Do these three pics look like they are the same coin?

RickMilauskas · October 13, 2008 11:10AM

Obviously they pics are of the same coin.

Should I assume that the first one has been "enhanced" to make its complexion appear more youthful and radiant for the judges in the pageant? (He typed with a hint of sarcasm)

Or could this Morgan actually look that clean shot from a different angle?

commoncents05 · October 13, 2008 11:11AM

I don't think it's been enhanced, sometimes it's just all about the angles and lighting.

-Paul

UtahCoin · October 13, 2008 11:12AM

<< <i>I don't think it's been enhanced, sometimes it's just all about the angles and lighting.

-Paul >>

I agree with Paul...

coinman420 · October 13, 2008 11:26AM

different cam and lighting. no enhancement. JMO

pheh · October 13, 2008 11:26AM

First one is shot with low contrast and diffused lighting. The next two are shot with high contrast and what would appear to at least be "less diffused" lighting. That is why the hits stand out on the second two images.

Edited to add:

And the first one is shot slightly out of focus or post-processed with a blur which further lessens the appearance of hits.

fcloud · October 13, 2008 11:29AM

All the same, but with different lighting.

Placid · October 13, 2008 11:34AM

Return it if you dont like it.

kryptonitecomics · October 13, 2008 11:44AM

Diffused lighting....that does the trick everytime...I only use it for toned coins to show off the color....not sure why you would use it on a blast white coin but I guess since it's a DMPL....

RickMilauskas · October 13, 2008 11:45AM

Thanks for the opinions...

No, I didn't buy it. Just wondering about the lack of hits in the first pic and how lighting/angle might affect the appearance.

derryb · October 13, 2008 11:50AM

as said above, lighting and angle of lighting.

pheh · October 13, 2008 12:21PM

By way of example (because I can never leave well enough alone)... Second image is a post processed version of the first with lowered contrast, median blur and finally resaturated color. Which, while clearly not resulting in a *great picture*, heavily reduces the appearance of hits. I am making no claims this was intentional by whomever is showing the coin - rather I would bet against it. But there are absolutely ways of showing a photographic subject in the best possible light, so to speak, without any major post processing work.

MikeInFL · October 13, 2008 12:40PM

<< <i>Diffused lighting....that does the trick everytime... >>

Bingo. Dead on correct in my opinion, Shane -- what we're seeing here is diffused light (and slightly missed focus along with a crappy camera) at work.

That said, it is difficult without additional information to conclude a misleading intent on behalf of the photographer, but I see nothing blatantly done to the photo in terms of post processing.

Respectfully...Mike

CoinJunkie · October 13, 2008 12:46PM

I agree with the other posters regarding the difference in lighting, but the
first pic is also slightly blurry, which tends to hide marks.

Broadstruck · October 13, 2008 12:53PM

Coin looks great in this shot

lkeigwin · October 13, 2008 2:35PM

In answer to your original question...yes.

mcheath · October 13, 2008 4:20PM

This thread enforces the fact that grading cannot be done from images.

TwoSides2aCoin · October 13, 2008 10:03PM

I sold many coins on eBay using crappy images. I maintained 100% positive feedback with "common" coins. My thought is : "Let the coin do the talking, in hand". (and all things considered, I'm with mcheath)

ziggy29 · October 13, 2008 10:08PM

Well, at least we don't have to answer that with respect to an 1873 IHC this time.

19Lyds · October 14, 2008 1:27AM

If you shoot a coin straight on, every little nick and hit will reflect light directly into the camera lens and become visible.

Shoot the same coin at an angle, and those reflections are bounced away from the lens.

Do these three pics look like they are the same coin?

Comments

Leave a Comment