Photo Manipulation

kryptonitecomics

I don't want this to turn into a flame war and I am not going to name any specific names becuase this is more of a general question and not based on a specifc dealer I have encountered but I have a question.......

When selling coins....is it ok for a seller to manipulate coin images in any way via photoshop or other software?


Does it matter to you if the manipulation of the image is just to make the image look more like the coin does in hand?

I am not talking about a minor adjustment like a few ticks of brightness etc....but rather more aggressive changes that might include copying and pasting etc....again I pose this under the banner of the changes being simply made to allow the potential buyer to get a better feel for what the coin will look like in hand. I think we would all agree that manipulations that desgise marks, enhance color not present on the coin etc would pretty universally be frowned upon.

Just curious how most of the members here feel about this issue

drwstr123

If it gets beyond a "few ticks" and as you say "aggressive", well, I know what to call it.....freakin' fraud.

mozeppa

you manipulate ANY photo just to get it ready to post.

and i think its okay only to the point of making the photo look EXACTLY like the coin...and NO more.


that is all. EOM.

KlectorKid

I'd go the route of improving your images through better photography rather than photoshopping, even if you are only making the coin look more realistic.

erroid

Just say NO to photoshopping, it'a fraud.

Bochiman

Some editing (copying/pasting seems ok if it is to put the coin on a background but not if it is to put pieces of a coin together to make a coin) should be ok.
But, if the editing is done to "show the coin as it looks in a certain light", I say the picture of the coin should be taken in that light and then some editing on getting rid of the glare would be ok.

I bought a coin from a board member, on ebay, late last year....based on previous purchases I knew it was edited a little. Well, it was edited more than a little as I did the lighting/angle and it does NOT look near as vibrant or colorful. I wasn't happy about it but, as there wasn't a return in the auction, I didn't press the matter since it was me buying it.

So, no, I don't think photo manipulation to a large degree is ok.
To a minor degree, to me, is though....sizing, backgrounding, slight adjustment for glare, etc, those are ok to me.

mrpotatoheadd

As long as the coin I get looks like the picture I saw when I made my decision to bid or buy, it doesn't matter to me what kind of manipulation you use. You can start with a blank bitmap and fill it in pixel by pixel, for all I care- I'm interested in the coin, not your image creating techniques.

yellowkid

If you allow it at all, there's bound to be some grey areas. You want the pic to represent the piece, but not to make it look better than it is, where do you draw the line?

Flame war, bring it on!!!!

Bochiman

<< <i>If you allow it at all, there's bound to be some grey areas. You want the pic to represent the piece, but not to make it look better than it is, where do you draw the line? >>



It's anyone's call...that's true, but a picture is better than sight unseen, imho, unless it is quite untrue to the coin inhand.
Once you image enough coins, you can get a sense of it and it is something you either accept or you don't.

grip

<< <i>As long as the coin I get looks like the picture I saw when I made my decision to bid or buy, it doesn't matter to me what kind of manipulation you use. You can start with a blank bitmap and fill it in pixel by pixel, for all I care- I'm interested in the coin, not your image creating techniques. >>



Ditto.

mozeppa

<< <i>where do you draw the line? >>




NO GREY AREAS...stop when it looks like the coin.

although i'm more in agreement with klecktor kid....just learn to take better pictures.

kryptonitecomics

Interesting responses so far....not that I agree or disagree....keep em coming folks

stckplunge

I think it is ok but ultimately a useless practice. I remember starting my first "business" on ebay - It was a clothes resale business. The digital pictures were very nice but were always "hit or miss" when it came to depicting the proper color. My business partner wanted to spend a bunch of time and energy using photoshop to "adjust" the color saturation/hue etc in order to have the digital photos to mirror the in hand color. Well we did this for a while until I eventually told him that unless you want to go calibrate everyone's monitor it was a useless endeavor. A digital photo will look different on all monitors and to adjust these parameters simply leads to "different differences" on other peoples' monitors.

Now, cutting, copying and pasting is a whole different story.

