Let's see your newest acquisitions!

I think Phil at PCGS TrueView does a great job capturing a coin's image.

Here is a photo of the 1957-D MS Lincoln posted on the previous page by another photographer when it was still in the NGC slab. It's clear the NGC slab photo is clean, raw, and unenhanced by the "normal" typical color of the NGC Label.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I have not experienced any cases oversaturation or juicing of TrueView photos at all! And I have had perhaps close to 250 taken for me over the past 2 years.

However it should be noted that a TrueView photo is an OPTIMAL view of the coin (at it's BEST (typcially for Phil), it's most colorful viewing angle) ... with most toned coins they change color drastically as you tip them. Lighting angles and viewing angles make a huge difference. One big advantage TrueView photography has is there is no slab plastic in the way (causing glare).

Clearly the BEST way to represent a toned coin is with perhaps 10 photos showing the various LOOKS of the coin as you tip it, however who has the time, money, or energy to do that. I have seen a few coins represented with video, that is probably best.

Here is a good example of a photo I took compared with a Trueview ... The coin below I shot in indirect sunlight with my cr@ppy iphone! This is THROUGH the slab plastic. This image is RAW and not enhanced in any way (which you can clearly see by the normal color of the NGC label). Below that is Phil's PCGS TrueView photo of the same coin.

The main difference between my raw unenhanced iphone photo of this coin and Phil Arnolds TrueView photo is Phil had the advantage of no slab plastic being in the way ... and he's using a lot more light ... while I was using indirect sunlight through an opaqued skylight only. You can clearly see the colors and overall look of the coin images are nearly identical.

You be the judge!

 

You've spent $5k on trueviews? Jeeze. You could buy an unbelievably kick-ass macro photography setup for that dough.

 

One last case study of comparing my iphone photos with PCGS TrueView photos. This is an ultra-rare Proof 1975-S Lincoln showing tremendous deep blue-purple color.

My iPhone photo of this coin, completely raw and unenhanced, in indirect sunlight vs. a PCGS TrueView of same coin.

 

Believe me, I have TRIED!!! I bought Goodmans book, a copy stand, a nice camera, lots of different lights ... I cannot make nice professional photos. The BEST photos that I take is with my OLD (2009 vintage) iPhone shooting in indirect sunlight (as shown above). Amazingly these are all hand held images, tipping the slab back and forth in one hand, and holding my iphone about 1 foot above it in my other hand (using my thumb to hit the SHOOT button) -- while the autofocus on my iphone is sort of going crazy! That's the ONLY WAY i have been able to capture a coins optimal color. Trouble is my iphone images are TINY and not very focused.

I have to say that I ENJOY the TrueView photos tremendously! I practically live for a great digital image. It's one of my great joys in this hobby! (Whatever floats your boat, right?)

 

I don't want to hijack the NEWPS thread too much, but here is my example. I didn't pay for the TrueView, but it's just a coin I purchased and it happened to have a TrueView image.



I haven't imaged the coin myself, but all I can say is I have no idea how this image would have been taken without some saturation boosting after the fact. I get that the coin is out of the holder, but as anyone who has seriously undertaken coin photography will tell you, to get the entire surface of the coin in focus you need to have it parallel to the sensor, so "tilting for the optimal angle" isn't really what's going on. Maybe he uses a tilt-shift set-up? Regardless, the level of toning on this coin in hand is no where near what is portrayed in the image. It is a beautiful coin, and it will remain in my type set for a long time, but the toning is very slight in hand, under any and every lighting condition.

Phil is definitely a good photographer, but he definitely takes artistic freedoms with his images. WL, you might be the first person who should be noted "collect the coin, not the TrueView image". Just kidding you a little bit...

Cheers,
-Brandon

 

It took me 2.5 years to get to where I am with my images. Are they perfect? NO. But, because photography is a hobby I also really enjoy, I figured I would learn for myself instead of just throwing money at the problem by paying someone else indefinitely. My set-up is well below $1000, and before my current bellows set-up, I was taking decent images with a Point and Shoot. I guess it's a matter of interest in photography, and whether one is willing to put the time into learning it.

 

Todd (BluCC) said he has tried tilt and shift lens' before with no luck, so I don't think its that.

 

I'm not going to spend the money on doing it, but I dare say that you would be surprised at the lack of consistency at PCGS (or NGC for that matter) if you were to take a sample of even 10 wildly toned coins that are currently holdered in non-details plastic, crack them out, and resubmit them to the same company that had originally holdered them. People forget two things when they talk about toned coins.

1) One has no idea how many times the same coin was submitted before it finally made it into a non-details holder. If you submit a coin 10 times or even 3 times and on the last submission it makes it into a graded holder, that doesn't mean that somehow it is now magically more special that it was the first times you submitted it. More marketable, yes. But it's the same coin.

