I am leaning more towards a reliance on TrueView images.
keets
Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭
Does that mean I'm drinking the "Koolaide" or that I'm hedging my bets on image manipulation??
Al H.
0
Comments
Very rare are the higher quality or consistent photos that I would trust above truview. That said I have been surprised how different even the PCGS team can get the same coin to look.
Isn’t too hard to believe considering the affect lights can have on a coin. How many of us have bought a coin that looked full of life at a big show only to pull it out when you get home without the mega lights and go “that’s not how I remember it”
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
This is what it comes down to.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
It is all about the lighting for sure. I’ve seen great TVs that are good representations and I’ve seen some that would only look like that if you used very specific techniques.
What I don’t care for, in general, with TVs is that they tend to be lower contrast and emphasizing color over luster. Having done a lot of macro photography over the years I learned to recognize certain looks and techniques. In essence, you have to choose what attributes of a coin you’ll emphasize over others. It’s the limitation of a still image of a three-dimensional object.
What I will say is that with TV there is a lot consistency in their approach and once you understand what it shows and what it conceals you can make good guesses when it comes to a TV of a coin you’re viewing online.
Coin Shows have always bothered me. at the most critical point of a transaction, point of purchase, the lighting is typically the worst. I would leave everything else at home if I could take my lighting to a show in a backpack.
how awkward would that be??
TurtleCat, don't overlook the fact that TV's are done on raw coins. that thin layer of plastic above the image and the fact that light is diffused all around the coin by still more plastic distorts an image. it may be almost imperceptible, but it exists. that's PCGS, with NGC we get an image in-holder but they are always the same as far as lighting and orientation, so that helps with interpreting what's there.
I have sent my share of raw and holdered coins to forum photographers and it must be admitted that they do what they need to do to get a good image. call that a "glamour shot" or just good technique but it needs to be acknowledged.
You, tell us😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
As with everything in life, it depends. It depends on the issue, proof or MS, etc.
Latin American Collection
I am a big fan of trueviews. I am hesitant to purchase a coin without a high quality image.
I decided to take the plunge and try coin photography for myself. My recent thread shows 5 different shot pairs of the same $10 Indian. Largely the only difference among the 5 is lighting.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1039571/coin-photography-continued
Near the end of the thread I posted my own picture vs trueview of a $20 lib.
I think there is a balance in trying to get a full and complete level of detail (see every mark and color) but also trying to capture the luster of the coin.
There can be a lot of variation just changing the lighting as my thread shows.
Instagram
Images can be highly inaccurate or misleading, even in the absence of manipulation.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Mark, that is sort of my point. to be more direct I wonder if members think it's "manipulation" for a photographer to take an image which best depicts what the coin looks like, including its attributes?? if that means an image which hides marks or hairlines,
I think @ianrussell ’s team got it right with their photo/lighting strat. The combo of speed with consistency. While not the most flattering photos, I can gauge quality so much better than jumping between styles on EBay even when the photos turn out to be quality.
Even HAs has too many lighting combos and hands involved to truly get the consistency I see on GC.
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
.
In the case of proofs, a choice on the TrueView submission form for dark or light background would be good.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
I'm not even smart enough with cameras, photography, or photo editing software to call myself an amateur.
That said, in my opinion, any "honest" picture of a coin is a valid and useful picture. I don't view different lighting as photo manipulation or dishonest.
I like TrueViews because they provide another honest image of the coin.
TrueViews are helpful in conjunction with additional images. I would never buy an expensive coin based only on a TrueView unless I have return privileges. I think I have returned two coins in 20 years so I think I’m pretty reasonable.
We had a post a few years ago where PCGS may have offered (if I recall correctly) the option for the coin owner to pick the preferred trueview for the same coin. They take multiple pictures. There was a difference between them.
All in all they are excellent for showing the surface of the coin, but different versions accentuate different aspects of the same coin.
When a coin I am considering has a trueview, i consider that a big big plus.
He who knows he has enough is rich.
I think you have to understand the picture a little (which can be difficult).
