How did this Flying Eagle ever straight grade, much less CAC?

As I have already stated, the scratch isn't "very noticeable" and only stands out when viewed under magnification. And what is wrong with their consistency? The gold coin you showed tells us all we need to know. In the slab photo, the scratch is plainly obvious and nobody would disagree that the coin deserves a details grade. Yet in the beauty shot, the scratch all but disappears, which brings us back to the hazards of trying to grade coins from photographs. The SLQ and Barber Quarter seem not to deserve the assigned details grades, but I bet if I had them in hand, I could find the scratch, and photograph the coin in such a way that the scratch would appear prominent, thus vindicating the details grade.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Heritage has to photograph thousands of coins for each auction which necessitates a cookie cutter assembly line approach. They can't spend time on each an every coin making sure the coin is cast in the best possible light. While I don't have confirmation of this, it is my belief based on my experience with numismatic photography that Heritage uses extremely bright lights that are diffused. This approach allows them to reduce slab glare, capture surfaces and color, and be able to change denominations of coins without making any adjustments to their lighting set up. As a result, the luster on all of their photos will appear flat and lifeless, which is the main drawback of using diffused lighting in numismatic photography.

Occasionally, they use an outside photographer for high end toned coins. I don't know if Todd Pollack still does this for them, but I know that he has provided photography services for Heritage in the past. In those rare instances, the coins will show proper luster since Todd mainly uses direct lighting in his photography setup.

 

And both are less severe than on the FEC.

Changing the angle of the scratch changed everything. Comparing the slab shots side-by-side, the width of the scratch is about the same, and the amount of metal movement indicates they have about the same depth. Yes, this is inconsistency.

 

Here's another 1913 buffalo this is a 65 every day!

 

How do you know the severity of the scratches on those two coins, all you have is one still photo? As your gold coin showed, changing the angle of the photo can make the scratch disappear. And the scratch on that coin is far more severe than the one on the FEC.

Question though, what would you do without Heritage’s archives so that you can search hundreds on scratched coins to find these so called examples of inconsistency?

 

I just picked the first three. I didn’t really search for them. The purpose of the 3 randomly-chosen examples was to show that the FEC was not consistent with the TPGs’ standards for scratched coins, not to criticize the grades of the 3 examples in any way.

 

The flying eagle was downgraded for the scratch. I can’t tell the luster but otherwise it looks 65. I’m surprised the 60-o $20 didn’t get a pass as it’s a tough date