This is why you don't use desktop scanner to take pics of toned coins
lsica
Posts: 1,745 ✭✭✭✭
So I dont know for sure if this guy actually DID use a desktop scanner to take the "overhead" pic, but based on the look and how his "angle shot" and the True View look it does look that way
Here's the listing
https://ebay.us/m/h3vNMo
And here's some pics from it for people who might not get to this post before it sells
Philately will get you nowhere....
2
Comments
It appears this is the same seller you purchased your NGC toned MS64 Peace dollar from.
Fingers crossed your coin turns out to be beautiful regardless of the possibility now that it is not.
Actually I think the scanner pic makes the coin look "flat" and not a good look at all. Based on how he seems to take pics vs other images of his coins I'm hoping it actually looks pretty good. No not a rainbow dazzler but definitely some nice multi-color toning. Fingers crossed, I guess we'll see
The seller is posting a variety of pics for the potential buyer to view before considering a purchase (including the TV) -- Bravo!
Some of his sales he does, others he doesn't. And the one's where he doesn't he seems to use the "scanner" looking pic. I do understand how taking a good coin pic does take a bit of time and just using a scanner is faster, it just IMHO winds up giving you an image that doesn't present the coin as good as it could be.
Sorry I’m not clear on this - have you already seen the coin in hand to know that the PCGS cert pictures are accurate? Either way, my guess is that the combination of pictures offered by the seller provides a pretty good idea regarding the coin’s appearance.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I have no reason to believe that this coin was imaged with a scanner. Rather, this look is common of ring lighting.
You can see the ring light from the glare in the other images.
Coin Photography
I don’t understand this post
You need to take a look at his other auctions. Most just have the one "scanner" photo, and they all have that same "flat" look. For the few he's taken other pictures those images aren't as bad. My hope(?) is that the coin I bought from him will have a similar improvement when I see it in hand
His other images, but his top-down images have that scanner look. Take a look at this one (yes its the one I purchased so I may have to eat some crow when I see it in hand)
The lighting is so bad it looks like some of the lettering is gone. Again I could be wrong and it might be covered with multi-colored thick muck so thick that it hides the letters. But the quality of his other photos make me think I might be somewhat happily surprised. But then again I might be wrong and I might have overpaid by a factor of multiple times. We will see.....
I think the coin will be fine. I’ve purchased many coins from a scan, you have to learn to read them.
Again, characteristic of a ring light.
Coin Photography
I agree with @FlyingAl that this is typical ring light set up. Does the dealer also sell jewelry? Certain jewelry photo set ups involve a white tent around the piece to have such uniform lighting.
Custom album maker and numismatic photographer.
Need a personalized album made? Design it on the website below and I'll build it for you.
https://www.donahuenumismatics.com/.
It's not the lighting with a flat bed that is the problem, it's the depth of field.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
.
No, it is not the depth of field. It is the broadly-diffused light source perpendicular to the coin surface.
A pin-point light source from a non-perpendicular direction will make the coin look a lot different (better).
.
Who uses a scanner nowadays for coin images?
Evidently not this seller.
Coin Photography
That's not a scanner picture. Scanners now can no longer image coins in slabs at all. Anything not in contact with the glass will come out very blurry. Some (much) older scanners had different optics and lighting and were able to do a little better with respect to sharpness off the glass.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
I'm not saying the light source is ideal. But the reason you lose a lot of features is because flatbed scanners are designed to image paper that is directly on the surface. They don't have the depth of field to bring up features that are back from the surface.
Years ago, I had a scanner designed to image objects rather than paper. You would get much better images of coins and 3D objects that didn't sit directly on the surface of glass (even though the lighting was still diffuse. Most flatbed scanners will not provide depth of focus and the features end up slightly out of focus which is why, as the OP stated "some of the lettering is gone".
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Tell this to @dcarr
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Huh,OK, I'll play along.
Stonehenge Docu-etch Scanners. Quality not included.
Rockford coin and stamp on eBay. As long as you know the pics are from a scanner it's not difficult to interpret them. I've bought from them, they're a good seller.
.
Where did I write that the picture was from a scanner ? (hint: I didn't).
Every part of the image is equally in focus. So it is not a "depth of field" issue as claimed.
.
I was responding to someone who mentioned the lighting in a flatbed. You jumped in to that conversation that was about flatbed scanners. Pardon me if I assumed you were staying on the topic.
I don't agree that it is equally in focus. The coin surface is equally out of focus. The rim, which is the highest point is actually in better focus. And I think the scratches on the slabs are in the best focus of all.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Er, I would never use a scanner to create images of coins ever. I wouldn't sell on feepay either………………. Why would someone not use the best equipment possible to capture the beauty of coins? Yikes. What can possibly be the point of producing inferior images intentionally? Double Yikes.