@Beatty said:
What I would like is an explanation from PCGS as to what is going on with the True View picture quality issues. Is management aware of the problem and if so why has it not been fixed. I notice on their site when they show a coin it is always a good photo.
I am going to write Nat Turner and the PCGS CEO and complain about the problem. I will post my letter to this site and others can use it to also send a letter.
True View pictures are supposed to enhance the collecting experience. That is what we pay for and that is not what we are getting. In addition poor quality photos actually hurt the value of our collections when the time comes to sell.
I know I am beating this horse to death. But if we all just shut up and go away then we collectively are enabling PCGS to get away with devaluing our collections and ruining our collecting experience.
I am surprised that dealers are not hammering PCGS about this issue. Then again I suspect they get better photos, just a suspicion. Maybe dealers could chime in on this.
PCGS is aware of the issue. The explanation I have heard is that Collectors Universe is focusing most of their budget on sports cards, which are more profitable than coins. This has led to budget issues at PCGS and the photo department is underfunded leading to poor photos.
I'm not sure why a photo dept is so expensive to run that a large, profitable company like CU can't fund it, just what I've been told.
If I had to guess, based on nothing except my own observations, I bet that CU is running ultra-lean in preparation for an IPO or sale to another fund. But that is pure speculation.
Now is not the time with Fledgling CACG looking for ways to steal market share.
One of the bigger draws to pcgs was trueviews + their registry. They go great together.
Dealers are getting the same crappy photos that collectors are getting, and management has been well aware of this issue for quite some time. I fully agree with everything you wrote, but I fear that the end of @lermish’s comment is very likely.
Who would have thought that loosing one guy in a photo department would create such a problem. I don’t think, they think it is a problem. Coupled with a up and coming grading company the tide of top dog might be turning. If the dealers are starting to feel they are leaving liquidity and money on the table they will also look elsewhere
Just my take
Martin
The terms of service are True View pictures that enhance your collection. Clearly PCGS is not meeting their terms of service. They are creating a liability in the event of a IPO or buyout.
So I encourage everyone to complain, especially when it's something more objective that's hard to argue with. My latest submission had all yellow photos. When I complained, they said they could replace the photos with alternatives, which I happily accepted. I just wonder why they thought yellow pictures were acceptable to begin with. They're still not as good as they could be but the only one I'm disappointed with now is the lighting on then 1996 Half.
the dimes look much better. The halves still don't look good, better but not good. More people should complain. You are paying for the service and have a right to professional looking photos. I hope we keep this thread going to pressure PCGS. Any dealers want to chime in on their TV photo experience or are your photos not a problem?
PCGS is not only the industries premier coin grader, but host of this great forum as well.
They will no doubt return the imaging to exemplary levels that meet expectations. And proper grading and a secure holder are way more important than a glossy photo.
PCGS is not only the industries premier coin grader, but host of this great forum as well. For now
They will no doubt return the imaging to exemplary levels that meet expectations. When???? It's been a year.
And proper grading and a secure holder are way more important than a glossy photo. More important, sure. Way more important? No. How many posts are there where people are not submitting or renewing their memberships because of the photos?
They WILL lose business (and are already) if they don't fix the problem. And then they will no longer be the industry's premier grader. It's not too late to stop the transition but PCGS is already losing ground...
@ProofCollection said:
So I encourage everyone to complain, especially when it's something more objective that's hard to argue with. My latest submission had all yellow photos. When I complained, they said they could replace the photos with alternatives, which I happily accepted. I just wonder why they thought yellow pictures were acceptable to begin with. They're still not as good as they could be but the only one I'm disappointed with now is the lighting on then 1996 Half.
Those yellow dimes and Kennedy halves look AT, not to mention unnatural.
@DocBenjamin said:
PCGS is not only the industries premier coin grader, but host of this great forum as well.
They will no doubt return the imaging to exemplary levels that meet expectations. And proper grading and a secure holder are way more important than a glossy photo.
In another thread, you’ve expressed strong concerns (if not a prediction) regarding how Mr. Hansen’s activities might negatively affect the rare coin market and collectors.Yet, at the same time, you don’t sound at all concerned about an issue that many collectors feel has actually been detrimental to them for quite some time. The imaging is about a lot more than just “glossy photos”.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
When I go on ebay it sure seems to me that the TV photos that are posted by dealers look much better than those that collectors seem to get. These are newer coins from dealers. I would ask that others view newly graded pcgs coins from dealers. I mean to me it appears dealers are getting much better photos. Ask yourself would a dealer be able to even sell coins that have crappy TV photos?
