Coin photographs at dealers' websites--a double-edged sword

RYK

I am going to take a break from the moderns vs. classics argument to talk about something considerably less volatile but interesting to me nonetheless: photographs of coins at dealers' websites.

I have said before that I am a big fan of dealers having photographs of coins on their websites. If I like the picture, whether or not it is representative of the coin, I may be inclined to have the coin sent on approval. Once the coin is sent to me, the "stick rate" is about 95% immediately and at one year is 80% or more.

There are two problems with shopping for coins online using photographs as your guide:

1. The coin might be nicer than than the photograph. I regularly get a coin in the mail that is much nicer than I expected based on the photograph. What a pleasant surprise! It sure beats...

2. The coin is not as nice as the photograph. Bummer.

There are additional problems with using the photograph when shopping for coins. What if the photograph is so unattractive that it makes the coin look undesirable? Absent the photograph, you might have ordered the coin. Crummy photo? No order, and the seller and buyer miss out on a mutually satisfactory transaction.

My solution: I work with a small number of dealers who know me well, no what I like, and are unlikely to send me what I do not like. The photograph, if any, have become less of an issue. On the phone last week, EVP had me practically salivating and begging him to send me a coin on the basis of his verbal description.

As I have said before, the best coin photographers I have seen are the collectors on this forum.

FC57Coins

Since I kinda made a side hobby out of coin photography, I can generally tell when a coin looks better or worse than the picture from the seller. This gives me an advantage, especially when looking for toned coins. I can't say I'm always correct, but it helps to know your photography in this business as well

photoman

Also RYK, sometimes a shadow or two could look like toning on a coin and it could in fact be completely spotless. I agree with your sentiements completely. Personally, I strive for complete accuracy in our catalogs and on the web. I think in the ten years that I've been photographing coins I may have had 2 or 3 complaints about inaccurate photographs. Online, its tough too because everyones computer monitors may be color balanced differently than what my monitor is set for and thus, could show a coin having more or less color than it actually does.

Sounds like you have a good system for getting what you want and expect.

Doug

ANR

mrearlygold

I'm getting ready to break all my rules and put up maybe 100-200 new gold coins on my website. This is very time consuming. Seriously. I get no less than 25 email requests every day for this kind of thing.

So I've decided that this weekend we're ( my wife and I ) are going to spend a lot of time scanning coins and putting them up on the website.

Eventually I may even get set up with a camera and stuff, but for now it's going to be the flatbed scanner .


Stay tuned


Tom

nwcs

Coin photography is fun and I enjoy doing it a lot myself when I have time. However, after taking the ANA grading class, I realized that a picture is just only a step above sight unseen. Cool to share and enjoy but hardly representative of the coin in reality.

nwcs

>Online, its tough too because everyones computer monitors may be color balanced differently than what my monitor is set for and thus, could show a coin having more or less color than it actually does.


Excellent point that few realize. Multiple issues here: people perceive color a bit differently. 24% of males have some variation of color blindness (and it doesn't always involve red) and 1-2% of females have some form of color blindness. Environmental conditions around where you see the picture on screen can have dramatic impact on how the coin appears. The lighting and quality of the monitor can have a big impact as well. Controlled lighting is one of the necessities for anyone doing graphics.

mgoodm3

I have found that the more photos I take, the better I can figure out what a coin will look like in person based on a less than desirable photo online. But in general I am still wary of buying any coins online without a photo that i feel is OK. I think the photo style that I have the worst trouble with is coins shot at an angle. Angled photos generally look better than the coin will in real life and will tend to hide flaws. I have a few dealers that i buy from that I don't worry too much as their photos are generally representative of the coin.

ChuckC

I like how the one guy has a photo for luster and another to highlight the toning (jk coins I think?)

JrGMan2004

<< <i>I like how the one guy has a photo for luster and another to highlight the toning (jk coins I think?) >>

That would be Jeremy (airplanenut) probally one of the top 3 coin photographers on the forum...

Shamika

Good photography skills are highly undervalued at several big name coin companies/auction houses. A good photographer is like a good salesman. They may cost a pretty penny, but they'll quickly pay for themselves several times over.

magikbilly

I agree - good photography is essential. I've posted to this before. DLRC still uses a scanner. Knowing this, I bought this coin as I knew to look for the original auction photograph online at the Goldberg site. The scan at DLRC just shows a glossy brown 10c - the coin is very lively in person and is not depicted accurately at all by the DLRC image. The auction photograph is my icon and the reverse is in my sig line.



Best,
Billy

BowTieCoins

I can show strike and preservation well with a scan. But it just does not cut it as far as luster or color go. suggest a camera that is
selling with an all around purpose. That is great at close ups for coins as well?

RYK

This is the opinion of one collector (me): Scans don't cut it. To me, a verbal opinion is far more valuable than a scan. Similarly, a verbal opinion complements a photograph. Especially if you are selling expensive coins, photography is the way to go. Unfortunately, it takes time, practice, and patience to get it right, and scans are much easier and quicker to do. For a $20,000 1799 eagle, a photograph is most appropriate. For an MS-66 1997 Lincoln, a scan is okay.

mrearlygold

For a $20,000 1799 eagle, a photograph is most appropriate. For an MS-66 1997 Lincoln, a scan is okay. >>






What's really most appropriate is to get on a waiting list for a real AU Eagle in that price range, have established credit with that dealer and ask "real nicely" if you can see the coin in person before you write a check.

The keyword is "real". Most can't differentiate between a real one and a marginal one. Real ones "really" do have a waiting list.

The lincoln isn't even worth mentioning.

But that's another conversation obviously.

Tom

RYK

What's really most appropriate is to get on a waiting list for a real AU Eagle in that price range

I am on the waiting list. The list of people who are waiting for the price to drop. So far, it looks like it is moving in the other direction.

Frankly, you probably do not have those in your hands long enough to photograph. I understand that, and it was a bad example. A better example would be an expensive inventory coin that you need a little help selling. A high quality photograph goes a long way.

That said, I am just as happy to buy a coin from Al Adams who has no picture on his website and an inventory list that is usually a couple months old. When he gets a coin I would like, I get a call or email, and I am never disappointed.

Again, back to my original point. No picture is better than a substandard one.

EVillageProwler

On the phone last week, EVP had me practically salivating and begging him to send me a coin on the basis of his verbal description.

Just call me Dr. Pavlov.