Downright Photo Dishonesty
RedstoneCoins
Posts: 218 ✭✭✭
While we all know that eBay has a policy against "heavily edited photos", it seems that enforcement of this rule is severely lacking.
Particularly among sellers who bring in lots of listings and sales fees for eBay to profit off of, and Sellers whose items fall under categories that are largely valued based on their condition and appearance (cars, coins, art, collectibles, jewelry, etc).
The photos below are taken directly from a seller, who I will not name, which are clearly heavily edited photos. It appears to be a simple case of overexposure, where the timing of the light exposure for the camera is far too long for what would be appropriate to represent the coin as it would appear under natural lighting conditions. This has the effect of "blowing out" all of the details by shining excess light over contact marks, details in the design, and any other potential problems in the overexposed areas such as hairlines, rub, oxidization, and possible cleaning or tooling. It can also given a false appearance of luster where none exists under natural lighting circumstances.
eBay buyers, particularly novices, deserve to be given a fair education about identifying misleading and heavily edited photos before buying expensive coins. Hopefully they'll find this forum, or other decent ones, or the advice of those who frequent such forums, before making a purchase. However, we all know the truth is that most will not, and sellers like this will continue to reap a profit off of the ignorance of new collectors, and the naive optimism of bidders who hope the coin will really look as good in hand as it does in the photos.
Sellers who take misleading photos like this hurt our hobby. Judge for yourself. Do you think this coin likely has problems hidden by the photos, or problems which the photos artificially obscure?
Comments
It doesn't really matter whether you name him - we can see the safe and the so-called 200 year old store.
That is The Dockter's stompin' grounds.
For the most part, eBay does not appear to proactively police coin listings for rule violations - they remove listings after they are reported by multiple users.
In this case, "Big Al" took the photos, so there is no proof they were edited. Taking an overexposed photo is not really editing, anyway, although it may be purposefully misleading (which, many suspect, his photos are).
Edit: It's not a bad practice to avoid calling people out by name, in general. In this case, the seller has already been widely discussed on the forum. The important thing to avoid is making libelous statements.
All us Ebay veterans know to avoid the over exposed pictures and the 'Ebay tilt' pictures as they hide all the coin's imperfections.
Dishonest and unethical...yes.
But, often found in seller's listings.....what are you going to do?
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
At least you can make him eat the PayPal fee, free 30 day return.
It looks fine to me. Isn't this what they mean by "blast white"?
Oh look, it's 1933. Where are my shades?
Overexposed isn't the same as heavily edited.
I like blast white coins.... However, I do not like that one...
Yes, no doubt a false/misleading picture. This seller has been discussed many, many times here...Cheers, RickO
"appears uncirculated"?
This seller has 2 identities on ebay, I believe. I know who they are by their photos and saves me from wasting time looking at their stock.
Jim
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
If you have a complaint just stop by the store. Another coin will be taken from his two hundred year old safe.
Photography skills vary greatly.
check out some European auction houses and dealers web sites and you will find that many of them are using overexposed images to hide imperfections.
They do it purposely. and yes, I have personal experiences with some of them. But, do they care??? NO!
they know that nobody has to buy or bid.
Photographically hiding things are a great skill!
Shame on you!
Pete
Shame on me for making a true statement?
Ok, I guess everyone is a professional photographer and should have perfect pictures, LMFAO.
There's a sucker born every minute ... and they know it.
The "doctor" buys problem coins (discussed here endlessly) and resells them as non problem coins.
Avoid this seller is all I can say.
At least morgandealer is honest about it.
Coin has been cleaned and artificially toned.
It would be impossible to judge that coin with those pics. Why in the world would anyone buy that coin based on those pics. If the buyer is that naïv they’ll learn the hard way. Tough love
If a seller primarily sells coins and their photos are consistently bad, unless they allow returns I will avoid them unless I can buy on the cheap. If I stumble upon a seller who normally doesn’t sell coins and they have a coin I like with a lousy picture I’m willing to take a chance if they allow returns.
Some sellers simply have no idea how to take a picture. Even with an iPhone a seller should be able to take a halfway decent picture. It’s not rocket science. Some buyers are better at interpreting poor quality pictures that aren’t meant to deceive than others.
People who have second accounts tend to end up having a third, fourth, fifth. There's a ton of money in market manipulation of anything. Rare coins? Sky is the limit.
Would it change your thinking if ErrorsOnCoins had said "Photography skills VARY greatly"?
Respectfully, I think extreme overlighting is equivalent to a manipulated photo.