@Beatty said:
When I go on ebay it sure seems to me that the TV photos that are posted by dealers look much better than those that collectors seem to get. These are newer coins from dealers. I would ask that others view newly graded pcgs coins from dealers. I mean to me it appears dealers are getting much better photos. Ask yourself would a dealer be able to even sell coins that have crappy TV photos?
@Beatty said:
When I go on ebay it sure seems to me that the TV photos that are posted by dealers look much better than those that collectors seem to get. These are newer coins from dealers. I would ask that others view newly graded pcgs coins from dealers. I mean to me it appears dealers are getting much better photos. Ask yourself would a dealer be able to even sell coins that have crappy TV photos?
Show us one
Better yet, a few.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
PCGS is not only the industries premier coin grader, but host of this great forum as well. For now
They will no doubt return the imaging to exemplary levels that meet expectations. When???? It's been a year.
And proper grading and a secure holder are way more important than a glossy photo. More important, sure. Way more important? No. How many posts are there where people are not submitting or renewing their memberships because of the photos?
They WILL lose business (and are already) if they don't fix the problem. And then they will no longer be the industry's premier grader. It's not too late to stop the transition but PCGS is already losing ground...
As a photographer I am having a hard time understanding how so many photos can be “off”……. The lighting and surrounding areas of these coins when they are photographed cannot be that different each time. Guess taking these True View photos must be a lot harder than I thought. 🤔
@DocBenjamin said:
PCGS is not only the industries premier coin grader, but host of this great forum as well.
They will no doubt return the imaging to exemplary levels that meet expectations. And proper grading and a secure holder are way more important than a glossy photo.
In another thread, you’ve expressed strong concerns (if not a prediction) regarding how Mr. Hansen’s activities might negatively affect the rare coin market and collectors.Yet, at the same time, you don’t sound at all concerned about an issue that many collectors feel has actually been detrimental to them for quite some time. The imaging is about a lot more than just “glossy photos”.
And it would be foolish to question Mr. Hansen's business decisions on the CACG forum.
CTF Error was banned here for questioning the host (at least that was his last few posts.) Those dissatisfied with the images should take it up directly with management, find a third party glamour photographer or collect comic books.
@knovak1976 said:
As a photographer I am having a hard time understanding how so many photos can be “off”……. The lighting and surrounding areas of these coins when they are photographed cannot be that different each time. Guess taking these True View photos must be a lot harder than I thought. 🤔
I'm wondering how many photographers PCGS has? Multiple photographers might begin to explain the considerable differences in the lighting, white balance, contrast, etc.
"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." Will Rogers
PCGS is not only the industries premier coin grader, but host of this great forum as well. For now
They will no doubt return the imaging to exemplary levels that meet expectations. When???? It's been a year.
And proper grading and a secure holder are way more important than a glossy photo. More important, sure. Way more important? No. How many posts are there where people are not submitting or renewing their memberships because of the photos?
They WILL lose business (and are already) if they don't fix the problem. And then they will no longer be the industry's premier grader. It's not too late to stop the transition but PCGS is already losing ground...
Please do not add words to my post.
This is not the OFR!
Software bug deleted my post. Trying again.
Please don't tell me how to post. Do you think that my answers to your questions in **BOLD **were confusing? People thought you were making two immediately contradictory statements?
And no, ctf_error was not banned for questioning the host. He was on an anti-PCGS diatribe and was insulting the mod. Given that we are on a PCGS message board, that seems like a recipe for banning.
@knovak1976 said:
As a photographer I am having a hard time understanding how so many photos can be “off”……. The lighting and surrounding areas of these coins when they are photographed cannot be that different each time. Guess taking these True View photos must be a lot harder than I thought. 🤔
Taking consistently high quality coin photos takes attention to detail and some knowledge of the subject matter. You can't just hire a bunch of button clickers off the street to mass-produce good work at the price being charged. PCGS needs to automate in-slab mugshots for every coin so that they can be done at no additional cost to the customer and charge $20 a pop for optional high quality ones done by a small, talented, better paid staff.
@lablover said: Note to Self: You Must Sell the Coin at GreatCollections to get a Great Image LOL
Example of the same coin by two different photographers:
PCGS TrueView
1955 Washington Proof (Imaged Raw)
GreatPhoto
1955 Washington Proof (Imaged thru the Slab)
Apparently, Phil has talent
Phil has talent to take spectacular photos. All we're looking for is good photos. Any photographer with the equipment and a penchant for photography can take photos that we would all find acceptable. Not amazing, but acceptable. My photos above are a prime example where the either a) took two sets of photos and someone who couldn't care less thought the yellow ones were better or they photo-edited the photos to remove the yellow. My bet is on the last one. But it's clear either the employees are not being given the time or do not have the initiative to post-edit photos or management has understaffed the photo room and not allowing them to do their job right.
