Yes it's real, it's in a PCGS holder. This coin is worth 3x-4x more than what I paid. Its very rare to find a 57P with this kind of intense toning.
The color on that thing is absolutely stunning. I can't believe it looked that good in TT's pics as they are generally not that great. Do you have their image for comparison to your photo? What did PCGS grade it? FWIW: I think seeing 'rip' in the thread is misleading at first, where 'rip' could be a rant about TT or that you were ripped-off by TT. Choice of terms seems to be a bit confusing is all. edit: found it myself, PCGS 64... pic below, completely different from the TT pics! So now the question is, which is closer to how it looks in hand?
Well the term rip I'm implying is I practically stole it at the price i paid. Here are the horrible teletrade pics. Most people think I juiced the pictures but that's what the coin really looks like in hand.
So you didn't play with levels or saturation at all in your image files? Just lighting and exposure? That's a HUGE difference, and I already gave my thoughts on TT's poor pics, doesn't matter the series or if there is tone and color. TT pics are flat.
It is a very nice coin. I would've expected it to not be as vibrant, compared to the TT photos. Nice camera work. (And editing work) Just kidding. I'll be willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that the pics aren't juiced. But damn, that thing has SICK color.
When it comes to toners, Lighting is everything. I'm sure the coin in hands looks like the TT pics in ambient light,,, but exposed to intense light, viola... neon baby ! Nice coin,, how much did you pay ? I've never seen a 'rip' from TT,, ever. So would be interesting to know what you gave to see if it qualified for what I would call a rip.
Having looked it up myself on the site, I think it qualified as a rip in this case, but everyone will have a different opinion on that as budgets vary.