Does this eBay seller deserve a 21-gun trash Feedback?

CaptHenway

Sellers picture:

My pictures (first just to establish this is the same coin):

Altered picture, or just very clever lighting? What do you think?

We are only talking a little over $20 here so I am not going to bother to return it, because I do want what's left of the mint mark after that invisible (in the seller's picture) ding took out the bottom of it, The question is, do I go nuclear or just go watch the hockey game?

CoinJunkie

Probably impossible to know if the seller was being intentionally deceitful or is just a poor photographer. That said, the gouge is visible in the seller's photo, but you have to really be looking for it. With a photo of that quality, I would have been leery of making the purchase in first place. FWIW, I'd probably leave no worse than a neutral, especially if there was a return policy (which you chose not to exercise).

AUandAG

What did he say he was selling? If he said no D then he's blind. If he said no problems or issues then he's blind. Does he use one of those red/white canes?

I think so,

bob

LanceNewmanOCC

depends on the continuity of image quality across their listings. if they are all kind of hard to see, then they are most likely lazy/don't care vs devious. since you aren't willing to return the item, which should be a seller's safety-net, i certainly wouldn't go negative. for sure i would let the seller know their current lighting situation prohibits informed buying from their selection and that they are close to good images but could use a bit more lighting as the coin you bought, which you are keeping, had some issues not readily visible.

there are many professional-level seller's on the bay that take abismal images/scans.

something along those lines.

although, that game sounds compelling!!

TurtleCat

In the original pic I can see the D or at least I feel like I do. Depending on the description, I’d probably go neutral as well.

CaptHenway

Sold as a 1922-D. Attribution not a problem. I am studying the various weak D’s and thought it worth a look see.

bombtech25

From what I’ve seen of doctored photos for acute problems like that scratch, there’ll be a subtle increase in pixelation or blurriness. I don’t see any here but he probably spent a good 10min figuring out that perfect angle. Maybe praise his deceptive photo skills, something really over the top.

MasonG

The photo doesn't hide the nicks on the bust. Without seeing other pictures he's used, I'm going with "that's just the way the picture turned out". For a 20 buck sale, he'll net about $15/$16, not accounting for his original cost to acquire the coin, of course. How much time would you invest taking pictures for that? Me, I wouldn't obsess over them. As long as the pics are close and there's an opportunity to return a coin that's not satisfactory, I wouldn't ding him in his feedback.

But then, that's just me.

airplanenut

@bombtech25 said:
From what I’ve seen of doctored photos for acute problems like that scratch, there’ll be a subtle increase in pixelation or blurriness. I don’t see any here but he probably spent a good 10min figuring out that perfect angle. Maybe praise his deceptive photo skills, something really over the top.

I sell a lot of raw problem coins, and I have the opposite problem--I work hard to make sure flaws are shown (accurately--I don't want to hide them, nor do I want to make them look worse than they are). As a result of this experience, I can tell you that for a coin like this, it would probably take me 5 seconds or less to get the lighting right to hide the scratch. That said, I know lighting well and have a setup that makes modifying my lighting angle very easy. The way that photo is lit makes me think it may have been taken with ambient light, and if it's soft light (fluorescent), that combined with the angle could easily make the scratch go away without any intent.

In short, if I bought the coin and that gouge weren't mentioned, I'd be annoyed and may exercise a return option, but I would give the benefit of the doubt that it wasn't intentional. I certainly wouldn't leave less than positive feedback without giving the seller an opportunity to make it right (which I think should be par for the course outside of a particularly egregious issue).

Desert Moon

Depends on the hockey game and team, Bruins in 92-93 with Cam Neely at center in the old Garden? Go hockey. New Jersey Devils present day? Flame on the ebay dude........

Best, SH

ms70

I think it was just a crappy pic. Compare the quality to his other auction pics.

messydesk

Hanlon's Razor applies here.

bombtech25

@airplanenut said:

@bombtech25 said:
From what I’ve seen of doctored photos for acute problems like that scratch, there’ll be a subtle increase in pixelation or blurriness. I don’t see any here but he probably spent a good 10min figuring out that perfect angle. Maybe praise his deceptive photo skills, something really over the top.

