Caveat Emptor; The toning edition.

Discussion in 'Coin Chat' started by Merc Crazy, May 9, 2012.

  1. Merc Crazy

    Merc Crazy Bumbling numismatic fool

    Found this half in a box I went through yesterday and thought it would make an excellent example on how easy it is to make a not-so-great looking coin look fantastic with just some strong diffused light.

    Under 3 diffused LED lights.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    Under regular room light.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    These images were not altered in any way, just cropped.
  2. Avatar

    Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide this ad.
  3. medoraman

    medoraman Well-Known Member Supporter

    Proofs are another one that photos can be dramatically different than the coin is in hand. TBH, if someone is paying a premium for how a coin "looks", I don't understand why they would not insist on seeing it in person first, or have a return guarantee with the seller.
  4. silverspoonvint

    silverspoonvint New Member

    This thread represents a topic of the utmost importance. Thank you OP!
  5. gbroke

    gbroke Naturally Toned Supporter

    This is why I am not a fan of PCGS tru-views. They are the most guilty of juicing images, in my opinion of course.

    edit: I also created a thread about how easy it is to make an obvious cleaned coin, not look cleaned.

    Here is another example.
    Although this is not the same coin, the '43, both sides, looks like the obverse of the '45. I didn't get to re-shooting the same one yet. But you get the idea.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
  6. Cazkaboom

    Cazkaboom One for all, all for me.

    looks like oil on water. She's a beauty!
  7. geekpryde

    geekpryde Coin Geek

    Wow, that is a dramatic difference. Thanks for posting. That 1976 is hideous in hand. Some sort of attempt at Artifical Toning in it's past, or is that enviro damage?
  8. icerain

    icerain Mastir spellyr

    The JFK Half looks wild. Amazing how it looks under different lighting.

Share This Page