How is the quality of True-View photos at present?
GRANDAM
Posts: 8,519 ✭✭✭✭✭
Getting ready to send in a big order and trying to decide wether to spend the extra $5 per coin?
Thanks, Gary
GrandAm 
0
Comments
I have only seen one order shown here that was decent which was a group of modern (ish) cameo proofs. Every other one shown here has been terrible, but I don't submit to PCGS so I can only go by what I see and hear.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
I have used these photos often recently to illustrate current TV issues.
PCGS TV 10/2/24
CACG 'TV' is very 'true' (ahem) to the coin in hand.
maybe someone is forcibly preventing the photographers from turning down the yellow, maybe it's they only way they can signal they're in captivity?
For hairline-free circulated coins, TruViews seem reasonable. For UNC coins, I am not a fan as they virtually always seem MUCH nicer in the pics as compared to the coin in-hand.
On the web: http://www.earlyus.com
@OldeTowneCoinShoppe
Are these recent photos or Phil era shots?
I’ll take nicer in the photo,,
I sent 50 coins off and don’t want to get sub-par photos for my $250.
Grades please? I’m wanting to send my next sub to CACG so the tvs look correct but I’m afraid I’m gonna get killed on the grades (moderns). Plus I’m real bad about Zigging when I should be zagging.
I have just sent in a group of Half Dimes and if the photos are not decent, I will move to ANACS.
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
James is this your current experience or are you thinking several years back before Phil left? Very few of the recent comments on TV's have been positive circ or unc, I certainly cannot recall anyone saying the recent TV's are even nicer much less "MUCH" nicer than in hand.
My Collection of Old Holders
Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
TrueViews used to be glamor shots where hairlines and flaws were minimized. Now, they seem to highlight the flaws on the coin and add a yellow or orange hue. This 1868-S shows some light scratching near Liberty's head and shoulder in the TV. In-hand, those scratches are only visible at certain angles and are not obvious. It's as if TrueView highlighted this flaw rather than hiding it.
P > XF40
C > XF Dets
Pay a little more and get 20X better photos by using a through the slab photographer like @robec once the coins are graded.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Submitted these coins raw and just got the TVs- they’re better than they were a year ago, but still sub-Phil quality
Well there you go. But still. A better picture with a lower grade in a better slab may still bring more money one day.
I'm going to say mixed to meh.
These are all from a recent submission.
The first two are okay. The next two are meh. Unfortunately, I don't have good images here for you to compare with, but none really show the coins as they look in hand. All were sent raw.
“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
Think.. jaundice…
Casual collector, mostly Morgans & Peace Dollars.
Well, this isn't the submission I was referring to in my original question. Those grades haven't popped yet,,,,,,, but I just got grades on another 8 coin submission and I am happy with the True-views.
Here is a sampling:
MS70
MS70
MS67
Here is "The Rest of the Story"
The last coin in this submission is a 1958 Canadian Nickel,,,,,, you might ask "WHY"
I was born in 1958 and have both Canadian and US Birth Year Mint Sets. I started this set at least 5 or 6 years ago and have been looking for the nickel since the beginning. I have never seen a graded PCGS coin come up for sale in all this time. The coin in this submission was cracked out of an NGC MS65 holder and that is the only graded coin I have ever seen come up for sale so I bought it and sent it in.
I was hoping for an MS65 grade but,,,,,,,,,,,,,
@GRANDAM your link is a "my account" link. Shared order is what you want.
https://www.pcgs.com/shared-orders/order-details/24443479
Here's my most recent, I think the TrueViews are alright. Two of the certs are gone, for, reasons..
I should mention this is from July.
https://www.pcgs.com/shared-orders/order-details/24067988
Collector, occasional seller
Thanks, I posted a screen shot.
NICE High Relief Peace Dollars.
Yellow, yellow everywhere.
I'm actually happy (after complaining non-stop for four concurrent submissions. These are pretty true to the coin in hand.
The TV's have improved to the point that they are generally acceptable. They aren't fantastic like they used to be or could be, but they are adequate.
Here are a few results I got this week. The Morgan is good. The rest of the pics could be better.
