Which auction house has the best images?
lkeigwin
Posts: 16,893 ✭✭✭✭✭
I pay attention to this. When the coin arrives I shoot images I think are fair and compare them.
Who presents the most accurate pix? Heritage, Stacks, Goldberg, Great Collections, Legend, Bowers, David Lawrence? Who am I forgetting?
If you have a dealer in mind, with especially good or horrible pix, let's hear about them.
Your pix vs. theirs are welcome. Or your impressions of images vs. the coin in hand.
Lance.
Coin Photography Services / Everyman Registry set / BHNC #213
0
Comments
Honestly, I don't trust any of them without an in hand view or having someone I trust do the same. DL is by far the worst, that I can say.
Dealers like CRO, Tom Bush, DWN, HLRC, Dave Wnuck, WDP, Eye Appealing, Sunshine, and others, all of them have images that capture the coins best assets without going overboard. As it has been said to me by dealers that have good images, they can't be glam shots or they get too many returns, so capture accurately is what they do.
Horrible dealer pix - too many to name here..........
Best, SH
DLRC is in the dark ages with their scans. Goldberg’s has generally high quality images. I never trust the Heritage glamour shots though they have gotten better but the slab shots are more helpful.
Latin American Collection
I would say they each have their own way of shooting-each of which has its own positives and negatives. over the years and having bought hundreds from each (and lot viewing especially) I have learned how to tell the "signs" of each shooting to know what I am looking for.
That said special shout out to Scotsman who I have felt was the most honest when describing certain coins. I have seen them almost literally say "this coin is garbage" and when they say PQ i actually tend to believe them
All auction houses are particularily bad on toned coins. This is one that I won in a Heritage auction a few years ago:
And this is the TrueView of that coin:
A very nice surprise when I received it.
OINK
Legend Auctions uses TrueViews though they are not labeled as such. Not sure if they still do.
It's hard to say which is truly the best unless you get to see the coins in hand to compare, but it sure is nice to have images over the days of the old Teletrade paper catalogs with just descriptions! Stacks and Goldberg's (to me) have the most consistent images, the coin in hand is pretty faithful to the pic. Great Collections is not too far off, in pretty much every case the coin looked better in hand when I got it though. Legend is maddeningly uneven with their photos, it appears the different image sources are used throughout their auctions. Heritage can be uneven too, though their source seems to be the same throughout. They are fine with their circulated coins though. DLRC really needs to get away from their scanner style images and step up to where the others are.
10-4,
My Instagram picturesErik
My registry sets
I dunno. You sort of get used to interpreting each site. I visit HA’s site the most. I find their shot of the entire slab to be a better representation of the actual look of the coin. The closeups show detail & hits. Stack’s seem to mute the luster and color, making most anything look lifeless. GC is consistent, but their photos don’t always show a coin to its full advantage. Legend is generally better but not always consistent. I think it goes without saying that eBay is the worst.
As others have said, seeing coins in-hand is the only real way to know.
Photographing coins has made me a better interpreter of coin images - no doubt there. After a while you get a feel for how the camera captures or hides what’s really there.
I have images from Legend Auctions, Heritage, Stacks, and Great Collections with my own comparison photography. I'll post them later today when I get a minute.
I like Great Collections. Their photo showed what....I.... had missed when I bought the coin FTF.
but the photo was accurate.
I always compare my own photos of newp coins to those in the auction (or dealer's site) just to get a sense for our differences...which is useful for setting expectations next time. E.g., a favorite dealer/friend knows he has a problem with white balance (much too red) but feels he can't efficiently fix it. I have figured out the right tint and temperature he should be using so I adjust his images for my personal view. Works nicely.
Like many of you I always ignore the HA glamor shots (except, maybe, for examining surfaces). Their slab shots are much truer.
I was surprised yesterday when a Goldberg newp arrived. Very accurate images (below). Check out that cool reverse die crack between ED in UNITED. It developed into an "internal cud" (as Tompkins calls it).
Lance.
