Do auction houses embellish their photos

BIGAL2749

Was looking at Legend current auction and D. Lawrence weekly auction and there just seems to be too much color at Legend and coins very light at DL.
Heritage and Stacks don't appear to embellish their coins.

Recent offering at Legend

BillJones

Heritage and Stacks don't appear to embellish their coins.

But they can use lighting to their best advantage as I have learned the hard way. From that I've learned to see through at least some of their methods.

oih82w8

Happens all the time...same coin can have different appearance characteristics with different lighting types, distances, angles and number of lighting sources.

Coinstartled

Rarely have I bought a coin at auction where the look of the toning exceeded that in the image. for that reason I don't pay a premium for toning. Well at least not much of one.

TomB

I would imagine that a boutique style auction house such as Legend would have different imaging requirements from a high throughput auction house such as Heritage or Stacks while DLRC and Great Collections might likely fall in between. Each should strive to show an accurate image of every lot, but the question becomes "what is a truly accurate image". It seems trivial, but any coin, especially toned coins, can look mighty different in sunlight, incandescent light, fluorescent light, LED light, halogen light, color corrected light and so forth. Therefore, which image is best to use when confronted with the task of shooting hundreds, or thousands, of coins in a limited period of time? Each venue seems to have its own paradigm for lighting and post-image acquisition processing; and learning how the image may differ from the coin in-hand (again, under what light conditions will matter) is imperative to the online bidder.

BryceM

Since there is no lighting standard, it might be best to state that different auction houses use different photo techniques. Do any of them artificially elevate color saturation? Yes, at times I've seen virtually all of them do this. Nothing compares to an in-hand evaluation and even then you need to take lighting issues into account. I've been fooled by poor overhead lighting. One copper coin I bought had a huge spot that was visible from 10 feet in normal lighting but which was COMPLETELY invisible in the horrible bourse lighting when I bought it.

BStrauss3

Several of the auction houses (Heritage and Great Collections to name two) have had professional photographers setup their photo studios and workflow. Charmy posted a couple years back about her tour at Heritage and Todd (BluCC) has posted about setting up GC.

Ultimately, whether you DIY or have a pro, it's about the instructions given as to how you want the photos to appear (look their best, vs. most honest appearance).

tradedollarnut

From Laura:

"we do NOT enhance our images, in fact we have a professional full time photog come in who just happens to be a long time collector. He knows what coins should look like.

in addition, we use as many PCGS TRUEVIEWS as possible.

If you were to see the Northern Lights coins in person, you would see those really are the colors

we all work VERY VERY hard here to make the images right. When it come to catalogs-transfering to paper is always a problem"

tradedollarnut

And yes, I've personally seen the OP coin and it looks just like that in hand

Elcontador

The human eye can see thirteen or fourteen F-Stops. The best cameras can only photograph ten of them. I've seen this disparity in that try as I might, I couldn't get the rich yellows from New England fall colors in my photos. The same applies to photographing coins.

An image may not properly pick up color, hairlines, spotting, etc., through no fault of the photographer. So if you are considering buying a coin sight unseen - AND IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE COIN IN FRONT OF YOU, YOU ARE BUYING IT SIGHT UNSEEN - you need to have someone you trust look at the coin in hand and give you a report. You could be on very good terms with someone at the auction house. A friend or dealer you trust could look at the coins for you.

Otherwise, caveat emptor, and remember, if the coin is slabbed, there is usually no return privilege.

tradedollarnut

From CoinFacts

LindeDad

Since I've went to LED lighting they all look different.

BIGAL2749

One of the reasons I posted the question is my interest in several of the coins at the upcoming Legend auction. I'll be in Europe for the next month and have no way to personally examine the lots before the auction.

Knowing that images are not perfect (have a couple Tru-views of my own coins that look like different coins), it's reassuring to hear that no intentional efforts are made to enhance the images.

I'm one from the toning camp and there's some pretty coins up for sale.

BIGAL2749

Forgot that I wanted to post my best 1806 quarter

caddyshack

you can always have someone look for you or call them and ask to discuss the coin.

shorecoll

My future daughter-in-law has a Masters degree in digital photo manipulation. The idea that that degree exists should give people pause.

BAJJERFAN

Some do and some don't or some suck at photography. Best thing is to learn how to read their pics. If you are consigning it might be worthwhile trying to negotiate you supplying the pics.

derryb

Cameras and humans do not always see something the same way. Photos of coins should accurately re-create what the eye sees. Unfortunately artificial lighting is sometimes not seen the same by the camera vs. the brain's interpretation of what is being photographed. A good example is a photo taken under fluorescent lighting - the camera will show the green put out by the tubes. Humans do not see the green because the brain will compensate and remove most of it.

