Query: Why would I want to consign to an auction house when their photography is so sad?

commoncents123 · August 16, 2009 10:07AM

Just wondering, because it seems as though huge money could be lost. I mean, their photography is worse than MINE and I have a 12 year old camera that uses 3.5" floppy disks:

Unknown · August 16, 2009 10:14AM

This content has been removed.

illini420 · August 16, 2009 10:14AM

Based on the B&M photos I've seen and coins I've owned that have been through their auction house, I would NEVER consign to them. Pretty much same goes for Teletrade but it's not quite as bad. Heritage can do a good job, but I still think I can do better than they do, especially on toned coins.

Until they have a feature where the seller can attach their own photos in addition to the auciton house's photos, I'll probably not be a consignor.

commoncents123 · August 16, 2009 10:15AM

I mean, doesn't it look like the extra profit from True view quality photography would more than pay for the professional services they would have to hire?

illini420 · August 16, 2009 10:21AM

MS64 1892 Barber Dime

Heritage pics:

vs. my pics after winning it:

just a little difference I think

coinkat · August 16, 2009 10:47AM

I think it depends on the auction house and understanding if they have the best audience for your coins

yellowkid · August 16, 2009 11:13AM

<< <i>I think it depends on the auction house and understanding if they have the best audience for your coins >>

The photos from Goldberg and B&M usually showcase a piece.

Connecticoin · August 16, 2009 12:12PM

Well, when NONE of the auction houses have decent photos, then who do you consign to? Ebay might be an option for cheap coins, but for higher priced coins you still need the auction houses, and usually hope floor bidders who see the coin in hand will bid on the coin, especially if it is nice quality.

So perhaps that means you consign to the auction company with photos that "suck the least" or has the best history of prices realized for the particular coins you are selling.

Geoman · August 16, 2009 12:22PM

Here is a question I have always had....... do any auction houses let you submit your own pictures of the coins you want to cosign and will they use them? I have seen many examples where the auction house photos didn't do justice to the coin, and thus could have realized a lower price than it would have with better photos. Can you submit yoour own photos and request they use your photos?

ThePennyLady · August 16, 2009 12:49PM

<< <i>Here is a question I have always had....... do any auction houses let you submit your own pictures of the coins you want to cosign and will they use them? I have seen many examples where the auction house photos didn't do justice to the coin, and thus could have realized a lower price than it would have with better photos. Can you submit yoour own photos and request they use your photos? >>

I have already been addressing these issues with my rep at B&M, and he said I could use my own photos (as a matter of fact, I made it a condition if I consigned a certain group of coins to them). I have sent them examples of the coins I just won from the auction with Todd's (bluccphotos.com) photos versus their photos so my rep could show them to upper management. I made it clear that they are losing consignments for this very reason.

Regarding Heritage's photos, IMO they are a little too good. From my experience, many of their photos do not show a coin's flaws like spots or marks when they are quite evident on the actual coin. When I view their lots, usually the coin is not as nice as the photo depicts, whereas B&M's photos are the opposite. I probably prefer the latter, but feel that, with today's technology and excellent coin photographers out there, all the auction houses could do a much better job showing higher quality and more accurate images of their coins. I posted comparisons on these other threads:

1914-D from B&M auction
1888 Indian Cent from B&M auction
1886 Indian Cent from B&M auction

SaorAlba · August 16, 2009 9:48PM

During the very brief time that Stacks had their new website last month their photographs were competing with Heritages. Then they had problems with that site and went back to their old site with the crummy images that you could not zoom etc. Good job Stacks, your auctions are going into the proverbial can.

DrPete · August 16, 2009 11:04PM

Whereas we would all like to see better quality images, there is NO substitute to examining the coins directly (yourself or an auction representative--I use Harry Laibstain). I hope my fear that some bidders are placing bids on expensive coins based on a two-dimensional computer images alone is unfounded. It is IMHO, extremely unwise to base too much credence on a digital image of a coin. You cannot judge all aspects such as luster, marks and other qualities, although strike is fairly well represented.

The question is how much resources should an auction house have to invest in its images? The taking of quality images takes time and resources and that will eventually cost the consignors or bidders more. Better to get a general idea of what a coin looks like from a computer image and then examine the coins yourself or have a competent dealer do it for you. It is well worth the money spent to have an expert on your side for the small amount they will charge you for the service. The coins you DON'T buy are generally well worth the cost of this type of service.

Buy the coin, not the image!

dorkkarl · August 16, 2009 11:19PM

pretty simple, consign to a auction house that gets lots of foot traffic. that way digi-pics are not a issue

K S

Coinosaurus · August 17, 2009 3:35AM

The problem is this.

If you are the seller you want the photography to enhance the coin as much as possible.

If you are the buyer, you want to know what the coin actually looks like.

To survive in the long run, the auction house has to attract both buyers and sellers. Thus, there is no completely satisfying everyone.

As a buyer I like what Heritage is doing in terms of showing both a photo and a separate scan of the slab. By looking at both I get a pretty good idea what a coin will look like in person. The photo tends to show what you can get out of the coin while tilting it in the light, the scan tends to show what it looks like straight up.

kryptonitecomics · August 17, 2009 4:06AM

I took a beating a few years ago selling toners through heritage....ouch

roadrunner · August 17, 2009 4:20AM

The coins that sell for real money typically sell to the floor to those have have inspected lots beforehand whether themselves, by an agent, or some other 3rd party. A photo may be nice for remembrances but it pales in comparison to the quality of the coin and having seen it in hand. If you have coins that really don't need to be inspected beforehand in an auction environment and are dependent on a photo, you probably shouldn't be consigning them. There are probably better venues for realizing more money for such coins.

Photography is the least important item when consigning. I'm not saying it's unimportant as I had Heritage reshoot an important coin of mine after the first photo came out poor. It really made no difference as that coin would have brought the same money with or without a photo. But this was a coin I wanted to remember so I went all out including providing to the auction house a half page history of the coin with pedigree back to the 1940's as well as data on comparable coins in the same era. Had I not provided this, it is unlikely the auction house would have found it on its own...or wasted time looking it all up.

More important factors are the coin itself and all of its attributions properly listed (pedigrees, history, variety,etc.), which auction house, which location (NY,Orlando,LA, Balty, etc), market timing, what part of the year, time of the week if during a convention, other competing auctions, other competing coins or similar consignments, attendance, commissions, buy backs, reserves, misc deals, etc. After all that, then photographs come into play particularly with those firms that can draw an internet presence. And from what I've seen only one auction house really has a truly strong internet buying presence. So if you consign to anyone else, the photo isn't all that meaningfull.

roadrunner

blu62vette · August 17, 2009 6:39AM

I have one main goal when I do photos for dealers selling coins. No returns based on the photos. I want my photos to be as realistic to the coin as possible. The buyers have contated me in the past to say they bought a coin based on my photo and are happy.

You would think the auction companies would have a similar goal. I take enough photos where I think I can tell pretty much what coins look like by the picture, but some are so bad I have no idea.

Query: Why would I want to consign to an auction house when their photography is so sad?

Comments

Leave a Comment