Digital deception by use of image editing software.
jtlee321
Posts: 2,355 ✭✭✭✭✭
@Insider2 had requested that someone photograph a large coin and display it here with before and after images, showing digital alteration. This was a project that I have been wanting to try for sometime now. Not for nefarious reasons, but to educate collectors. There are some other threads that show questionable coins, which also inspired me to move forward with this project. I chose a Morgan Dollar that is from the GSA hoard and as so, appears very baggy. I spent approximately 2 hours cleaning up the bag marks using Photoshop.
The end result could be very deceptive if proper technique and patience are exercised. The only gains I can think of in using this form of deception is to sell a coin to an unsuspecting individual, then take the money and run. Obviously the coin if actually shipped will not look as it does in the images. This form of deception could also be used as bragging rights in online forums or Instagram or some other form of online sharing, where the other users will never see the actual coin.
I hope that this thread will show that it's not just lighting techniques that can be used to hide the flaws on coins. It's also another reason why you should know who you are buying from online and be cautious of those you have never dealt with before.
Here is a semi-high resolution before image at 2500 x 2500 pixels.
Here are the results after the digital alteration. Again, this is the result of 2 hours in Photoshop.
Comments
AMAZING!
Thanks for giving me something ELSE to worry about.
This is the kind of high caliber content I come here for. Thank you @jtlee321
You rock!!!
http://www.pcgs.com/SetRegistry/publishedset.aspx?s=142753
https://www.autismforums.com/media/albums/acrylic-colors-by-rocco.291/
That's awesome @jtlee321!
Given that we've already moved to high resolution photos, I wonder what this means for the future of collecting!
Nice job, @jtlee321.
I've been on a campaign for the past 20+ years (ever since I got proficient at photoshop (and vice-versa)) not to trust any image as real. Some of the tools developed make it ridiculously easy to doctor a photo.
Image manipulation was really tough (but still not impossible) in the darkroom age, but now you can probably do it on your phone...
Thanks for the demonstration. The after photo makes the coin look almost flawless.
@jtlee321
Doctored photos have been going on for many years and in many industries.
Technology just makes it easier.
Thank you for the demonstration and reminder.
Photoshop is over 30 years old.
behold ... an MS69 Morgan.
You mean, gulp - that that woman on the dating site might not look that good?
Great post, jtlee321!!
I knew it would happen.
I remember a thread where someone asked for help grading a Morgan after they photoshopped pot leaves into her hair.
It went 3 pages before anyone noticed.
That was funny
My Saint Set
MUCH more common than thought I suspect.
Great piece of art work. I've got DC over-strikes that look almost as nice,,,,
@jtlee321
Thanks for posting your great work.
I took a basic Photoshop Elements class a couple of years ago to be able to make simple improvements to some family photos. Even at the Elements level, it is amazing what can be done with a little effort. I was able to "repair" tears and tweak the photos so they were more acceptable for display.
I can only imagine what the full blown software can do when an experienced user applies their skills.
“In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." - Thomas Jefferson
My digital cameo album 1950-64 Cameos - take a look!
A very enlightening and educational post. Thanks.
If you were looking closely you would notice the high points with detail are still thrashed, as well as the rims, which don’t match with the perfect fields and cheek. But most definitely this wouldn’t be picked up quickly by most and is deceptive.
Good post, something I’ve thought about a bit and wondered how often we see altered photos. I doctored my own photo a while back to see how good it could get. Pretty good!
What did y'all think? They only photoshop models??
ANY picture (or coin in this case) can be made differant. But I would rather see coin doctors messing with photoshop than screwing up the coin permanetly.
WS
Too bad the Russians didn't have this back in the Soviet Union when people appeared and disappeared all the time in official photos. Think of all the scissors that would have been spared.
The clone tool is quite powerful for messing with the fields/cheek. Just that clean up alone could probably be done in a quick 10mins or so to pass a quick ebay pic glance...granted, I've been using photoshop since v1.0 so your results may vary.
Did you smudge the stars a bit that were rough? Or should we not talk of the how tos??
Hey!
Stop this bullying!
😂😂😂😂
Excellent demonstration.
In my youth there was a saying “The camera never lies!” It is now obsolete.
I think it means we’ll be collecting pictures!
Great thread.
Well done and WOW!!
I tried it. Didn't take long. Not quite as complex, but it worked.
I think.
No?
Wow 2 hours to spend on a coin that would KILL me. Most I can do right now is power up Photoshop that's about it. 2 hours of manipulation I would love to see the video on that one. Did you record it JLee? Just kidding don't give me those habits.
I'm glad to see that this thread is opening some eye's and many are finding it a positive experience. I don't think the use of digital manipulation is much of a problem in the way that I demonstrated at this time. It only works in the online world, as the coin will still speak for itself. Physical doctoring of a coin is still very much and perhaps a greater concern than digital doctoring. As others have said, digital doctoring only changes the pixels and leaves the physical coin untouched. Yet digital manipulation can still be used to deceive.
Photoshop is a tool and like a lot of other tools, if an experienced craftsman uses those tools properly a work of art can be made. If an unexperienced person wields those tools, they can cause a lot of damage. That damage can be helpful in determining whether an image is manipulated or not. I have spent many years using Photoshop and have trained my eye to be able to spot signs of manipulation.
Good eye you are correct, I intentionally left those areas unaltered for the most part. As you get into the finer details it takes more time and effort to clean up. Most people who are trying to deceive in this way are not investing much time into their deception. So looking very closely, you can find evidence that what you are looking at might not be the real deal. It's just like detecting counterfeits, the devil is in the details and it's the details that will uncover a forgery.
Wow and thanks!
@HeatherBoyd Perhaps this needs to be in BEST OF!