Most of what I collect is circulated. I have found Heritage to be pretty good, Stacks too, but I have really struggled with DLRC. I just can't project what the coin will look like in hand from their images; I have been disappointed a couple of times and as a result rarely look at their listings. I hope they change to a new system.
Goldbergs' images look terrific, but I have not bought anything from them. (yet)
I think Great Collections images tend to underplay the eye appeal; this can lead to some pleasant surprises. My experience with them is limited.
@lkeigwin , **I love cuds! **The one above I had not seen.
W. David Perkins Numismatics - http://www.davidperkinsrarecoins.com/ - 25+ Years ANA, ANS, NLG, NBS, LM JRCS, LSCC, EAC, TAMS, LM CWTS, CSNS, FUN
This might be a lengthy post, but perhaps will contain some useful information. I pulled photos from the auction houses and circle-cropped them and sized them to be identical to my own photos. No other processing was done and the copyright of those photos is retained by the auction houses. My own photo techniques are more-or-less standard and I create a photo composite of the obverse, reverse, and slab label. I have stuff for David Lawrence, Great Collections, Heritage, Legend Auctions, Stacks Bowers. I will show the auction house photos, my own photos, and when I have it, a TrueView for comparison.
First, David Lawrence. The half dime was purchased in 2015, the Barber Quarter in 2012:
Next, Great Collections. The dime was purchased in 2015:
Next, Heritage. The FH half dime was purchased in 2016, the half cent in 2017, and the Barber Dime in 2105:
Legend Auctions. Both were purchased in 2017:
Finally, Stacks Bowers, a purchase from 2014:
The quality of many of the auction house photos is diminished by slab scuffs, scratches and such. In some, the white balance is off. In a few the details aren't sharply focused. In a couple, the images aren't even actually round.
Hope someone besides Lance finds this useful.
Pretty sure I know exactly who you are talking about and I think it's more of you can't teach an old dog new tricks mentality!
Great job, Bryce. Thanks for the effort.
You may remember the comparison I put together several years back, showing Heritage's Newman photos (glamor and slab) and ones I had recently taken.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/903797/heritage-newman-photos-good-bad-or-acceptable-warning-lots-of-images#latest
I know your photography and I'm sure your images are spot on. In the above comparison did you use HA's slab shots or the glamor ones?
I wish there were consistency to the quality of a vendor's images. Sometimes they're pretty decent...the HA half cent, the TrueView CA commem, Stacks' 1797 dollar. Some of the others are ridiculous.
I like and appreciate Ian's GC site. But I am not very impressed with the images (excessive exposure and lack of color). DLRC's pix have gone downhill, IMO. Excessive contrast and color. I think Stacks and Goldberg are usually fine. As was mentioned earlier, HA's slabs are okay but the glamor shots are absurd and those are the ones in their printed catalogs!
Lance.
I generally agree with your assessments. As strange as it seems, I think SB has some pretty decent photos. Luster isn't usually shown well though. I used HA's glamour shots for the FH half dime, and the Barber dime but only a full-slab shot was available for the 1/2 cent. HA might not be excellent, but I can usually figure out luster and color from their photos, if for no other reason than they're reasonably consistent and I visit the site a ton.
DLRC seems to be all over the place. A few years ago they seemed to put effort into their more expensive coins while the low-end stuff got cheap quickie photos (maybe even scans). Now, I don't look there very often, but their work doesn't strike me as very good.
GC is a little frustrating. I did a consignment there and wasn't thrilled with how my coins were represented. I do think they're consistent and most people can probably figure out what they're getting. Like you said, I think Ian is great and I'm personally thrilled to see a little competition to keep the other guys honest. Photography with the growth and volume that they've been seeing must be a real chore.
I really like Legend's monthly and Regency auctions and I'm bidding on quite a few coins there over the past couple of years. Their offerings are a step above the usual stuff but I have to say, their photos really aren't very good. As was said, sometimes they're OK, but sometimes a quick iPhone image would be far better. I only bid on the California commem after I found the TrueView of the coin on CoinFacts from a previous cert number.
