Disappointed in an auction where the image was a True View

UtahCoin

I've been searching for a 1950 PR66CAM Franklin for quite a while now. I've seen a few, but they want Moon $$. The I recently came across this one., where the only image was the Trueview from our hosts. PCGS Trueview image, coin in a PCGS Secure holder, what could possibly go wrong?

This is what I got. Maybe a candidate for PCGS Restoration service?

Batman23

That is a big omission on the sellers end, I would not be happy. Return option? Does PCGS have a grade guarantee for these? Let us know if they are able to fix this.

ricko

Certainly worth pursuing... That is a horrible surface defect and right in the field of the money side....Let us know what transpires.... I would be amazed if that could be restored without evidence remaining.... Cheers, RickO

ChrisH821

Must have formed after slabbing, that would definitely be in the TV.

kbbpll

Had to check if the image was doctored. Nope, it's actually there.

Goldminers

Note, I have also had this happen to me, so now I tend to download the hi-res TrueView's and look close. This is the TrueView and you can see the flaw. However, the seller should have also disclosed a more "normal" actual photo like yours, and because they did not, I would pursue a return as not fully as advertised.

Barndog

I don't think that is restorable.

sparky64

I can see it in the Trueview but it's not very apparent and I doubt I'd have noticed.

I don't see it at all in the OP's top photo.

TradesWithChops

wow. return it - coin not as advertised.

UtahCoin

It's on it's way back.

U1chicago

That stinks! I was once on the hunt for a cameo 1950 Franklin too, and it was a challenge (one of my nicest examples that was close to a cameo came from your listings ).

This is why I tend to be hesitant when the only picture available is a TruView. Quite often the TruView is the most optimistic view of a coin and can hide certain flaws.

I believe a listing should include a full slab photo along with the TruView (I strive to do that too). However, it can be detrimental to a sale if the slab photo does not live up to the TruView (and for that reason many don’t include it).

keets

the picture posted might be the TrueView image but it has been doctored to hide that spot. if you go to the cert page and load the image, the small initial image, you can see the spot. in the sellers "TrueView" image which is several times larger than the original the spot is barely visible. very deceptive.

all that said I would assume that spot could be either romoved with no trace or lessened to such a degree that it wouldn't be a distraction at all. other than the spot and the scattered hairlines(which are normal) the coin has some Moose-ishness.

NebuchadnezzarTheGreat

This is clearly a manipulation by the seller or an issue that PCGS should correct immediately.

Of course, there's also the issue of the upcoming 1894-S 10c. Stack's is using PCGS's image and to say it's a glamour shot is being conservative. ..

LindeDad

How did it get a grade is what I want to know that is a carbon spot I thought those were Code 97 Environmental Damage.

mkman123

I actually dislike auctions where the only image is the true view because it is not exactly how a coin looks. I've had coins that looks far different than the true view shows. I would rather they show me a slab shot.

astrorat

I just pulled up the TV image and it is not the same image the OP posted. The lighting is clearly different.

Edited to add ... is it the same coin?

Hemispherical

@astrorat said:
I just pulled up the TV image and it is not the same image the OP posted. The lighting is clearly different.

Edited to add ... is it the same coin?

Not the same coin, IMO.

There are too many differences. At first glance a couple that jumped out: The ear and E in EPU.

golden

Ouch!

SiriusBlack

Doesn't look like the same coin. I can't find any marks consistent in both. Markes above the O in God on top, not showing on TV, Marks in field in front of face are different in each image, Marks under UNUM are different looking on each one.

MFeld

@LindeDad said:
How did it get a grade is what I want to know that is a carbon spot I thought those were Code 97 Environmental Damage.

There are countless coins with carbon spots, which have received grades. I’m not sure where you got that idea.

johnny9434

sorry to hear about your demise on the franklin half. it is good to hear that it has gotten sent back

LindeDad

Always just assumed, my error I guess. Always thought that happened after grading.