Remember for a few years during the pandemic a lot of the delay and backlog for orders was due to photography. Anyone want to bet that some manager came in and determined that they could increase throughput if they stopped "wasting time" post-editing photos?
@Rodentman said:
Many of mine have no tv photos. I don't care I have the coins
That is becoming an advantage lately. In my next submission I plan on including some $500 to $1000 coins in Economy - I will have to pay a $10 upcharge, but there will be no Trueview in the database.
@lablover said: Note to Self: You Must Sell the Coin at GreatCollections to get a Great Image LOL
Example of the same coin by two different photographers:
PCGS TrueView
1955 Washington Proof (Imaged Raw)
GreatPhoto
1955 Washington Proof (Imaged thru the Slab)
I prefer the look of the TrueView reverse of these 4 photos as being closer to my guess as to the look of the quarter in hand. The GC obverse photo shows excess brightness and resulting color, perhaps sell the coin better, and the TV obverse is way too dark and probably not a realistic representation either.
Just got this one in and it's okay (for what it is) but looks like they changed the lighting or settings between photographing the obverse and reverse. To me, they just don't match.
I contacted PCGS yesterday about the yellow tint on three of my Trueviews and today they did a little editing and sent me the above photo for approval.
Just saw the pictures of my 8-coin world submission. Underwhelmed. They are all low contrast and lack definition due to the lighting. Sure, two are Lion dollars, which are oddly shaped and hard to light, but all 8 were photos I wouldn't want to deliver to someone. I'm not going to post them here for comparison to my photos, since that dead horse has been beaten a lot, but take a look at the 1523 Batzen and 1571 Ryal in my Prime Number set (link in sig) if you want and you'll see how they compare in general. Cert numbers are 49811809 and 49811812, respectively.
@constitutional_halve said:
How have others gone about correcting this issue? Just emailing support with the submission number?
Yes, I simply sent an email with the certification numbers of the photos of the "yellow" coins, as I knew that they could edit them. Obviously, many issues cannot be corrected by anything other than new photos being taken, but removing yellow tint is easy enough.
Here are True View photos of two toned proof clad Kennedy halves that were graded last November. The lighting used in taking the photographs is too bright and washes out the toning. In hand both coins are very eye appealing and look much different and much better than how they look in the True View photos.
PF67
PF67CAM
Last week I sent 18 coins to PCGS for grading (1 MS, 4 SMS and 13 Proof). It will be interesting to see how the True View photos of these 18 coins look.
@ProofCollection said:
So I encourage everyone to complain, especially when it's something more objective that's hard to argue with. My latest submission had all yellow photos. When I complained, they said they could replace the photos with alternatives, which I happily accepted. I just wonder why they thought yellow pictures were acceptable to begin with. They're still not as good as they could be but the only one I'm disappointed with now is the lighting on then 1996 Half.
My question is, if they have "normal" replacement TVs, why don't they just use those in the first place?
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
@lablover said: Note to Self: You Must Sell the Coin at GreatCollections to get a Great Image LOL
Example of the same coin by two different photographers:
PCGS TrueView
1955 Washington Proof (Imaged Raw)
GreatPhoto
1955 Washington Proof (Imaged thru the Slab)
Apparently, Phil has talent
The Great Collection photo would enhance a collection the PCGS photo would devalue the coin. Terrible True View photos will result in lower prices since so much business is done over the internet.
The Great Collection photo would enhance a collection the PCGS photo would devalue the coin. Terrible True View photos will result in lower prices since so much business is done over the internet.
Agree, if one doesn't have a better photo to use. If so, not to worry IMO.
Seated Half Society member #38 "Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
@Goldbully said:
Here's my 1973 Kennedy half under Phil's leadership.
He rally captured the look.
Beautiful Shot!
Your post reminded me of Phil's many accomplishments!
Here's a couple from my
"Phil Inventory!"
Phil made me look good!
By hunting these down, then submitting.
"Jesus died for you and for me, Thank you,Jesus"!!!
--- If it should happen I die and leave this world and you want to remember me. Please only remember my opening Sig Line.
Those pics. are almost as bad as mine and I'm not fussy. Wasn't NGC using a high resolution scanner before they improved the imaging? I'd think that would be a good fall-back until they get the level of prior competence submitters had come to expect.