A coin photographer's responsibility is to create an image that matches that of the actual item. Sometimes this does require "adjustments" to the captured image. White balance and lighting adjustments are the two of the best ways to accomplish this.

BAJJERFAN

I've had a number of different folks image some of my coins over the years and many of them didn't much look like the real thing. I consigned some toners to Heritage thru another party and they were allowed to supply the pics. I know some didn't much resemble the coins as I remembered them. They sold well tho.

ianrussell

We make a big point out of not enhancing our photos, since we want bidders to know how the coin looks and bid accordingly.

The key to taking great photos is to get the shot right the first time without the need for enhancing. It takes more time and lighting is probably the most important part of it.

The second key is to be consistent.

• Ian

cameonut2011

@tradedollarnut said:
From Laura:

"we do NOT enhance our images, in fact we have a professional full time photog come in who just happens to be a long time collector. He knows what coins should look like.

in addition, we use as many PCGS TRUEVIEWS as possible.

If you were to see the Northern Lights coins in person, you would see those really are the colors

we all work VERY VERY hard here to make the images right. When it come to catalogs-transfering to paper is always a problem"

I felt really good about the quote until the second paragraph. I would never buy a toned coin based on a PCGS True View alone.

leothelyon

@tradedollarnut said:
From CoinFacts

Which looks more like your coin?

Or......which pic do you think might represent the coin better? Anyone?

Leo

tradedollarnut

Not my coin

leothelyon

Oh.

Walkerfan

The one and only coin that I purchased from Legend, so far, looked just like their photos.

Heritage images are usually pretty accurate and, oftentimes, the coin is even more lustrous in hand.

The coins that I bought from GC look, as good as, if not better than their photos. Their photos are very bright and have an almost cartoonish appearance. I feel that it understates how they truly look. I've never been disappointed with a GC coin and they almost always look better in hand.

DLRC seems to shoot their coins in two different styles. One is very accurate, while the other one uses this funky bright light. My guess is that it is to try to make duller coins look more lustrous. This latter type of photography looks very artificial and inaccurate to me.

Justacommeman

I have 20 coins in the current Legend Auction. Some of the coins we used the Trueviews and they captured the coin accurately. Most of the others I already had professional images and I was happy with those as they accurately depicted the coin. A couple Legend imaged.

If anything Legend images understate most of the coins I'm familiar with..

mark

Justacommeman

@leothelyon said:

@tradedollarnut said:
From CoinFacts

Which looks more like your coin?

Or......which pic do you think might represent the coin better? Anyone?

Leo

Are those even the same coin? One looks bigger then the other

mark

lordmarcovan

@Justacommeman said:

@leothelyon said:

@tradedollarnut said:
From CoinFacts

Which looks more like your coin?

Or......which pic do you think might represent the coin better? Anyone?

Leo

Are those even the same coin? One looks bigger then the other

mark

They are the same coin. Note the speck between the rim and stars 1 & 2.

Andrew99

I think the one at the bottom has had the Saturation value increased digitally.

People talk about not "enhancing" their photos, but unless you spend hours taking the picture with adjusting the camera, most of the work of getting the picture to match the coin in hand is with a digital photo editor. This is particularly true of copper and most darker coins. You can do only so much with light and f-stops and you need to adjust white balance and saturation to get colors right. Photography is a skill and it is not just pushing a button on an expensive camera.

Justacommeman

@lordmarcovan said:

@Justacommeman said:

@leothelyon said:

@tradedollarnut said:
From CoinFacts

Which looks more like your coin?

Or......which pic do you think might represent the coin better? Anyone?

Leo

Are those even the same coin? One looks bigger then the other

mark

They are the same coin. Note the speck between the rim and stars 1 & 2.

I was being facetious ; )

m

ElmerFusterpuck

@BigAl I'll bet your 1806 quarter looks way better in hand then that photo. Looks like the white balance is off among other things.

Insider2

It would be stupid not to from a profitability approach.

BIGAL2749

@ElmerFusterpuck said:
@BigAl I'll bet your 1806 quarter looks way better in hand then that photo. Looks like the white balance is off among other things.

Yes it does and although darker, it has many of the colors of the "blue" coin that can be seen having light hit it at different angles.
My photographic skills suck.

leothelyon

Like this?