1949 Jackies on Memory Lane

[orly57]

Peter, the AH scan is all anyone has to go off when they are bidding at auction. That cuts both ways on psa and sgc-graded cards. You bring up a very serious issue about AH's using questionable scans. The SGC 7 mantle looks almost too good to be true, and may well be a product of that practice. But this string began with two cards from the same auction taken presumably with the same scanner. The premise of the post was to compare two equally graded cards, one by sgc and one by psa, and ask if the holder is more valuable than the card even when the SGC is clearly a nicer card.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by orly57

Peter, the AH scan is all anyone has to go off when they are bidding at auction. That cuts both ways on psa and sgc-graded cards. You bring up a very serious issue about AH's using questionable scans. The SGC 7 mantle looks almost too good to be true, and may well be a product of that practice. But this string begun with two cards from the same auction taken presumably with the same scanner. The premise of the post was to compare two equally graded cards, one by sgc and one by psa, and ask if the holder is more valuable than the card even when the SGC is clearly a nicer card.

Right, but the thread (like many) has evolved, I thought Patrick's scans presented an important opportunity to make a point, if a different one than the thread started with. I mean SO many times we see people here making judgments based on juxtaposing scans. "The one on the right has much better color and registration" blah blah. Well I could say that about the two I posted, couldn't I, other than the fact that they are the same card?

More critical thinking needed.

[orly57]

My world has been turned upside-down. I am now critically thinking. I must now make personal visits to all AHs and hold it in-hand before bidding on a card. I can no longer buy on eBay. I can't even admire nice cards anymore, and must assume that Battlefield is now the staff photographer at Heritage. I see the light now. I just wonder how this board can go on if we can't discuss images of cards.

[Peter_Spaeth]

There you go.

[irv]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

This should be a permanent sticky for anyone who doubts the power of scans and anyone glibly comparing cards based just on scans.

Wow, what a difference!

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by orly57

My world has been turned upside-down. I am now critically thinking. I must now make personal visits to all AHs and hold it in-hand before bidding on a card. I can no longer buy on eBay. I can't even admire nice cards anymore, and must assume that Battlefield is now the staff photographer at Heritage. I see the light now. I just wonder how this board can go on if we can't discuss images of cards.

Despite the sarcasm a trip to an AH office might not be a bad idea before dropping a couple hundred grand on a card.

As for the 52 Mantles in this discussion the improved color in the heritage scan may have played a role, but I believe the centering difference alone is enough to justify the difference in price.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

Despite the sarcasm a trip to an AH office might not be a bad idea before dropping a couple hundred grand on a card.

As for the 52 Mantles in this discussion the improved color in the heritage scan may have played a role, but I believe the centering difference alone is enough to justify the difference in price.

I had that discussion (scans) with Heritage at the National. The way they do scans of cards isn't with a scanner. It is with a camera. Any difference in colors is not intentional....and I am as cynical as the next guy but trust me, I doubt any good AH is doctoring scans in today's age. And I don't think I am too naive....but please keep going...it's interesting.

.

[frankbmd]

I must admit that in my "Diminutive Surface Scuffing" thread that I did "doctor" the scans of the 55 Topps cards to make it easier for the naive among us to see the presumed defects. I suppose that some would argue that all my scans are "Doctored", but for the aforementioned thread I used SET (Scuff Enhancement Technology). So there , now I feel better.

[orly57]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

I must admit that in my "Diminutive Surface Scuffing" thread that I did "doctor" the scans of the 55 Topps cards to make it easier for the naive among us to see the presumed defects. I suppose that some would argue that all my scans are "Doctored", but for the aforementioned thread I used SET (Scuff Enhancement Technology). So there , now I feel better.

Frank, I was more concerned with Brian's Hornsby card. It was in an SGC 2 holder in the Spring '14 REA auction, and recently appeared in a psa 9 holder. Obviously it has been doctored, though it may just be the scans.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Leon

I had that discussion (scans) with Heritage at the National. The way they do scans of cards isn't with a scanner. It is with a camera. Any difference in colors is not intentional....and I am as cynical as the next guy but trust me, I doubt any good AH is doctoring scans in today's age. And I don't think I am too naive....but please keep going...it's interesting.

.

The issue isn't scans versus pictures, obviously, as both can be adjusted. Intentional or not, it's hard for me to believe the hobby's biggest AH is not aware of the character of their pictures and the fact that they are relatively, shall we say, bright.

[Peter_Spaeth]

On the subject of 52T Mantle colors, what up with this one?

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by orly57

My world has been turned upside-down. I am now critically thinking. I must now make personal visits to all AHs and hold it in-hand before bidding on a card. I can no longer buy on eBay. I can't even admire nice cards anymore, and must assume that Battlefield is now the staff photographer at Heritage. I see the light now. I just wonder how this board can go on if we can't discuss images of cards.

Guess it's time for a trip to a live auction