Comments
Now is not the time with Fledgling CACG looking for ways to steal market share.
One of the bigger draws to pcgs was trueviews + their registry. They go great together.
BHNC #248 … 130 and counting.
@Beatty
Dealers are getting the same crappy photos that collectors are getting, and management has been well aware of this issue for quite some time. I fully agree with everything you wrote, but I fear that the end of @lermish’s comment is very likely.
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Got an 8 coin submission in the works now, all to be TV'd. I'll post the images when they come in, fingers crossed lol.
Cross your toes too!
“The thrill of the hunt never gets old”
PCGS Registry: Screaming Eagles
Copperindian
Retired sets: Soaring Eagles
Copperindian
Who would have thought that loosing one guy in a photo department would create such a problem. I don’t think, they think it is a problem. Coupled with a up and coming grading company the tide of top dog might be turning. If the dealers are starting to feel they are leaving liquidity and money on the table they will also look elsewhere
Just my take
Martin
weird
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
The terms of service are True View pictures that enhance your collection. Clearly PCGS is not meeting their terms of service. They are creating a liability in the event of a IPO or buyout.
So I encourage everyone to complain, especially when it's something more objective that's hard to argue with. My latest submission had all yellow photos. When I complained, they said they could replace the photos with alternatives, which I happily accepted. I just wonder why they thought yellow pictures were acceptable to begin with. They're still not as good as they could be but the only one I'm disappointed with now is the lighting on then 1996 Half.
the dimes look much better. The halves still don't look good, better but not good. More people should complain. You are paying for the service and have a right to professional looking photos. I hope we keep this thread going to pressure PCGS. Any dealers want to chime in on their TV photo experience or are your photos not a problem?
PCGS is not only the industries premier coin grader, but host of this great forum as well.
They will no doubt return the imaging to exemplary levels that meet expectations. And proper grading and a secure holder are way more important than a glossy photo.
They WILL lose business (and are already) if they don't fix the problem. And then they will no longer be the industry's premier grader. It's not too late to stop the transition but PCGS is already losing ground...
Chopmarked Trade Dollar Registry Set --- US & World Gold Showcase --- World Chopmark Showcase
Those yellow dimes and Kennedy halves look AT, not to mention unnatural.
What's going on in that PCGS TV imaging studio?
In another thread, you’ve expressed strong concerns (if not a prediction) regarding how Mr. Hansen’s activities might negatively affect the rare coin market and collectors.Yet, at the same time, you don’t sound at all concerned about an issue that many collectors feel has actually been detrimental to them for quite some time. The imaging is about a lot more than just “glossy photos”.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
When I go on ebay it sure seems to me that the TV photos that are posted by dealers look much better than those that collectors seem to get. These are newer coins from dealers. I would ask that others view newly graded pcgs coins from dealers. I mean to me it appears dealers are getting much better photos. Ask yourself would a dealer be able to even sell coins that have crappy TV photos?
Show us one
Mike
My Indians
Danco Set
Better yet, a few.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Please do not add words to my post.
This is not the OFR!
As a photographer I am having a hard time understanding how so many photos can be “off”……. The lighting and surrounding areas of these coins when they are photographed cannot be that different each time. Guess taking these True View photos must be a lot harder than I thought. 🤔
And it would be foolish to question Mr. Hansen's business decisions on the CACG forum.
CTF Error was banned here for questioning the host (at least that was his last few posts.) Those dissatisfied with the images should take it up directly with management, find a third party glamour photographer or collect comic books.
I'm wondering how many photographers PCGS has? Multiple photographers might begin to explain the considerable differences in the lighting, white balance, contrast, etc.
Software bug deleted my post. Trying again.
Please don't tell me how to post. Do you think that my answers to your questions in **BOLD **were confusing? People thought you were making two immediately contradictory statements?
And no, ctf_error was not banned for questioning the host. He was on an anti-PCGS diatribe and was insulting the mod. Given that we are on a PCGS message board, that seems like a recipe for banning.