ChrisH821

I agree, that doesn't look like the same coin.

ChrisH821

So I can't hep but chuckle here.... To be clear, chuckle at the egregious misrepresentation..
This is the coin you thought you bought, PR67+CAM
https://www.pcgs.com/cert/19321119
No big deal, just $30k

ChrisH821

Oh, also... that coin belongs to a certain D.L. Hansen
-Sorry about the 3 posts in a row here.

ms70

@astrorat said:
I just pulled up the TV image and it is not the same image the OP posted. The lighting is clearly different.

Edited to add ... is it the same coin?

I was thinking the same thing even before I saw these. In the OP pics I immediately suspected they might be different coins.

Utah, did you look at the TrueView directly from the Cert Verification website or only what the seller displayed?

kbbpll

I guess there's (at least) two issues here. Seller used the TV from the wrong coin, and the real TV from the coin being sold makes it nearly impossible to see the distracting spot.

The two TVs look remarkably similar, so purposeful deception or honest mistake?

ARCO

I personally would never buy any coin with a Tru-view. They are not accurate representations of the coin.

keets

interesting, so the seller apparently used, intentionally or otherwise, the TrueView image of a different coin. that is a scam I hadn't heard of before and now another thing to be careful about.

Aotearoa

Maybe I'm missing something but, didn't anyone else say to themselves, "that's not actually a TV; it's two separate photos kind of joined together to look like a TV"? No background. No PCGS wording.

lkeigwin

They are images from PCGS. The equivalent of a TV. It's what you see if you do a cert-lookup on 19321119. Maybe for Coinfacts? Someone split the image.

https://images.pcgs.com/CoinFacts/19321119_max.jpg

Funny...if you look closely at the OP photo you see:

SanctionII

The two coins look very much alike, but they are not the same coin. Intentional misrepresentation IMO.

I like both coins very much. I would have the coin received by UathCoin conserved.

kbbpll

I noticed the "left arrow" like they took a screenshot instead of "save as". Not sure if that means anything. Maybe they're just thinking they avoid copyright infringement by doing that. The images are from the TV but not actually the TV... I guess.

ms70

@ARCO said:
I personally would never buy any coin with a Tru-view. They are not accurate representations of the coin.

They are accurate representations. When you look at a coin it's appearance can change drastically as it is rotated and reflects light to your eye from different angles. It's not possible to fully "see" the coin from one angle in a single picture. TrueViews are accurate representations of a coin in the particular lighting when it was photographed.

ARCO

@ms70 said:

@ARCO said:
I personally would never buy any coin with a Tru-view. They are not accurate representations of the coin.

They are accurate representations. When you look at a coin it's appearance can change drastically as it is rotated and reflects light to your eye from different angles. It's not possible to fully "see" the coin from one angle in a single picture. TrueViews are accurate representations of a coin in the particular lighting when it was photographed.

I disagree. Yes, they are representations of how the coin was photographed, but the aim of photography is to approximate how the coin looks in person. In this regard, the tru-view fails.

TennesseeDave

I think you should out the seller so we can avoid him.

skier07

I would not buy a coin based only on a TrueView.

Aotearoa

@lkeigwin said:
They are images from PCGS. The equivalent of a TV. It's what you see if you do a cert-lookup on 19321119. Maybe for Coinfacts? Someone split the image.

https://images.pcgs.com/CoinFacts/19321119_max.jpg

Funny...if you look closely at the OP photo you see:

I don't see that image (the image in the OP) when I click on the link.

Walkerfan

The spot on your coin is active (note the ring around it)....meaning it will likely get worse if left untreated.

Restoration may not completely get rid of it but it would definitely minimize AND stabilize it.

The question is: Is it really worth the trouble?

ArizonaRareCoins

https://ebay.com/itm/-/401830620166?nordt=true&orig_cvip=true

ms70

@ARCO said:

@ms70 said:

@ARCO said:
I personally would never buy any coin with a Tru-view. They are not accurate representations of the coin.