My hat is off to those dealers who make an effort to have great photography. CRO, Tom Bush, Dave Wnuck, and many, many others leave nothing to the imagination. A much larger group of dealers do good enough to get by.
I'd wager any of those in the second group would recoup multiples of whatever they invested to improve their photo game in better sale prices and liquidity,
As a side note, APMEX offers a few numismatic higher-end coins and their photography for those is generally superb, even if the prices are unrealistic much of the time. I had a few conversations with their staff photographer a while ago and she really knows her stuff.
The folks at PCGS generally do an amazing job. They handle a wide variety of surfaces, finishes, and types of coins and they usually nail it. They do have the unique advantage of shooting without the slab. I tried to outdo them on the California, but I just couldn't......... Maybe I'll have to revisit that.
You would THINK that the auction houses have an incentive to provide top notch images on the coins they have up for auction. Not to mention that the consignors ought to insist on top notch images. After all, better images tend to draw higher bids.
But then, maybe common sense doesn't apply to auction houses. They are only interested in the $$.
“In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." - Thomas Jefferson
My digital cameo album 1950-64 Cameos - take a look!
for what I have seen I think Stack's and Goldberg do a good job. also, it doesn't really seem appropriate to use the TrueView images in a comparison. Phil Arnold is able to take pictures of the raw coins and the others generally are shooting through plastic, too many variables in play.
I remember certain dealers in the 70s and early 80s used stock photos of coins rather than the actual coin they were selling. Boy - we have come a long way.
Often, dealers and auction houses don't use the True View images even when they're available. I've never understood that.
Even just including a little symbol in the lot description to inform you that a TV is available would be useful.
You said it, Brother.
Many dealers with great photos mentioned already. I don't think anyone has mentioned him yet and should (especially given that it was @lkeigwin who started this thread), but Sheridan Downey's photos are absolutely top notch.
The importance of quality photography (and consistent photography) just can't be overstated when selling coins online. Some dealers seem to get it, some others don't.
I don't usually self promote...but I think my pictures are very honest and show an in hand look!
I had to spend big wasted bucks buying back a couple of coins from heritage the LAST time I consigned to them do to poor pictures and description.
Very helpful post, Bryce, thanks! You should be doing photos for some of those auction houses, imo.
Exactly.
I saw a CBH at Heritage, and based on the photo I passed. I think it was an 1807. The same coin showed up on Sheridan Downey's site, and now I want it, but I'm sorry to have missed the opportunity to get it cheaper from Heritage.
A lot of eBay images are worthless. Finklestein comes to mind, but I wouldn't suggest you tell him that.
As long as the pictures sent better then coin in hand. I am good. All mentioned do good work and st times great work. Judge by the after purchased feeling.
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
I'm sure I'm stating the obvious...but a takeaway from this thread is that if you want to attract online bidders/buyers (and who doesn't? this is the future, folks) then you had better improve your photos so they resemble the coins you're hawking. You can only skate by with marginal pix for so long.
Coin photography can be bewildering but it's really elementary with a little effort and investment. If it's beyond your abilities, patience, or interest then hook-up with those who can deliver. There are many excellent sources here.
Attending coin shows to see coins in-hand, or buying on approval, are still great ways to go. Just not very efficient or economical for the masses.
Lance.
@BryceM
I had that Cali for about 7 years. Bought it from Larry Shepherd. It was in a 66* holder before I crossed it. I have a Goodman and Todd shot of it. I can't seem to access my Goodman files. If I do I'll forward it to you. The TV is the most accurate IMHO
Mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
@Justacommeman
Mark, good to know. Makes me like it even more!
Photography is as good as the professionals on their staff, just look who on their staff is doing the work and their background may give a sense of the quality.
I have taken a chance before and have usually been pleasantly surprised...however...there is the occasional dog of an image which was actually represented properly.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
Problem is that with most coins being auctioned/listed on many dealer sites, improved images will convince you why you don't want to bid on/buy the coin. I think this is part of the reason many auction houses and many dealers don't make the effort give good images as it may actually hurt sales........
Best, SH