Home U.S. Coin Forum

Auction Photo vs Real Life (wreath cent)

Which looks more desirable?

image

P.S. My fingernail is showing and I am glad that it appears reasonably clean!
image

Comments

  • MWallaceMWallace Posts: 4,309 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The real photo.
  • AnkurJAnkurJ Posts: 11,370 ✭✭✭✭
    Looks worse vs the auction pic.
    All coins kept in bank vaults.
    PCGS Registries
    Box of 20
    SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
  • BustHalfBrianBustHalfBrian Posts: 4,190 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Looks worse vs the auction pic. >>



    I agree, but shown more accurately in the real, IMO.
    Lurking and learning since 2010. Full-time professional numismatist based in SoCal.
  • This content has been removed.
  • mgoodm3mgoodm3 Posts: 17,497 ✭✭✭
    The auction photo is probably a better source of info on the true color of the copper (although the WB is off a little). The other photo shows the detail and surfaces better, but not likely the color because of all of the light reflecting off of the coin in that image (I doubt the coin is charcoal gray in real life).
    coinimaging.com/my photography articles Check out the new macro lens testing section
  • Alltheabove76Alltheabove76 Posts: 1,520 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>The auction photo is probably a better source of info on the true color of the copper (although the WB is off a little). The other photo shows the detail and surfaces better, but not likely the color because of all of the light reflecting off of the coin in that image (I doubt the coin is charcoal gray in real life). >>



    It is dark and dead. Very close to real photo.

    Without being in direct light

    image
  • looks like someone toned a cleaned/dipped coin JMO
  • The real photo is much more appealing to me as you can actually get an idea of what the coin looks like. The auction photo shows nothing of the surface texture and the brown color is obviously just an effect of yellow light (as seen by all the yellow surrounding it). The steel brown color of the coin in the "real photo" is very common for early large cents and is probably accurate. IMO a steel-charcoal early cent is not undesirable as it signifies originality.
  • Alltheabove76Alltheabove76 Posts: 1,520 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>looks like someone toned a cleaned/dipped coin JMO >>



    Could very well be. Even though I didn't pay much for it, and its a lettered edge variety which is a bit harder to get, I am going to return it. I do not like the completely dead surface. It has a completely smooth reverse also. So we have a coin that has PO1 details, with damage and either environmental damage or questionable color/cleaning. Net -1
  • ormandhormandh Posts: 3,111 ✭✭✭
    Your photo probably depicts the coin better. It appears that the sellers white balance was way off(hence the yellowish hues on the white background.) But, there may have been WAY too much light on this copper.

    -Dan
  • Alltheabove76Alltheabove76 Posts: 1,520 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>The real photo is much more appealing to me as you can actually get an idea of what the coin looks like. The auction photo shows nothing of the surface texture and the brown color is obviously just an effect of yellow light (as seen by all the yellow surrounding it). The steel brown color of the coin in the "real photo" is very common for early large cents and is probably accurate. IMO a steel-charcoal early cent is not undesirable as it signifies originality. >>



    Your opinion matters greatly to me. I didn't mean though which pic is better, I mean in which photo does the coin seem more desirable?

    I thought from the original pic it would be much lighter and to me that is preferable as long as that lighter color doesn't come with corrosion. This coin has a smooth surface but it is just so dark and lifeless that it all eye appeal is gone.
  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 34,674 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The auction photo could be a white balance problem. The might not have been fooled with it after it was taken.

    Still low grade Wreath cents are more common than low grade Chain cents so you might as well return this. The blank reverse is a turn-off.
    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • ormandhormandh Posts: 3,111 ✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>The real photo is much more appealing to me as you can actually get an idea of what the coin looks like. The auction photo shows nothing of the surface texture and the brown color is obviously just an effect of yellow light (as seen by all the yellow surrounding it). The steel brown color of the coin in the "real photo" is very common for early large cents and is probably accurate. IMO a steel-charcoal early cent is not undesirable as it signifies originality. >>



    Your opinion matters greatly to me. I didn't mean though which pic is better, I mean in which photo does the coin seem more desirable?

    I thought from the original pic it would be much lighter and to me that is preferable as long as that lighter color doesn't come with corrosion. This coin has a smooth surface bit it is just so dark and lifeless that it all eye appeal is gone. >>



    I would definitely not buy the coin based upon the original photo. However, your photo is much more accurate, color wise, for this coin.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file