Jeff

yellowkid

<< <i>

<< <i>where do you draw the line? >>




NO GREY AREAS...stop when it looks like the coin.

although i'm more in agreement with klecktor kid....just learn to take better pictures. >>



I'm talking about a third party. You know where to stop "adjusting" a photo, I know where to stop, but how do you set a standard? "When it looks like the coin" could be subject to a wide interpretation.

PawPaul

i think it's part of the game and as long as I have a return priv,

it doesn't become an issue

mrpotatoheadd

You can do all kinds of stuff with your pictures by manipulating lighting without ever editing the photos your camera creates (not to mention the fact that different cameras will generate different images of the same setup), so if you're concerned about setting standards for image manipulation, you've got more to worry about than you think.

mgoodm3

What does "copying and pasting" mean?

drwstr123

<< <i>You can do all kinds of stuff with your pictures by manipulating lighting without ever editing the photos your camera creates (not to mention the fact that different cameras will generate different images of the same setup), so if you're concerned about setting standards for image manipulation, you've got more to worry about than you think. >>


Whoa....now I'm confused. Are we talking about Art Photography or pics to present a coin for the market?

CaptainRon

<< <i>What does "copying and pasting" mean? >>



You know, when you copy a clean part of the field to paste up that huge die gouge in another part of the field.

Sheeze who wants to look at ugly pictures now a days when it's so simple make them nice with a cloneing tool.

I mean if you are going to spend $2500 on a camera body and lens, $300 for a photstand, $1200 for the CS4 suite,
shouldn't you end up with a great picture of a priceless coin. Opps I mean a picture that is priceless.

airplanenut

I wouldn't support any changes made that go beyond the coin looking like it does in hand. Typically, this shouldn't be anything more than a small tweak, or there may be a problem with how a picture is taken. That said, sometimes there are circumstances where a shot can't be had without more aggressive changes. Toned proofs, for example, often require diffused light that will wash out the picture to capture color. I'm not opposed to digitally removing the washed out aspect of the image to show the true color you see with the coin in hand. The same can happen if a slab has many fine hairlines.

So my answer is that if the photo looks like the coin in hand, then a few tweaks aren't the end of the world. If you go overboard and make the image something the coin is not, that's dishonest.

zeebob

Top image taken under daylight flourecents. Bottom image captured under desktop Halogens. Both shot in jpg.

First image shot by Blu62vette. I was told there was no juicing in Photoshop. He just shot the image after adjusting his lighting to show the coins surface detail as realistically as possible to his eye.

Second image shot by Zeebob. No juicing. I used gimp to edit all the images into a single jpg.

First images shot raw. Second shot in the slab.

Do the images even look like the same coin?

Fraud? I don't think so. Different light.

The actual coin looks somewhere in between these images and looks differently under different light. Cameras and eyes aren't the same beast. Try getting a good photo of certain toned coins. I have a Jefferson proof that neither Todd or I have been able to get an image of that, to my eye, really represents the coin.

Digital photography by the nature of the physics has to "tweak" the image just to get color. Most cameras have various settings that sharpen, blur or adjust color balance - all of it is just 2D digital signal processing (image processing).

kryptonitecomics

Many of us can look at a full slab shot to judge whether an image has been enhanced....obviously the color of the slab and label change as images are tweaked. If you could manipulate the coin and then super impose the coin back onto the slab.....for the purpose of showing the coin off in the best light from a sales perspective.....what is your take on that

BECOKA

<< <i>Many of us can look at a full slab shot to judge whether an image has been enhanced....obviously the color of the slab and label change as images are tweaked. If you could manipulate the coin and then super impose the coin back onto the slab.....for the purpose of showing the coin off in the best light from a sales perspective.....what is your take on that >>



This is a no go with me unless it's for something like a registry set. If it is to represent the coin for sale the only manipulation that should be done is items related to white balance, brightness etc...