I sell a lot of raw problem coins, and I have the opposite problem--I work hard to make sure flaws are shown (accurately--I don't want to hide them, nor do I want to make them look worse than they are). As a result of this experience, I can tell you that for a coin like this, it would probably take me 5 seconds or less to get the lighting right to hide the scratch. That said, I know lighting well and have a setup that makes modifying my lighting angle very easy. The way that photo is lit makes me think it may have been taken with ambient light, and if it's soft light (fluorescent), that combined with the angle could easily make the scratch go away without any intent.

In short, if I bought the coin and that gouge weren't mentioned, I'd be annoyed and may exercise a return option, but I would give the benefit of the doubt that it wasn't intentional. I certainly wouldn't leave less than positive feedback without giving the seller an opportunity to make it right (which I think should be par for the course outside of a particularly egregious issue).

If you’re the seller just fess up. You’re already half way there.....took you under 5 seconds to get the lighting right, you used ambient/soft fluorescent light, you snapped a couple pics. Then what? Did you select auto adjust color? Click the little wand icon? You can tell me.

CaptHenway

Hockey it is. Good night all!

ifthevamzarockin

The type of lighting can make a big difference in the way copper coins show their colors.
Incandescent, LED, Fluorescent, Halogen etc. will all produce different colored photos of the same coin.

airplanenut

@bombtech25 said:

@airplanenut said:

@bombtech25 said:
From what I’ve seen of doctored photos for acute problems like that scratch, there’ll be a subtle increase in pixelation or blurriness. I don’t see any here but he probably spent a good 10min figuring out that perfect angle. Maybe praise his deceptive photo skills, something really over the top.

I sell a lot of raw problem coins, and I have the opposite problem--I work hard to make sure flaws are shown (accurately--I don't want to hide them, nor do I want to make them look worse than they are). As a result of this experience, I can tell you that for a coin like this, it would probably take me 5 seconds or less to get the lighting right to hide the scratch. That said, I know lighting well and have a setup that makes modifying my lighting angle very easy. The way that photo is lit makes me think it may have been taken with ambient light, and if it's soft light (fluorescent), that combined with the angle could easily make the scratch go away without any intent.

In short, if I bought the coin and that gouge weren't mentioned, I'd be annoyed and may exercise a return option, but I would give the benefit of the doubt that it wasn't intentional. I certainly wouldn't leave less than positive feedback without giving the seller an opportunity to make it right (which I think should be par for the course outside of a particularly egregious issue).

If you’re the seller just fess up. You’re already half way there.....took you under 5 seconds to get the lighting right, you used ambient/soft fluorescent light, you snapped a couple pics. Then what? Did you select auto adjust color? Click the little wand icon? You can tell me.

I'm not the seller, and if I were, I'd never let a picture like the OP show get out there, certainly not on purpose. I've taken a few hundred thousand shots of coins, and with that, I know what you can do to make pictures come out a certain way. I work very hard to avoid doing that, but I certainly understand how it happens, and can understand how it could be either malicious or unintentional. What part of my post possibly hinted that I would actively try to make my photos deceptive?

airplanenut

@spacehayduke said:
Depends on the hockey game and team, Bruins in 92-93 with Cam Neely at center in the old Garden? Go hockey. New Jersey Devils present day? Flame on the ebay dude........

NJ Devils present day? Drop everything and it's time for hockey! The saddest part of my birthday this year was that I had a steak, a beer, and a Devils game... and they canceled the season earlier in the day

Harlequin

From the pics I can clearly see that is not a"D" ........ It could be assumed but it is definitely NOT!

BLUEJAYWAY

I suppose you could make it a 22-gun trash Feedback, to match the year of the coin (22).

jedm

@Harlequin said:
From the pics I can clearly see that is not a"D" ........ It could be assumed but it is definitely NOT!

What else do you think it is if it's not a D?