What do you think?
Thanks!
POST NUBILA PHOEBUS / AFTER CLOUDS, SUN
Love for Music / Collector of Dreck
Justin, thank you for the information/presentation and I appreciate the polite and professional way in which you post.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Where this becomes more dangerous is when it becomes easy and takes little time/experience to accomplish. I say that for a specific reason: there is, in my mind, a specific scenario where this methodology would be useful, which is a a big price spread for a small grade change.
Let's say the coin in your post is a 63. If you sell it with the doctored photos as a 63, there will be some skepticism about how badly undergraded the coin is. But even if a buyer thinks it could be a 66 or 67 (at which point, you might think something else is hidden--perhaps some hairlines that are easy to mask with lighting), with the coin in a low grade holder, you aren't likely to get 67 money. If instead you sold the coin as a 67, it would get returned for being the wrong grade when it arrives. On the other hand, when a coin jumping from 63 or 64 to 65 has a huge price swing, taking out a few marks and making the coin look like it was just graded on a bad day can result in a significant premium being paid. Of course, those coins are more likely to be sold sight-seen, where this trickery doesn't work.
To sum it up, I think this really becomes a problem when anyone can do it. I think there's some protection at the moment because the coins where it's worth doing this are sold in ways where it's harder to get away with digital manipulation (physically altering the coin is different, because it will look like the photo when it arrives). This also shows another scenario where there's some level of extra value buying from a trusted source.
Oh yeah, and I'll take the second Morgan... looks nice!
WOW!!!
One way to help prevent this is to carefully examine the original picture taken at time of certification when considering a coin for sale online. The image quality is not great as we know, but you can often see a few key items. Do they match?
Thx - great demonstration.
Now, can we do it in reverse? It might make selling on eBay easier if you uglify the coins in the photos so when they receive them they won't be able to claim they were not as described.
Someone used some sort of "photo manipulation detection" software/website in another thread on one of the "banned user" threads. It showed quite clearly where the monkey business was done.
Can someone run this photo through the same process? I'd be interested to see what pops up, since this is a much better attempt, for sure....
It was @ChrisH821 …..
Any chance you have the time? (Not sure I have the time or talent to learn the process).
@ChrisH821 Used the following:
https://29a.ch/sandbox/2012/imageerrorlevelanalysis/
Very Nice !!!!!!!!!!!!!
I remember once seeing where the guy doing the photo improving took out the notch 40% up the front of the neck.
Although I do love truviews, I don't think they are always a very accurate picture of a coin. They seem to be more like glamour shots often times.
Excellent post... extremely informative. Thank you @jtlee321 for a great educational thread. Cheers, RickO
You could probably do a photo invert to see where it was changed.
wow! well that could be alarming! thanks for the education
Well, I attempted the website ChrisH821 used.
As I suspected, it did NOT light up to the same degree that the other images did. Slight darkness on the forehead was the most telling.....but overall, not that obvious.
Problem is, I couldn't get the processed image out, then lost the webpage, and didn't want to start over.
Have you tried taking an image of, say an ms66, nothing special coin, and overlaying over a bagged up ms63, for example, without the date field, and then fuzzing in the "line" where they overlay.
Even say a few "features, on the MS63, that might take the MS66 down to MS65, based solely on the picture, so that the "poor buyer" would see, once coin in hand, yes, it was THAT coin, but does not look as good in hand as in the picture, but are still stuck, since it is THAT coin?
Excellent information thanks to @jtlee321 for your time to educate all on this.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
Nice Work Kiddo!
It's much easier than ya might think. KNOW who you're dealing with if possible. That includes on line. Most all will leave footprints
This is quite impressive.
Collector, occasional seller
To me this highlights the importance of trusted buying avenues and/or solid return policies. As jtlee points out, once the coin is received in hand the deception becomes obvious.
I think the larger danger is not in vast "digital improvements" but rather slight tweaking that makes a potential buyer view the coin a little bit more positively but maybe not enough that it is noticed in a cursory inspection of the coin in hand.
Edit: Oh and thanks for spending the time to do this!
I'm glad that everyone's eyes are opened. The next time you see an image of a coin and it just doesn't look right, you can question more than the lighting or physical doctoring.
As others have said, this is certainly a viable method for making a coin appear just one or two points undergraded. An 1882-O/S going from MS-64 to MS-65 has a price jump from around $1750.00 in 64 to $50,000.00 in 65. People may not question that that coin may have been graded very conservatively as a 64 due to the price jump to 65. They may be willing to pay quite a premium for what appears to be an undergraded coin the "should" go 65. So always buy from people you trust.
I was trying to find a way to work in a joke about cracking an MS68, taking a picture, then rolling it around the parking lot, then a follow up picture
In the next post , is that from Wayne’s World
http://www.pcgs.com/SetRegistry/publishedset.aspx?s=142753
https://www.autismforums.com/media/albums/acrylic-colors-by-rocco.291/
They needed a puck...
Thanks for the posts @jtlee321
Although it’s likey a job as thorough as you did would warrant a return, I imagine a little more subtle touch up might encourage higher bidding or increase interest and still be a believable coin in hand. Clearly, digital photo editing is a necessary element to photography, it’s the ethics behind using them for deception seems to be the issue. Understanding how this is done is a may help collectors denfend against needlessly paying the price. Makes a great case for attending shows in person and meeting dealers and contacts that can be trusted to buy online from.
One of the other critical photoshop jobs in this field is the arena of colorful toning. I think it would be neat to see what you could do to amplify subtle toning and make it a screamer.
Anyway, we get the forum we deserve. We need more threads just like this. Thanks for taking the initiative to make this coin collecting forum educational and informative.