They are accurate representations. When you look at a coin it's appearance can change drastically as it is rotated and reflects light to your eye from different angles. It's not possible to fully "see" the coin from one angle in a single picture. TrueViews are accurate representations of a coin in the particular lighting when it was photographed.

I disagree. Yes, they are representations of how the coin was photographed, but the aim of photography is to approximate how the coin looks in person. In this regard, the tru-view fails.

Yes, it is how it was photographed, but my point is that in-hand you can look at that very coin at different angles and see it exactly that way.., and many other ways. The camera can only get one perspective per shot and of course you will get the most attractive shot when you are paying for it.

Walkerfan

Thanks @ArizonaRareCoins Now, I can see that the coins are one in the same.

RogerB

The OP's detail photo suggests the coin is permanently damaged where a particle was in contact with the coin for a long time.

lkeigwin

@Aotearoa said:

@lkeigwin said:
They are images from PCGS. The equivalent of a TV. It's what you see if you do a cert-lookup on 19321119. Maybe for Coinfacts? Someone split the image.

https://images.pcgs.com/CoinFacts/19321119_max.jpg

Funny...if you look closely at the OP photo you see:

I don't see that image (the image in the OP) when I click on the link.

Don't click on the link. Just look carefully at the OP images.
Lance.

ChrisH821

I fixed it.

UtahCoin

The seller used the image from a PR67+CAM in the auction. When I right clicked on the image, it brought up Cert 19321119 which is the PR67+CAM. In my haste, I didn't catch the 67+Cam notation at the bottom.
Interestingly, the seller issued a full refund within an hour of me initiating the return, long before I dropped it off at the P.O.
The seller relisted the coin, then suddenly ended the auction because "This listing was ended by the seller because the item is no longer available."
Anyway, for a brief time I had both the refund and the coin!

Desert Moon

I just went back to the original Completed Listing using ebay advanced search where this coin was sold on July 31 when a best offer was accepted. In that listing, it had the images of the correct coin cropped from the TV, just like the current listing. So if this is the correct completed listing where the OP bought the coin from, I am confused that the OP says the vendor used the TV of the 67+?

https://ebay.com/itm/1950-50C-Franklin-Half-Dollar-PCGS-PR66CAM/401830620166?hash=item5d8ef8ac06:g:deYAAOSwm2ddP33C

This is also verified in watchcount.com using the listing number: 401830620166

Again, no images of the 67+ in the original listing from which the best offer was accepted, just the right images of the coin for sale.

Best, SH

ARCO

@ms70 said:

@ARCO said:

@ms70 said:

@ARCO said:
I personally would never buy any coin with a Tru-view. They are not accurate representations of the coin.

They are accurate representations. When you look at a coin it's appearance can change drastically as it is rotated and reflects light to your eye from different angles. It's not possible to fully "see" the coin from one angle in a single picture. TrueViews are accurate representations of a coin in the particular lighting when it was photographed.

I disagree. Yes, they are representations of how the coin was photographed, but the aim of photography is to approximate how the coin looks in person. In this regard, the tru-view fails.

Yes, it is how it was photographed, but my point is that in-hand you can look at that very coin at different angles and see it exactly that way.., and many other ways. The camera can only get one perspective per shot and of course you will get the most attractive shot when you are paying for it.

I have seen tens of thousands of coins photos. Tru-view is the least representative of how the coin looks in hand. Beautiful and accurate are two different things.

savitale

I also think that TrueView images, though technically accurate, many times do not reflect what one will actually see in hand under normal room lighting conditions. So I prefer regular photos, and full slab photos. The full slab photo is the most accurate reflection of in-hand viewing under normal lighting conditions.

Not too surprising this coin didn't CAC ...

Purfrock

This is an excellent reminder to really scrutinize a photo before purchasing.

ChrisH821

Is this thread not opening to latest post for anyone else? It opens to the first post for me every time.