2) Once the coin is in a non-details holder, even if you attempt a cross-over, I would guess that both of the big 2 would be less likely to turn away a toner that already made it past the muster of the other company. And, if they would, it would stay in it's current holder as it wouldn't quality for "cross".

The downstream effect of these two factors means that if you are persistent you can get almost any crazy toned coin in an NGC or PCGS holder if you pay enough money and are patient enough.

 

I can't speak for your SBA Dollar, you know what that looks like in hand. If you say the photo doesnt represent the coin well, I believe you. For me, I typically find the TV photos captures my coins PERFECTLY (at the OPTIMAL popped color angle)

On the tilting issue. I did want to add that I have deducted (inferred) that Phil has a set up that allows tilting of coins to take them "out of round" when being shot ... then he uses some sort of software to get the coins back to round. I guessed this because I actually had Phil shoot about 5 images showing the various colors of a Matte Proof Lincoln I own (it shows different colors at different angles). And I noticed after I got the images back that the size of Lincolns head (for example) was varying (that is the width of Abe's head was varying slightly). I found this out by doing a "layering of images" in a Photoshop master file where I could quickly flip through all the images he shot (where one image lays exactly on top of the next). If this is true, then it's clear that this technique would allow PCGS TrueView TREMENDOUS flexibility in tipping the coin to find the Maximum color pop angle and then shooting it -- no matter how "tipped" or "angled" the coin is at. Without that (back to round) sofltware to take the coin images back to round, he would end up with flashy looking coins that were eliptical instead of round in shape in the photos. Now you can see in my iphone photos above ALL of the coins are tipped slightly (i am not shooting straight down) ... I always find I need to tip the coin to max out the color.

Now I just wanted to add that I do not KNOW this FOR A FACT about what PCGS TrueView is doing exactly (that's probably a well guarded secret) ... it's something I deduced or inferred from the images I got back.

Also the fact that Phil can shoot a coin RAW with no slab plastic in the way is a HUGE advantage, as often the angle that pops the max color on a slabbed coin also pops the glare on the slab. I have seen this again and again with slabbed coins (that the plastic glare gets in the way).

Finally I think this whole tipping issue is why PCGS TrueView photos sometimes have minor focusing issues, usually on only parts of the coin. People that shoot straight down produce more clearly focused images, but never show as much color as those that tip or angle the coins.

One last thing I have noticed is whatever technique PCGS TrueView uses, it tends to sacrifice luster (and mirrors in some cases) for color. However I think they will shoot a coin however you want if you write it on your submission form. So if you said please shoot to max out LUSTER and not COLOR, they will.

That is my experience at least!

Now for non-color coins, this whole train of thought goes away! You just shoot those straight down. These are MUCH EASIER to capture than colorfully-toned coins which have hundreds of different looks depending on the angle!

 

I am sure if you turned the coin in a certain position relative to the light, the coin will look similar to the TrueView. Unfortunately due the the slab, your lens is limited to a big blob of glare. The position can be fine tuned, but will almost always come up short.

Without the slab and with a little tilt of the coin, the colors will pop. True they won't be in focus, but with focus stacking software, the coin will look like it was taken with the coin perpendicular to the lens.

A couple of examples. Both coins were tilted, but both look entirely in focus. I'm not sure Phil employs this method, but I'm sure he has his tricks.

 

WL, I respect your efforts and opinions. And I think Phil does a good job with most Trueviews. But it's my feeling that a photo should look like the coin at a normal viewing angle under ordinary light, and that tilting for extreme colors is misleading.

It certainly would anger me to buy a coin based on images with spectacular colors only to find it didn't look like the photos unless I angled it and caught the perfect light.

If I were you I'd redouble my efforts at photography. What many people don't realize is that camera captures data, manipulates it automatically (exposure, color, sharpness, contrast, etc.), and presents the user with what the camera thinks is a good likeness. Almost all photos require adjustments to make the final image correct.

I do not find shooting through slabs a problem. Glare is never an issue or something is being done poorly. The only downsides to shooting through holders are the occasional scratch that can't be polished out, and trendy prong holders that clip some of the coin.

To keep this topical, here is a recent purchase. The coin looks like this and color is not enhanced.
Lance.

 

That thing is sexy. I agree that if you have to manipulate a coin greatly to get certain colors to show (IE tilting the coin to an angle to see them) then the photograph shouldn't give the impression that they are there when the coin is level.

