Would you consider this attractive toning?

p.s. Oval, I was surprised you recommended auto color correct. In my experience, it doesn't do a good job of correcting color for coin photos, and even when it does get it pretty close, it doesn't nail it. The reason for NGC/ANACS slabs is the slight color cast of the insert (which PS interprets as pure white), and the reason for PCGS slabs is their opaque (and bluish) tint.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I didn't know I was recommending it but suppose I was. Should've added, "at your own risk." I do it to get an alternate read of a coin, knowing that any image isn't going to fully represent the item. I don't like the "wan," red-yellow, slightly washed-out look that appears especially in Heritage's imaging.

I tinker with Photoshop in other ways, too, e.g., searching for carbon spots (and generally assessing the coin's surface) using Brightness/Contrast, since carbon spots are non-reflective. As maybe a lot of folks here do, I try to get as full a read of the coin's surfaces as I can.

Sound like you have a good bit of experience yourself. I find this stuff hard to talk about because there are so many variables and different perceptions.

With respect to the NGC slabs (not sure about the ANACS ones), I would ascribe the slightly warm, dark cast as coming not from the insert, which I judge to be fairly white, but to the holder itself, which we've all seen vary quite a bit. The PCGS plastic is definitely harder to read.

I left graphic design in the mid-90's, when web design was still fledgling and color compatibility between the various design and print programs (i.e., screen builds for 4-color process) began having huge problems. I'm glad I missed all that, frankly; I'm a very visual person but not much of a technician.

 

He had it at $1,595 (or thereabouts) in a previous listing. I'm kinda surprised no one bought it, but then again, I don't think a lot of viewers would've been bowled over by the toning, esp. w/o seeing it in hand.

The sales history of coins like this intrigues me. It had sold on Heritage for $1,150, then $1,495. Now, no one's touching it for $1,195. I wonder how much Disruptek paid for it? And did he buy it from the dissatisfied owner who won it on Heritage with no return policy?

 

It sold for $1,495 in February. That's quite a drop.

Now, since it failed to sell at $1,195, seller is hoping to add some cachet by re-listing it at $1,745: http://cgi.ebay.com/1934-50C-NGC-MS..._Individual&hash=item20b48b215d#ht_2496wt_674

 

You're right, 20% is not that much. I didn't have the sense, through Greysheet, that Walkers had changed that much this year; had only seen a few lower bids here and there over the year.

I just checked PCGS; two-year changes are all over the map, with selected S-mints up as much as 100% and others down up to 50%.

 

Thought you might appreciate the final chapter in the recent history of this coin:

Sold on Heritage in Feb. of this year for $1,495 in a PCGS CAC slab.
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1137&Lot_No=472

Then, about a month ago, in an NGC holder, no CAC, it was listed as a BIN on ebay by Disruptek for $1,545 (one week listing). Then $1,195, $1,745, and $1,695.

Finally, it sold as a true auction this evening for $689.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=150516872247&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT

Someone's headache finally becomes someone else's bargain.

 

Really? Like what coins? And where would I be able to find such information? I guess I'm not really in touch with the coin market.

 

finding a decent toned WLH is about the same chance as finding a decent toned peace dollar. dont see why the toning on the OP coin would bring any premium really.