eBay pictures Vs NGC pictures....

So I was looking around on eBay today and I came across this nicely toned Morgan that caught my eye. The price looked a little much to me so I did a little investigating around NGC's new iPhone app, and I came upon the EXACT same coin. So as I was looking at the pictures on the NGC registry, the toning looked totally different. I mean the eBay pics looked absolutely stunning. The NGC picture, which is below, made it look like garbage, compared to the eBay pics. So it begs the question, how do these people get away with something like this and do they just doctor the pictures that bad? And people bidding on these coins, do they not do any research? I just don't get it. Compare the pics and I'd love to hear your thoughts.



http://www.ebay.com/itm/1884-O-MORG...00469&pid=100009&prg=1004&rk=4&#ht_2419wt_921

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

It might have a lot to do with toning. I don't think NGC would take the time to take a picture to really make the colors come out, but if your selling a coin wouldn't you try to find the best lighting to make it look as best as possible? Pictures can be deceiving, and this is just a theory.

 

I think you have this one backwards. The NGC images are quick shots that are little better than scans and they can make coins look terrible. The images on ebay, which I did not look at, may very well be high quality shots that were taken by a professional like myself who attempts to accurately portray the coin. The quick NGC shots are very similar to the quick PCGS shots (not the TrueView shots) and the quick PCGS shots look horrible at times, too.

 

well I hear you on how the sellers pics can seem deceiving, but that is the job of any seller, to present his wares in the best possible way as to appease to a potential customer and hope to make a sale, the smart buyer might check NGC's website before making the purchase(especially when making a $135+ purchase with over a day to go!)

 

I for one can't properly express how hard it is to capture great toning on a slabbed coin. I'm struggling REALLY hard right now to capture an 1885-O MS65. I've taken more than 100 pictures and NO amount of manipulation with photo software has captured this coin properly. Some of the pictures (no manipulation) looks NOTHING like the coin in hand......crazy.

Thanks to a few members here, I have their suggestions to attempt again soon.

Basically, the NGC picture looks like a quick snap and the ebay picture looks like a pro shot. Seriously, If I bought that coin and thought the picture was juiced once I received it.........I'd simply send it back.

 

I can agree that there are plenty of ways to manipulate lighting and such. And of course it's the sellers job to take the best pictures possible. However, if you looked at the NGC photo and the seller's photo, wouldn't you be a little hesitant of buying a coin with, what appears to be, a big difference in toning?

 

I don't think it's a matter of having it backwards. And maybe I was a little harsh in assuming the seller was trying to deceive customers. But I just think that there is a huge difference in color and appearance. I personally do not see any touch of the reds, yellows or blues the seller is showing, in the NGC photos. I mean does NGC really not make any attempt with these quick shots to capture the toning of the coin?

 

From a distance with poor lighting and without the coin tilted into a light source it is possible that the NGC photo is accurate. But I don't know anybody who doesn't use a light source when looking at their coins. The E-Bay seller is an established seller who has been selling toned coins for years. Although I think he over-saturates some of his photos, my guess is that his E-Bay photos are much more representative of the actual appearance of the coin. That said, the coin is not very attractive for an EOR toned Morgan Dollar and I would wait until a much better example hit the market. Rainbow toned Morgan Dollars are very common and buyers should be very picky about what they buy.

 

No, they don't make any attempt to capture the color. It is a cookie cutter set up and every coin is photographed using the same method. While that might work for untoned coins, the toned coins will end up with substandard photos. In NGC's defense, Heritage used to be guilty of this same offense some years ago and their photographs were being used to actually sell coins. If you want some examples, here you go.

 

NGC makes not attempt at all to capture the toning. The images are there for an online record of the coin just as the quick PCGS images are there for an online record that can be used for little else than to compare surfaces if you think a coin is in a counterfeit slab.

 

Well I have to say, I see your point now and those are some very good examples. I do have to say in your first photos I can at least see some touches of toning, and then see that toning really pop with the lighting. The example I gave I couldn't and that's where my concern came in. But I can absolutely see what you're saying and I've learned some on this thread. I always appreciate a little lesson!

 

Gotcha, and thanks for the info! And this is one of the reasons that I'd only by a toned coin in hand and not on the interwebs.

 

First off, I have to say that the NGC photos are totally off color. White is beige, so that would be the first clue. Also, NGC doesn't charge the ridiculous price that PCGS does to give high quality pictures in trueview form to show you the in hand experience, it is only to verify that is that.
Second, Ever look at a toned coin straight on then tilt it just a tad and see it completely differently? This is exactly what you are experiencing.

 

Doug, that just isn't true. If you don't put a direct light source on the coin, it will simply look dark like the NGC photos. But once placed under a light, it will display the colors you see in the photos over a broad range of movement. There are many sellers that are starting to use video to show the luster and color on coins like this. If the color only showed up 1% of the time, there is no way they would employ such a strategy.

1880-S $1 PCGS MS66 Blazing Banded Neon Rainbow Morgan JhonECash

Notice as he tilts the coin around that the color doesn't disappear and turn black. I understand what you are trying to say but you are severely exaggerating the effect which is more commonly found with iridescent toning which bag toned Morgan Dollars don't have.

 

This one is for you Doug. I just took a video of a monster toned Morgan Dollar that I uploaded to YouTube.

[video=youtube_share;9gbU155pgiM]http://youtu.be/9gbU155pgiM[/video]

Notice that no matter what angle I move the camera to, the toning is visible in full color as long as direct light is hitting the coin. Once you remove the direct lighting, the coin appears very dark and the different colors become almost indiscernable. Just like the photos we have seen in this thread. Those without direct lighting appear very dark whereas those taken under direct lighting show the toning in full color. Here is a my photo of this same coin.

 

I would like to nominate this for the single most ridiculous post in the history of coin forums. Let me get this right. You are claiming that I am not qualified to discuss or evaluate toned coins? And your reason is because I have not attended coin shows? Or because I buy coins via the internet instead of in hand?

I have owned thousands of toned coins across many series during my life and only a very small percentage of them exhibit the behavior that your are talking about. If what you are claiming is true, I certainly would have seen them since I buy my coins sight unseen. But it is not true. The only coins that show toning at a specific angle are coins with iridescent toning that changes color or disappears based on the angle of the light hitting the coin.

Perhaps we should ask the members of this forum whose opinion they would trust more on the subject of toned coins? How about it, wanna make a bet? No money, just pride! Let me know.

 

Because I have owned thousands of toned coins across many different series. Face it, that is the most ridiculous thing you have ever posted. Guess you are not interested in what the forum members have to say huh?