coins recently auctioned by Heritage were expertly and accurately imaged, so we know they have the ability to do a high quality job when they choose to do so.

Edit, to answer the original question: Is this poor grading by PCGS or poor imaging by Heritage?

YES.

etexmike

I'll go with the majority here and say that it is Heritage.

I have several Proof Walkers in their Signature sale and four of the coins are NGC (STAR) coins.

They got the star designation because of the nice frosted devices. You wouldn't know it from the pics or even from the description.

I hope that some folks will take a good look at them at the show. Or, smoebody is going to get some bargins off my coins.

-----------

etexmike

Russ

Heritage produces crappy images because they have no incentive to do otherwise. Even with the crappy images, their coins still bring strong money. Until that changes, they have no reason to make the effort.

Russ, NCNE

howboutdemcoins

I've got an idea. Why don't one of you good photographers out there get in touch with Heritage and offer your services? Show them a copy of this (and many other threads) concerning their lousy pictures. It's a win win for everyone.

1. Heritage has better pics so more people are willing to consign.
2. The collectors get more accurate pics of what we're buying.
3. The photographer gets a dream job of photographing beautiful coins.

And yes, I'll wait till you get the job before you send me my commission! LOL

Barry

<< <i>Heritage produces crappy images because they have no incentive to do otherwise. Even with the crappy images, their coins still bring strong money. Until that changes, they have no reason to make the effort.

Russ, NCNE >>


Russ - Don't you think prices would be stronger with good pics, especially the Internet-only auctions?

shylock

When in doubt, look at the color of the label.

Heritage has embarked upon yet another new strategy in imaging slabs.
They image them against a translucent background. They are ultra bright
as a result. It makes their CN IH's look like white gold.

When it comes to PR Liberty nickels, like your post, they then backed off
the brightness with imaging software. Now the label looks darker blue than
it should, and the background looks lightly toned blue instead of translucent.

Russ

<< <i>Russ - Don't you think prices would be stronger with good pics, especially the Internet-only auctions? >>



Honestly, no. At least for the stuff I watch, (IE 1950 to 1970 era proof and SMS coins). I've seen them blow away realized prices on the same coins that sold in other venues many, many times. Part of that is that there are plenty of buyers that are paying for the label, though. The other part is that they have a huge user base.

Russ, NCNE