The TV's seem to be accurate, but are shot in a way that doesn't always show the color or surfaces quite the way my eye sees them in hand. I do understand a few of the nuances as I look and compare more of them.
The same is true for the auction houses, the bigger dealers and some of the more notable photographers here on the board. Different lighting and technique can show a coin in a lot of different ways.
It's always good to have more, not less ... unless the pictures are purposely deceptive based on angles and other nefarious means.
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
I enjoy looking at true view images of proof coins.
In the case of proofs, it would be good to have both
Cert verification can support multiple photos so it would be good to be able to cycle through both. Of course, I'd be happy to pay for 2 as well.
I would actually like that, along with slab photos as well, like the overseas photos. Here's one:
I am with Al... @keets... I really like the clarity and consistency of TruViews.... That being said, we all know that coin photography/lighting/angles etc., can affect what we see....Beauty shots are great ... But I like the TV's....and I have found on my coins, the TV and reality are very, very close....Cheers, RickO
That’s not lighting. That’s just tilt.
And it’s also a small crime against humanity that they’d give you a glamour shot like that on a DCAM coin ..... 🤬😱😖🔥
Exactly. It changes the lighting angle!
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
I like Trueviews because I cannot capture the same quality shots as a professional can. Owning a camera doesn’t qualify me as a photographer. I consider photography a trade, not really a DIY job for optimal results. I heavily rely on TVs for my favorite coins.
Consistency is really, really important and this is pretty darn good with TrueViews. There isn't any one set of photos that can do a coin perfect justice. It's always a trade-off and compromise to show it one particular way. It is trivially easy to hide flaws (or accentuate them) by manipulating the lighting. I'm much more likely to place a bid on a coin on HA, Stacks, or GC when a TrueView is available.
Taking photos of coins has tremendously improved my ability to interpret coin photos. Still, not even videos can compare to the ability to look at it in person, under good light. I have plenty of examples of times I prefer my photos to the TrueView and other examples where they were able to capture something better than me.
One final thought.......
Some coins are more photogenic than others, even when they're perfectly nice in-hand. For a dealer, the coin with the prettier photo will always be easier to sell. This is especially true now that we've moved into an Internet-centric marketplace.
‘’I am leaning more towards a reliance on TrueView images. financial ruin.”
I fixed it for you. TVs are not consistent.
I fixed it for you. TVs are not consistent.
they have proven to be a better way for me to judge an item's true appearance than anything else, so in that regard TrueView images have proven more consistent. look, I'm a rank amateur compared to all the well regarded pro/semi-pro's here at the forum including PCGSPhoto, yet there are coins I have been able to "nail" with perfection using a 1990's model Nikon camera with a 1.2mb file size. I just can't do that consistently from session to session even with a static set-up. I have used a couple of the well regarded forum guys but the quality of what they can do doesn't match what my $5/coin gets from PCGS.
While TVs are not always "True" with proof coins as shown by @topstuf, I think
they are very accurate with MS and "circ" coins. Here on the forum I think
Todd @blu62vette and John @messydesk do an excellent quality work.
The second shot was a kitchen table shot with my hand killing the glare.
It's also what it looks like in hand.
Pop 1 68+
Link for Images from Heritage:
https://coins.ha.com/itm/commemorative-silver/1936-50c-delaware-ms67-pcgs-cac/a/1166-7395.s
Have no ideas which one is closer to the real look of the coin.
Gorgeous Delaware! Somebody definitely saw the upgrade potential to shell out $18.4k for that coin in an MS67 OGH in 2012. The color in the TV looks a bit more saturated and vivid vis-a-vis the Heritage images, which is usually the case. Reality is probably somewhere in-between.
Here's my 100% reliance on TrueViews only purchase. It was a significant sum for me but I couldn't resist. When I opened the package, I couldn't be happier. It colors are spot on and look exactly like this in hand. The main difference is that the reverse is quite reflective in hand, but that's generally hard to capture.
Congrats to Phil @PCGSPhoto for some great photos!