Just a gentle tap on the shoulder and a whisper in your ear: Everyone here is an alias. They are ALL aliases including you, @oldglorycoins.
(For me, I simply haven't landed on one that totally works for me yet. It's a work in progress.)
Stopping with 5 - all taken within the past year- The 1697 is a 6d.
It is very difficult to capture all coins all the time in the most favorable or accurate light. The images shared show the good and perhaps the not so good but at the end of the day, I would not be critical of these images or the coins.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Once one figures out the camera settings and photography lights, the set-up...it doesn't change much for each coin. I've had this discusion with a few so called professional photographers who do it for a living and most didn't know much more than l did, like what a full format sensor camera was. One said, I know they are very expensive. lol Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
I don't buy coins without a great photo.....oh no, the secret is out! Now a days, it's close $20 to mail and return a coin. Sellers...you better get it figured out....your photography skills! Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
@ELVIS1 said:
Once I heard that my White Balance was the problem I figured I didn't have enough time or energy to go down That rabbit hole..
Honestly, I've been using Photoshop for more than 30 plus years, and Lightroom for close to 20, and color grading is still difficult. It's not easy.
I feel like most of the TruViews I see are simply too dark. They tend to be afraid of highlights, or they make mistakes on the exposure (likely because they're moving very quickly from coin to coin and not adjusting for the brightness of the coin itself.
Newbie collector of type and circulated Peace dollars, photographer of places and animals, player of instruments and builder of amplifiers, espresso industry professional, and a person distracted by shiny objects. https://mycollect.com/Rule556/sets
My experience is that Truviews are great as a research tool. I've been able to tentatively identify new obverse die varieties of 1909-S V.D.B. Lincoln cent using PCGS Truviews from their library.
The measure of intelligence is the ability to change.
Albert Einstein (14 March 1879--18 April 1955)
Going to be real, Phil Arnold set an extremely high bar but that doesnt allow the current team to send out photos like these. The difference in coin to photo is so different now that the photos are imo damaging to the coin. Online buying is hard and not everyone is a photographer so if I had to go off of those I would avoid a lot of times. I can now shoot coin photos now so I don’t depend on the trueviews as much but I have a lot of prized coins in PCGS holders with trueviews and I’d be insulted if some of them had the new style photos. PCGS team, you need to up your game in the nicest way possible.
What has been your experience/opinion with the quality of PCGS Trueview in the past couple of years?
Mostly disappointment, I'm sorry to say. The TrueView service used to be the main reason I used PCGS. It was great in the Phil Arnold days. In the last few years, results on my submissions (and on some coins I've bought that were already TrueViewed) have ranged between adequate and awful.
Now I use NGC, and am happy with their PhotoVision images by Doug Plascencia. Which isn't to say I wouldn't still use PCGS for some US coins on occasion, but since I'm mostly a World & Ancients guy, NGC just makes more sense anyway (since obviously, PCGS doesn't grade Ancients).
Here's one rather egregious example. The first set of photos are the DLRC images. They are accurate to the coin's color. Compare them to the weirdly-orange TrueView, next. I did not submit this coin, but bought it already slabbed. If I had been the submitter, I would have been rather disappointed with that inaccurate "TrueView".
Really, the only time I've used PCGS recently is for a TrueView and reholdering on this already-slabbed Saint, which I didn't want to cross to NGC and risk losing the (66) grade. I wanted good photos to use and have on the cert page. I do think this particular TrueView was satisfactory.
Collector since 1976. On the CU forums here since 2001.
The TrueView on this medieval bracteate is not way off, but it is a little bit too dark. This has been the case with a few of my other pieces submitted.
Collector since 1976. On the CU forums here since 2001.
Comments
He'll always just be RedRocket to me.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.
Oh good. I was wondering why there were so many names I had set to ignore on this thread!
"She comes out of the sun in a silk dress,
running like a water color in the rain...."
Just a gentle tap on the shoulder and a whisper in your ear: Everyone here is an alias. They are ALL aliases including you, @oldglorycoins.
(For me, I simply haven't landed on one that totally works for me yet. It's a work in progress.)
Stopping with 5 - all taken within the past year- The 1697 is a 6d.
