Show me your Timely's and I'll show you mine. Have a Cigar...
33 33

21,147 posts in this topic

I've found Heritage scans to be noticeably brighter than the books appear in hand. It is hard to get an approximate scan, I've found I have to adjust differently for each book, and then often readjust after scanning. I've also got a cheap Epson, which doesn't help. I find it near impossible to get all the colors to look like the book, and usually end up tweaking towards the best match for the dominant color. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/30/2019 at 3:36 PM, Knightsofold said:

FE1F78C4-92C7-45EF-A7C1-73BAAF7099A7.thumb.jpeg.ac35bec0e4a3a2efc6f59f37b88902a2.jpeg

Here's the comparison shot I made of your 2 books from the other thread.  Left: Heritage, Right: Your color adjusted to match the book in hand after purchasing. 

This is just a follow-up to get into the nitty gritty of what's goin' on in these scans.  It may not put this issue to bed, but here are my observations comparing the side by side images gratefully provided by knightsofold.  

The encapsulated book is marginally brighter, with a tad more color than my rescanned, corrected image on the right.  That said, achieving perfect color balance & accuracy is extremely difficult in a straight-forward scan because of the lip depth of CGC's current holder.  To reiterate, my rescanned, slightly tweaked image as presented here is very close, ...much closer to how the book actually looks in hand.

Unfortunately, HA's image, on the left, comes across as totally blown out to me, grossly misrepresenting the book's color, depth of field and detail.  Proof is in the fact that the pale blue CGC trademark in the center of the label almost disappears in HA's image (IMO, this would not occur in an accurate scan).  

Also, if you look closely at both images, the thumb on Cap's right hand quite literally disappears in the left scan ...the warlord's blade apparently having severed it.  Fortunately, Cap's thumb miraculously reappears in the right image reshot on my own trusty scanner.  Again, I'm not casting blame on Heritage for any perceived inability in getting an accurate scan from a difficult source.  I'll leave it to others to sort out the causes for image inaccuracy and what needs to be done to fix perception issues for future auctions.

Edited by Cat-Man_America
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr. Lady Luck said:

The imaging done by Heritage looks perfect and professional - MUCH better than the images on CC, CLink, or anywhere else. They don't need to change a thing. 2c

+1

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Cat-Man_America said:

This is just a follow-up to get into the nitty gritty of what's goin' on in these scans.  It may not put this issue to bed, but here are my observations comparing the side by side images gratefully provided by knightsofold.  

The encapsulated book is marginally brighter, with a tad more color than my rescanned, corrected image on the right.  That said, achieving perfect color balance & accuracy is extremely difficult in a straight-forward scan because of the lip depth of CGC's current holder.  To reiterate, my rescanned, slightly tweaked image as presented here is very close, ...much closer to how the book actually looks in hand.

 

Are you certain that the CGC case is the cause of your scanned color issues? I haven't noticed that result at all. But it is good to know that if something is going wrong the CGC cases are as good a scapegoat as anything. I really think the sonic seals are the cause of the recent drop in the stock market.

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, MrBedrock said:

Are you certain that the CGC case is the cause of your scanned color issues? I haven't noticed that result at all. But it is good to know that if something is going wrong the CGC cases are as good a scapegoat as anything. I really think the sonic seals are the cause of the recent drop in the stock market.

I think what catman is saying that due to the holder, the book surface itself is not directly on the scanner bed. It’s 1/8 to 1/4 of an inch away, and the distance affects the scan, and compensating for this distance can lead to some creativity 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GreatCaesarsGhost said:

I think what catman is saying that due to the holder, the book surface itself is not directly on the scanner bed. It’s 1/8 to 1/4 of an inch away, and the distance affects the scan, and compensating for this distance can lead to some creativity 

I understand. And what I am saying is that scans I have taken with the new holders are not similarly affected. I have heard of no one else experiencing that effect and I would be curious if that effect as a result of lip depth of the holder is even a possibility. I am not ruling it out, just vigorously disputing it. I also love that that concern is coming from Cat, who I love, and who is also very adamant in his dislike of the new holders.

Edited by MrBedrock
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, MrBedrock said:

Are you certain that the CGC case is the cause of your scanned color issues? I haven't noticed that result at all. But it is good to know that if something is going wrong the CGC cases are as good a scapegoat as anything. I really think the sonic seals are the cause of the recent drop in the stock market.

Just got back here, and haven't had time to read through all the posts, opinions, etc., but yes, I'm convinced that the lip depth of current holders is a key bad actor that requires recalibrating scanners or enhancing scanned images to achieve some semblance of color accuracy.  This is easy to prove as I have many older CGC scans (pre-NR holders) and have done the side by side comparisons.  Achieving bright, clear, accurate color images was never an issue before.  Older holders had other faults, but pale in comparison to this.  

Don't know about sonic seals, but I'm pretty darn sure my HP scanner didn't go on strike, deciding on it's own to darken only new holder scans.  If that proves to be the case, I'm sure there'll be an investigation & my scanner will go to jail. :wink:

This is not an effort by me to throw shade on either CGC or Heritage, but I see this is a serious enough problem that both businesses should be concerned.  Unfortunately, Heritage's reaction to difficulty with scanning newer holders seems to be boosting everything.  That's easy enough to do I suppose, but the downside is unrealistic, saturated color and the risk of disappointing auction winners receiving books that aren't as bright and colorful as the auction house scans.

I'm striving to be as objective as possible (constructive criticism shouldn't be seen as scapegoating).  No one is making this stuff up nor casting blame.  The scans are what they are, and yes, it's an issue that should be addressed ASAP.  Newton Rings are still an issue too, but there's a separate thread discussing that and possible fixes.  

:tink:

Edited by Cat-Man_America
Link to post
Share on other sites

Follow-up: Richard isn't seeing the same issues I'm seeing, so it isn't clear where the differences between our scanners are manifested.  hm

What I can do is show a new label scan before and after serious tweaking was required to get the color right (slightly cropped top and left side of holder in second image, but the same scan).

Here's the original scan, before & after color correction.  Alas, the billboard label is a bit oversaturated in the second image (being raised & closer to the surface of the holder), but the book is now accurately rendered:

Spoiler

CA43_zps1xqwdxrw.jpgedited-image_zpsbf7d441v.png

 The image on the right is very close to how the book looks in hand.

Now I'll post a recent addition older label book that required minimal enhancement via Photo-bucket editing to bring image clarity up to what I'm seeing in hand (notice that the label matches book clarity)... 

Spoiler

8343043d-b56f-47bf-b823-4094e18cd724_zps

It's always possible that my scanner is somehow contributing to the problems I'm experiencing with new label holders, but I'm not seeing it.  

Note: These images haven't been cobbled together or heavily manipulated in a way to misrepresent how these books actually look.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
33 33