Home› PCGS Set Registry Forum

Heritage VDB - PR66RD - Sold for $69K in Feb 2008, is being offered again...

renomedphysrenomedphys Posts: 3,641 ✭✭✭✭✭
in PCGS Set Registry Forum
While I'm sure a few of the more watchful eyes have seen this, I think it is worthy of mention.

Current link.
Past link.

I suppose this is as good a place as any to put my 2 cents in. I'll do it in the form of a question. Can somebody please show me a single stunningly eye appealing VDB that has been on the auction block in the past three years?

Empty Nest Collection
Matt’s Mattes

Comments

  • HdHunterHdHunter Posts: 133
    Matt:
    Good pick up, I would never have thought this was the same coin. What a difference a picture makes?
    Wow!
    Jonathan
  • soty27soty27 Posts: 1,956
    I dont think the image is the only thing that has changed on that coin. How could an image make all those spots on the obverse disappear?



    imageimage


    I think there is alot more going on here then a new image.
  • DMWJRDMWJR Posts: 6,008 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Considering it is still in the same holder, I think the difference is just a function of lighting and that these two photos are at the opposite extremes, and the truth is somewhere in the middle. Neither captures what I would be looking for in a matte proof Lincoln.
    Doug
  • soty27soty27 Posts: 1,956


    << <i>Considering it is still in the same holder, I think the difference is just a function of lighting and that these two photos are at the opposite extremes, and the truth is somewhere in the middle. Neither captures what I would be looking for in a matte proof Lincoln. >>



    No matter how you lit that coin it would not make the carbon spots disappear, either Heritage started post editing the images and erasing defects or that coin has been doctored. I saw the coin in hand last time it sold and I will see it again this time around so I will know for sure. Just because its the same cert number on the holder does not mean it's the same holder.
  • EagleEyeEagleEye Posts: 7,677 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I recall commenting on the coin back in '08 that some of the spots in the pic were not on the coin, but I see the archives were deleted from early this year on back, so I can't confirm that.

    Even the slab pics are totally different-looking.
    Rick Snow, Eagle Eye Rare Coins, Inc.Check out my new web site:
  • BigRickBigRick Posts: 1,334
    Is it even possible it got worked on AND still got the same cert number? image
    My Sets
  • EagleEyeEagleEye Posts: 7,677 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I see no difference in the coins, just the lighting.
    Rick Snow, Eagle Eye Rare Coins, Inc.Check out my new web site:
  • kryptonitecomicskryptonitecomics Posts: 9,185 ✭
    The coin looks like it could have hard the carbon spots removed but I will concede that I have taken images of coins that looked pristine and once imaged the pictures seem to show spots or stains that did not appear on the coin at any angle so lighting can play tricks on the overall look of a coin including adding or subtacting marks or blemishes. Since I have not seen this coin in hand.....I can not provide anything other than a worthless opinion that the coin could have been conserved.....
    Kryptonitecomics Ebay Auctions
  • ProofCentsProofCents Posts: 1,656
    The fields look fishy the stains make me think some one removed those carbon spots. Let wait and see this coin in 2 years.
  • DMWJRDMWJR Posts: 6,008 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I'm sorry, but there is no doctoring or conserving here. The coin is in the same holder with the exact same label (note the uniqueness of the print defect in the coin number). This is a function of lighting and/or color edits with software. It does serve to remind us that you can't go by photographs when grading a coin. The best you can say is "that is a ___ photograph of a coin."
    Doug
  • HdHunterHdHunter Posts: 133
    Doug:
    Well said, the only question is which is a truer image of the coin?
    Jonathan
Sign In or Register to comment.