You're splitting hairs when you try to draw a distinction via minutia between editing which occurs AFTER the photo was taken (i.e. post-processing like in Photoshop) vs. editing which occurs BEFORE or DURING the taking of the photo (like exposure and lighting).
Manipulation in either case results in a photo that does not portray reality. That's the entire point of the policy. To require buyers to tell the truth, and whole truth, and nothing but the truth about the item which they are selling.
Which this seller clearly is not doing.
I am not saying this seller is unique in committing this act. But it is a problem that should be addressed. And we, as the members of the coin collecting community, shoulder the burden and responsibility of ensuring accountability for those who violate the public trust.
We should strive to do better, and ensure those who participate in a multi-billion dollar market do better as well. Otherwise, we will suffer the consequences of a negative reputation, both as a hobby and an investment. It will inevitably effect us all.
Don't buy from sellers who use crappy pictures. Problem solved. You're welcome.
It can be a problem.
This isn't about me. I can tell that is a manipulated photo.
This is about novice, new, young, naive, and occasionally myopic collectors (like older collectors) who have vision problems, whose inexperience or circumstances prevent them from knowing any better.
The standard to sell any item should be to tell the truth about it, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. And in this market, condition is everything, which means photographs are everything.
These photos do not tell the truth about the coin. Therefore they are misleading.
New, young, novice, and naive collectors may come to trust someone who has conducted numerous transactions on eBay, not knowing any better about the item the are buying, or the seller they are buying it from.
We should strive to call out bad behavior in our community. Otherwise, our silence speaks volumes, and will only come around to hurt us in the end.
I didn't mean SHAME ON YOU. I apologize if that's how you took it.
I meant SHAME ON THEM! for deceiving everyone.
Pete
Educating people so they know how to handle such situations better would be a good thing.
So much for education, I guess.
Same here. I take plenty of photos that end up being useless.
One more thing- unless one has access to the seller's monitor, one can't be sure what the image one is whining about looks like to him.
If you shoot a silver coin against a black background with a camera on auto, that will happen a lot. The camera adjusts the exposure to the dark part of the image and over-exposes the silver coin. The opposite happens if you shoot a copper coin against a white background.
Now, that seller is somewhat notorious for other things, but this is the first time I've heard him accused of photo manipulation.
My point is that it is entirely possible to get an overexposed photo by accident. And how overexposed does it need to be before you want eBay to intervene? Actual photo manipulation is an affirmative act and much easier to police.
when I hear edited, I infer changed after taken. Has there been heavy editing? and if so where?
There is a Huge difference between post-production editing and image mainpulation.
If I have any questions about a photo, I message the seller for info. In all cases, their response is adequate,
I even asked this seller how much for the coins on the floor, lol
At the end of the day, people are responsible for their representations of the items they sell. Whether accidentally wrong, or deliberately incorrect, sellers are ultimately responsible for any misleading information or descriptions - including visual descriptions - of the items they sell.
There are too many "coincidences" with this seller for me to believe that it is merely incidental or accidental. This seems deliberate. Especially given his other issues and actions.
I'm not sure why you're bending over backwards to defend the reputation of someone who already has a sullied one.
If done intentionally, it is.
We all know this guy isn't doing it by accident.
Collector, occasional seller
Nobody has argued otherwise.
Indecent over exposure in the pottery barn.
I'm not defending The Doktor. I'm defending eBay.
eBay should NOT be in the business of policing "photo quality". Photo quality is very different than intentional photo manipulation.
And, to your other point, the seller has responsibility for everything they sell. That's what SNAD and free returns are for.
It isn't about "this guy".
The OP isn't a criticism of The Dokter. It's a criticism of eBay for not policing overexposed photos.
From the OP:
Sellers who take misleading photos like this hurt our hobby. Judge for yourself.
From the OP - the OPENING SENTENCE:
"While we all know that eBay has a policy against "heavily edited photos", ** it seems that enforcement of this rule is severely lacking.**
**Particularly among sellers who bring in lots of listings and sales fees for eBay to profit off of, **and Sellers whose items fall under categories that are largely valued based on their condition and appearance (cars, coins, art, collectibles, jewelry, etc)."
This clearly is a condemnation of eBay for not cracking down on something that isn't even a policy. There is no policy against "bad photos" only manipulated images.
I'm not going to get into another pointless semantic argument with you. Have fun with this thread, I'm out.
"While we all know that eBay has a policy against "heavily edited photos"
Not based on anything I could find on eBay's site. Just sayin'.