I'm with Mark, what does copy and paste mean earlier is it what you are saying here with the superimposed coin on the slab?

soty27

I think that cutting a coin out from a holder, enhancing the image to get the coin to look "better" and then pasting the coin back into the holder is a very fine line. In my opinion doing that is kind of like lying. You have taken the coin out of the photo enhanced it and the pasted it back into the holder. If you do it to simply make the coin look like it does in hand then it shouldnt be a problem, but on the other hand just practice taking better pictures. I know a prominent dealer that does this and the people that buy from him seem to be happy with his coins. I see no reason to cut and paste the coin back in the holder that just seems deceptive to me, even though the person may only be trying to get the coin to look like it does in hand. In his case he seems to just be trying to make the coin look like it does in hand but still seems a bit much in my opinion.

MrSpud

I think it is ok to adjust the photo to make it look more like it looks in hand, but not to cover up problems with the coin.

mrpotatoheadd

<< <i>If you could manipulate the coin and then super impose the coin back onto the slab.....for the purpose of showing the coin off in the best light from a sales perspective.....what is your take on that >>

As long as the picture looks like the coin when I get it, I don't have a problem with that.

Why are people so fixated on editing? Isn't the important thing that the image be representative of the coin, regardless of how it's accomplished?

garsmith

As long as they offer a full money back guaranty no problem- If there are any kind of stipulations to the return or no return policy at all forget it.

Russ

<< <i><< What does "copying and pasting" mean? >>

You know, when you copy a clean part of the field to paste up that huge die gouge in another part of the field. >>



That would actually be cloning.

Russ, NCNE

RaginsteveK

I've fiddled with photography over the years (never before with coins).

just some observations-
For a while I was using a single lamp, angled off -
..simply rotating the coin under that lamp source highlights different things (I've added a secondary, at least for now- it's gotten harder).

The eye sees the same thing.

I've been posting a fair number of pictures for each coin- because just like collector looking at a coin under a lamp, direction and perspective change everything. Ideally, I would end up with some shots a lot like what the observer's eyes might see as he maneuvers a coin under a lamp.

edit: the next time you hold a coin under a lamp- keep the coin steady... and move back. Notice what changes. Which view is TRUE? or REAL?

Sometimes, I've resorted to high contrast to bring out a detail (I'm sure more experience "in the studio", with better control of lighting- diffuse rather than direct- and directional control would simplify my life)

We see artificial presentations all the time: think of the last DEEP CAMEO shot you've seen. in which the smooth mirror surfaces are non reflective. How real is that !! It serves a purpose: bringing out the high relief areas. It's also totally unnatural and contrived- but not fraudulent.

.========

The notion of "smudging" or "smearing", or "touch-up" to mask "issues" is blatantly fraudulent.

I've learned that an image a bit fuzzy or out of focus under enlargement is a danger signal. (hiding the fact that perhaps that there is no detail where there should be some. )

And I know that I've bought as least one coin that was not nearly as "brilliant" as the photograph proclaimed.

It's also a fact that I avoided buying a coin because no detail showed where there should have been some- even though I'm almost positive that poor lighting choice was responsible for masking the detail.

BTW- there's a great write -up by a guy trying to photograph his Battle Creek Morgan (and remarks about his impression of how the dealers handled it. just google Battle Creek Morgan, and it practically jumps right out at you.)

coindudeonebay

<< <i>you manipulate ANY photo just to get it ready to post.

and i think its okay only to the point of making the photo look EXACTLY like the coin...and NO more.


that is all. EOM. >>

I'm with you.

dorkkarl

beyond inconvenience why dies digi-pic manipulation matter? once you get the coin in your greedy little hands you can decide whether or not to return it

K S

drwstr123

<< <i>beyond inconvenience why dies digi-pic manipulation matter? once you get the coin in your greedy little hands you can decide whether or not to return it

K S >>


Have you ever incurred the "inconvenience" of having been lied to?

dorkkarl

<< <i>

<< <i>beyond inconvenience why dies digi-pic manipulation matter? once you get the coin in your greedy little hands you can decide whether or not to return it

K S >>


Have you ever incurred the "inconvenience" of having been lied to? >>

happens w/ some regularity, you just return the coin & get your $$$ back

K S

JMW

As someone who is just getting started with coin photography and the related imaging software, whether it's for your own records or to offer to a potential buyer, the image needs to be as close to the actual coin as possible. Unfortunately, that's a lot easier said than done, but if you intentionally make the image better than the actual coin in hand you're wrong.