Heritage Photos Anyone know what they use?

[pawnee101]

They get such clear big picks just wandering if anyone knows what set up or camera they got?

[Hoot]

My understanding is that they use a scanner for most of their pics and a camera setup for their "better" pieces. I don't know what brands, their specific setup, etc., but the differences in the scanned photos and the camera photos is usually quite noticeable and the presentation is different.

 

There's a good article in the January 10 Coin World on digital photography.

 

Hoot

[jom]

There's a good article in the January 10 Coin World on digital photography.

 

Anyone got that issue? Maybe I could get a copy?

 

Anyway, it seems Heritage does use a scanner for most of their coins. Which explains why the NGC holdered coins always look poor. White slab and all that.

 

They do seem to use a different type of scanner than some others do. Their pictures look signifcantly different than others I know of that use scanners who sell on Ebay.

 

Their camera shots are much better usually but as Hoot noted they only do that with the more expensive coins.

 

jom

[spy88]

Their camera shots are much better usually but as Hoot noted they only do that with the more expensive coins.

And in so doing, put out the most un-professional pictures for the consignor relying on them to sell their material. Whether it is a $25 coin or a $250,000 coin, the photography should be the same, i.e. showing the coin as close to actual as is possible. A good photographer can put out just as many pics with a digicam as with a scanner in the same amount of time if the setup is done right. To cite time constraints as a reason for scanning (given to me) is another way of saying they don't care. Also, it was easier for them to add the lightening buttons then to just do a good job in the first place.

 

Heritage does not seem to understand how much their lousy pictures (scanned or photoed) hurt their commission and the sellers wallet. I will never understand this philosophy.

 

I could be wrong but this is JMO from personal experience.

 

jom, PM me your address and I'll send you my copy.

[Beijim]

Anyone got that issue? Maybe I could get a copy?

You can read the article online at the Coin World web site (www.coinworld.com), at least last I checked.

 

Beijim

[Hoot]

Their camera shots are much better usually but as Hoot noted they only do that with the more expensive coins.

And in so doing, put out the most un-professional pictures for the consignor relying on them to sell their material. Whether it is a $25 coin or a $250,000 coin, the photography should be the same, i.e. showing the coin as close to actual as is possible. A good photographer can put out just as many pics with a digicam as with a scanner in the same amount of time if the setup is done right. To cite time constraints as a reason for scanning (given to me) is another way of saying they don't care. Also, it was easier for them to add the lightening buttons then to just do a good job in the first place.

 

Heritage does not seem to understand how much their lousy pictures (scanned or photoed) hurt their commission and the sellers wallet. I will never understand this philosophy.

 

David is 100% correct in his assessment. It's remarkable that an auction house with such a high $$$ flow and superior reputation as Heritage, should continue with such unbelievably bad photography.

 

Hoot

[Wihlborg]

David is 100% correct in his assessment. It's remarkable that an auction house with such a high $$$ flow and superior reputation as Heritage, should continue with such unbelievably bad photography.

 

I agree. There have been a number of coins in their auctions that I would have bid on, but due to the quality of their images I won't take a chance on them.

 

John