It is very difficult to capture all coins all the time in the most favorable or accurate light. The images shared show the good and perhaps the not so good but at the end of the day, I would not be critical of these images or the coins.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
same
Micah Langford - https://www.oldglorycoinsandcurrency.com/
He's back!!!
Micah Langford - https://www.oldglorycoinsandcurrency.com/
I agree.
Two different names, same person?
Nah he wouldn't do that. The rocket man sure was quiet for a while.
Student of numismatics and collector of Morgan dollars
Successful BST transactions with: Namvet Justindan Mattniss RWW olah_in_MA
Dantheman984 Toyz4geo SurfinxHI greencopper RWW bigjpst bretsan MWallace logger7 JWP BruceS bigjpst
JWP
Wide World of Sports; Jim McKay.
Once one figures out the camera settings and photography lights, the set-up...it doesn't change much for each coin. I've had this discusion with a few so called professional photographers who do it for a living and most didn't know much more than l did, like what a full format sensor camera was. One said, I know they are very expensive. lol Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
I don't buy coins without a great photo.....oh no, the secret is out! Now a days, it's close $20 to mail and return a coin. Sellers...you better get it figured out....your photography skills! Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Once I heard that my White Balance was the problem I figured I didn't have enough time or energy to go down That rabbit hole..
Honestly, I've been using Photoshop for more than 30 plus years, and Lightroom for close to 20, and color grading is still difficult. It's not easy.
I feel like most of the TruViews I see are simply too dark. They tend to be afraid of highlights, or they make mistakes on the exposure (likely because they're moving very quickly from coin to coin and not adjusting for the brightness of the coin itself.
Newbie collector of type and circulated Peace dollars, photographer of places and animals, player of instruments and builder of amplifiers, espresso industry professional, and a person distracted by shiny objects. https://mycollect.com/Rule556/sets
My experience is that Truviews are great as a research tool. I've been able to tentatively identify new obverse die varieties of 1909-S V.D.B. Lincoln cent using PCGS Truviews from their library.
The measure of intelligence is the ability to change.
Albert Einstein (14 March 1879--18 April 1955)
I think Trueview is much better than no Trueview.
The True View is horrible. I would be embarrassed if I sent out a coin looking like that.
Phil Arnold set a very high bar. I am not surprised that his results have been difficult to match.
Going to be real, Phil Arnold set an extremely high bar but that doesnt allow the current team to send out photos like these. The difference in coin to photo is so different now that the photos are imo damaging to the coin. Online buying is hard and not everyone is a photographer so if I had to go off of those I would avoid a lot of times. I can now shoot coin photos now so I don’t depend on the trueviews as much but I have a lot of prized coins in PCGS holders with trueviews and I’d be insulted if some of them had the new style photos. PCGS team, you need to up your game in the nicest way possible.
My Instagram
Mostly disappointment, I'm sorry to say. The TrueView service used to be the main reason I used PCGS. It was great in the Phil Arnold days. In the last few years, results on my submissions (and on some coins I've bought that were already TrueViewed) have ranged between adequate and awful.
Now I use NGC, and am happy with their PhotoVision images by Doug Plascencia. Which isn't to say I wouldn't still use PCGS for some US coins on occasion, but since I'm mostly a World & Ancients guy, NGC just makes more sense anyway (since obviously, PCGS doesn't grade Ancients).
Here's one rather egregious example. The first set of photos are the DLRC images. They are accurate to the coin's color. Compare them to the weirdly-orange TrueView, next. I did not submit this coin, but bought it already slabbed. If I had been the submitter, I would have been rather disappointed with that inaccurate "TrueView".
Really, the only time I've used PCGS recently is for a TrueView and reholdering on this already-slabbed Saint, which I didn't want to cross to NGC and risk losing the (66) grade. I wanted good photos to use and have on the cert page. I do think this particular TrueView was satisfactory.
Collector since 1976. On the CU forums here since 2001.
The TrueView on this medieval bracteate is not way off, but it is a little bit too dark. This has been the case with a few of my other pieces submitted.
Collector since 1976. On the CU forums here since 2001.
I'd love to know what this one looks like in person (and soon, I will):