It's funny how a lot of people used poopoo the TVs as unrealistic glamour shots and now they're being poopooed for the opposite reason. I'll take a happy medium if mine are here by Christmas (checked in today).
I'm not sure if your comments are directed at me, but that's not the reason I have a a problem. The 1961 Proof cent has lighting glare on Lincoln's chin and chest that is inexcusable. The 1961 Franklin is also improperly lit and should probably be more like this Coinfacts example:
The wheat cent is decent but would be better if shot like this CF example:
@ProofCollection Not at all directed at you just a general statement.
I think my submission was the Cameo proof submission referenced above. Though a few had some glare issues, I was generally pleased with the quality of my TrueViews. The order shipped back to me on October 9. Here are a few samples:
PR65BN
PR68CAM
PR69DCAM
PR68
PR68CAM
PR64CAM
PR68CAM
PR68CAM
PR68
At least the recent pictures aren't yellow. Can't say I'm a fan of the blue look on the half and dime though, And while that is a cool photo of the 51 cent, as a buyer that photo does little good to understand what the coin actually looks like in hand.
Love the blue Kennedy and the TVs look great @ModCrewman
Just found these two.
If they are economy or modern I would not do it. I am still seeing lousy photos coming out on Coinfacts with a lot of yellow tint. A few posted above have the yellow tint as well. After over a year without Phil, they still can’t get the white balance right.
I have a Regular order in transit, so I will post about the photos when they drop, hopefully before Christmas.
I sent in this proof 1950 Franklin several months ago straight from the original boxed set and it was a stunning coin. I took photos of it and you can see the difference. I thought it would go 65/66 CAM/ DCAM….and it came back as a PR64 CAM with TV’s that looked like someone had taken a brillo pad to the surfaces. In hand it’s a gorgeous coin….but the TV’s tell a different=nt story…😏
I agree it sucks your coin didn't grade as well as you expected that's always a disappointment, but your photos look to be from an extreme lighting angle where the hairlines on the coin don't show up. Judging from the significant scratch behind the bust (which can also be seen on your photo), the grade is probably fair. The fact that it came straight out of the OGP before submission is honestly probably more confirmation that the hairlines were there before submission as it means for 74 years the coin had been in the cellophane bag (which most commonly was degrading and becoming more abrasive) with the other 4 coins resting on top of it. Hairlines in the obverse fields from this packaging is all but guaranteed.
IMHO the TrueView actually shows the contrast much better than your photo because it was more directly lit. Before seeing the TrueView, from your photos I wouldn't have given your coin any chance at getting a CAM designation. Overall, 64 CAM is still a very nice grade for one of these.
My evaluation of your TrueView is that the obverse could be lit a bit better as the bust seems dark, but overall, I'd be satisfied with the image. Just my 2 cents having purchased and graded a ton of 50-70 proof coins with TrueViews over the past 15 years.
It’s a shame what has happened with the true view quality lately….
It makes me want to look for slightly older slabs, because the TrueViews used to be excellent! Now it’s a roll of the dice just to get a decent one much less a good one…
My YouTube Channel
My most recent. PF70 submitted last month. Bought from the U.S. Mint. The other one I submitted was a PF69. I never had problems with true views.
Box of 20
My problem is that it's a roll of the dice of Proof Cameo coins. You don't know if you'll get a high contrast cameo picture or a low contrast picture like you got. I would suggest that since they look cameo in person, the photos should default to cameo so we can reliably know what to expect.
I submitted a raw so-called Wilson Dollar to PCGS in Baltimore. I asked aporoximately when I should get the graded coin back. They respinded in early 2026. I am hoping they meant 2025?
I am not happy with any of pictures I just got of my toned coin submission. The photos actually make the coins less valuable. Pass
Successful deals withChrisH821, fhc, greencopper, Al21, AUandAG, wondercoin, KellenCoin, and you next.
I just bought a very recent 508xxxxx toned Morgan based off just the true view images and received the coin today. Happy to report that the images are absolutely spot on and I’d put them up against any “golden age” TV in terms of accurate representation of a nicely toned Morgan. Sample size of one, but things seem to be moving in the right direction.
That's good news! No yellow tint to this coin.
Perfect coins just happen to be very photogenic. Btw that’s a terrible pic.