 

I totally respect your efforts and opinions as well! Yes, the whole question of which "look" a colorfully toned coin should be captured and presented in a photo is a good one. Clearly, if you are a seller of a toned coin, you should always provide MULTIPLE photos or a video to show all of the looks to potential buyers. And if you are a buyer of a colorfully toned coin buying based on a single photo, make sure you have an air tight return policy so you can see (and tip) the coin in hand to evaluate for yourself.

This is a cool case of 1 coin with two DRASTICALLY different LOOKS presented in photos. Top image by Todd Pollock of BluCC Photos, bottom Phil Arnold of PCGS TrueView. I think (but I'm not sure) that Todd shot this straight down, and Phil shot it tipped. Which is "right"? They BOTH are!!! It just depends on the lighting angles/conditions and the tipped (viewing) angle.

If I ever went to sell this coin I would provide both photos and possibly even a video to show the various looks. If I provided just one photo (either just the top or just the bottom, I am not telling the whole story).

Certainly when I buy a toned coin, I always expect them to have a multitude of "looks" and it's why in-hand evaluation is a MUST (In other words, never buy a "No Returns Accepted" toned coin based on a single photo).

 

If I had to guess I would say the top image is correct and the bottom one is enhanced.
Lance.

 

I am with Lance on this one - I would rather have the direct view that I first see the coin at. At the same time I know from the top view that I can expect something like the bottom view - just from collecting IHC's. I have seen quiet a few direct views that do not flatter a coin - but when you tilt them a little the luster blazes away. Still - I would rather have the direct view of the coin.

 

Bob, as others have stated, I prefer my images to look like the coin looks without tweaking, turning, tilting, standing on my head, etc. I use ZereneStacker for focus stacking of extreme macro photography images (on the order of 3:1 or 4:1 magnification). The technique is most useful for attributions, double dies, etc. I think tilting a coin to make the colors "pop", stacking maybe 3-5 images, and then artificially resizing the image to be a perfect circle is misleading. Just my opinion.

In addition, I seriously doubt that Phil Arnold is using focus-stacking methods, but I don't know that for a fact. I can't imagine focus-stacking being a very efficient technique to implement for high throughput imaging of coins.

 

The one disadvantage the lens has is that it can only see one view at a time. The eye can see hundreds of subtle movements of the coin and light in seconds. If you are a buyer of toners you don't lay the coin straight down to determine colors, you hold it in front of you and wiggle it back and forth. The camera lens doesn't have that luxury. If you are shooting a toner, such as what Phil is doing, you try to show the colors the coin has in one shot. The coin doesn't have to be manipulated (other than tilting for the best angle) or image tweaked or saturated. If anything, with the light at certain angles, the image would have to be unsaturated (which can be adjusted in the camera before any new shots are taken). This is especially true on neon toned proofs or even some neon toned mint state coins.

Another example of straight down and tilted. Is this tweaked? Both images are correct, but the 2-D only captures one view at a time. The human eye will see it in a second.





Here is another. This is in a slab. Top photo is straight down. The bottom photo is at a slight angle. Without the slab there would be no glare. By Lance's definition, this would be tweaked or a misrepresentation. Both photos are correct and neither is saturated or tweaked. This is what the TrueView brings out and for the most part, correctly so. Not always, but fairly consistently.

 

Lance, I am sorry, but I just have to object to your word "enhanced" here. I'm not sure if you are just on a different mind track here, or if your defintion of the word enhanced is different from mine; but saying one is correct and one is enhanced is just off base.

I just shot some images of this coin with my iphone a few minutes ago (always love a challenge). You can see my thumb in my new iPhone photos so they are easy to pick out below!!! These were shot in indirect sunlight and I promise you these are all COMPLETELY RAW photos not TOUCHED at all with any software packages. And I was EASILY able to capture both the look very close to that Todd (BluCC) captured AND the look that Phil (TrueView) captured. Now just realize that both of these guys are using A LOT MORE LIGHT than I am.

You can see that to show the look that was captured by PCGS TrueView ... i had to angle the coin differently so there was less light on the label (which is why the PCGS label looks a bit darker in the top photo) Note that the glare on the slab is also in a different spot (above the coin) than on the bottom photo ...

My WHOLE POINT HERE IS that BOTH PHOTOS ARE COMPLETELY CORRECT and RIGHT they simply capture two different looks that you get when tipping the coin in different directions so it catches the light differently. That being said the tipping angle I needed to use to capture these two looks were both REALLY SMALL ... so I am not talking about some huge crazy tipping/viewing angle here ... but fractions of degrees.

So when you say something like Todd's photo is "Correct" and Phil's photo is "Enhanced" you are completely missing the point! I was easily able to capture BOTH looks with my iPhone!

In any case, what we all really should all be saying is "That is one darn gorgeous AU Indian Cent from any angle".

 

I bet I could get the colors to show on that thing even in the slab.