Chopmarked Trade Dollar Registry Set --- US & World Gold Showcase --- World Chopmark Showcase
Taking consistently high quality coin photos takes attention to detail and some knowledge of the subject matter. You can't just hire a bunch of button clickers off the street to mass-produce good work at the price being charged. PCGS needs to automate in-slab mugshots for every coin so that they can be done at no additional cost to the customer and charge $20 a pop for optional high quality ones done by a small, talented, better paid staff.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Note to Self: You Must Sell the Coin at GreatCollections to get a Great Image LOL
Example of the same coin by two different photographers:
PCGS TrueView
1955 Washington Proof (Imaged Raw)
GreatPhoto
1955 Washington Proof (Imaged thru the Slab)
Apparently, Phil has talent
Phil has talent to take spectacular photos. All we're looking for is good photos. Any photographer with the equipment and a penchant for photography can take photos that we would all find acceptable. Not amazing, but acceptable. My photos above are a prime example where the either a) took two sets of photos and someone who couldn't care less thought the yellow ones were better or they photo-edited the photos to remove the yellow. My bet is on the last one. But it's clear either the employees are not being given the time or do not have the initiative to post-edit photos or management has understaffed the photo room and not allowing them to do their job right.
Remember for a few years during the pandemic a lot of the delay and backlog for orders was due to photography. Anyone want to bet that some manager came in and determined that they could increase throughput if they stopped "wasting time" post-editing photos?
That is becoming an advantage lately. In my next submission I plan on including some $500 to $1000 coins in Economy - I will have to pay a $10 upcharge, but there will be no Trueview in the database.
Just rename the service to: “PooView” , or FauxView.
I prefer the look of the TrueView reverse of these 4 photos as being closer to my guess as to the look of the quarter in hand. The GC obverse photo shows excess brightness and resulting color, perhaps sell the coin better, and the TV obverse is way too dark and probably not a realistic representation either.
My US Mint Commemorative Medal Set
Just got this one in and it's okay (for what it is) but looks like they changed the lighting or settings between photographing the obverse and reverse. To me, they just don't match.
I contacted PCGS yesterday about the yellow tint on three of my Trueviews and today they did a little editing and sent me the above photo for approval.
My Carson City Morgan Registry Set
Just saw the pictures of my 8-coin world submission. Underwhelmed. They are all low contrast and lack definition due to the lighting. Sure, two are Lion dollars, which are oddly shaped and hard to light, but all 8 were photos I wouldn't want to deliver to someone. I'm not going to post them here for comparison to my photos, since that dead horse has been beaten a lot, but take a look at the 1523 Batzen and 1571 Ryal in my Prime Number set (link in sig) if you want and you'll see how they compare in general. Cert numbers are 49811809 and 49811812, respectively.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Has anyone seen a true view photo of a coin/medal for sale by a dealer lately that was terrible like the ones collectors are posting here?
Yes, many.
First post here..
Absurdly disappointed in these images. None of my coins are yellow, and the 1826 CBH is dripping in luster and the TV is yellow and flat
How have others gone about correcting this issue? Just emailing support with the submission number?
Thanks
Yes, I simply sent an email with the certification numbers of the photos of the "yellow" coins, as I knew that they could edit them. Obviously, many issues cannot be corrected by anything other than new photos being taken, but removing yellow tint is easy enough.
My Carson City Morgan Registry Set
Here are True View photos of two toned proof clad Kennedy halves that were graded last November. The lighting used in taking the photographs is too bright and washes out the toning. In hand both coins are very eye appealing and look much different and much better than how they look in the True View photos.
PF67
PF67CAM
Last week I sent 18 coins to PCGS for grading (1 MS, 4 SMS and 13 Proof). It will be interesting to see how the True View photos of these 18 coins look.
Here's my 1973 Kennedy half under Phil's leadership.
He rally captured the look.
Not used their service. Used one of the many through the slab photographers active on this board. Excellent results!
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
My question is, if they have "normal" replacement TVs, why don't they just use those in the first place?
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
The Great Collection photo would enhance a collection the PCGS photo would devalue the coin. Terrible True View photos will result in lower prices since so much business is done over the internet.
Agree, if one doesn't have a better photo to use. If so, not to worry IMO.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
My replacements are actually better than the originals, still not great
Not my coin, just saw it on a search.
Beautiful Shot!
Your post reminded me of Phil's many accomplishments!
Here's a couple from my
"Phil Inventory!"
Phil made me look good!
By hunting these down, then submitting.
"Jesus died for you and for me, Thank you,Jesus"!!!
--- If it should happen I die and leave this world and you want to remember me. Please only remember my opening Sig Line.Those pics. are almost as bad as mine and I'm not fussy. Wasn't NGC using a high resolution scanner before they improved the imaging? I'd think that would be a good fall-back until they get the level of prior competence submitters had come to expect.
Seller's photos and fresh Trueviews for comparison.
Apparently, this photo crew prefers bilirubin orange-brown over gray reality.
You should ask PCGS to add the sellers photos to the TV template for you 😂
Cool coins!
Maybe just do away with owning the coin and get some snazzy images.
Egads the hobby is trending downward.
Oh 100