This is a coin posted for sale online (not the same 1833 dime as my last thread - different coin). The first set of pics were the only ones posted for awhile, and bidding had begun to wind down to about $600 or so. So how do you interpret these pics? (They are not horrendous, I know, but not good by any means). (Stay tuned for a new set of not-so-good pics later, of the same coin, also posted by the seller). In other words, check back in on this thread for an update.
It appears to have AU sharpness, but the photo does not tell me anything about the remaining luster. It might also be a counterfeit. The out of focus picture could be hiding something about the surfaces. Just as the crooks have scraped off the bad stuff from their fakes and gotten them in TPG holders, the same could hold true for doctored photographs.
There are many photo editors online that can sharpen an image. Here is one, but it's just a free online one I found: https://www11.lunapic.com/editor/?action=sharpen It would probably be better to get an actual app, or watch a tutorial on how to do it. Just search up "photo sharpener" on Google or whatever search engine you have.
This is pretty good advice. Especially in an age where most cell phones can take excellent pictures. But sometimes this is all we have to work with, and I'm just curious how folks would interpret them.
Anytime anyone buys something on line and with pictures they take a chance. Unless the seller is, or hires a, professional photographer most pictures are problematic in one way or another. The key to success is buying from the seller who has a 'buyer friendly' return policy. That way you can have your coin in hand, inspect it, and can return it without problems. Just my opinion; that's all.
Yes. Understood, but the point of the thread is to see how folks interpret the pics... so feel free to give us your take. Thanks!
Just depends how much of a gambler you are....could go either way....might be a nice original coin, (I'm leaning that way), or it could be a lusterless worked on piece. The toning looks a bit blotchy perhaps. I see I'm talking out of both sides of my mouth.
To me, it looks like the seller over-enlarged the photo in an attempt to show the coin better, causing it to become pixelated. It doesn't look to me as though it is out of focus, just pixelated. Dimes aren't big to begin with, and a large percentage of people don't know how to, or have the equipment to, take good close up pics, so will crop/enlarge the living heck out of it in an attempt to show detail. Just think of all the newbie photos we see here on CT, especially in the 'Errors' section. If I was looking for one of these, and the seller had a good reputation, and a good return policy, I wouldn't be afraid to buy this coin.
The only thing I can tell for sure is the coin is a very high grade AU-MS and the toning is genuine. Since folks can return anything on Ebay for any reason, if the seller has a good feedback and the price is OK a bidder has nothing to lose except the postage to return it. Buy as an AU and hope for an original slider that gets graded MS-62 by NGC or PCGS.
Lighting is from 12:00. There is substantial pull away toning, implying excellent originality, and little evidence of wear, although I think I see cabinet friction on numerals and letters. The rim, while having nothing to do with the photos, is largely undisturbed on both sides, indicating the coin was not seriously mishandled. The only thing that would give me pause is the poor focus, potentially hiding serious contact marks or slide marks. This is always a source of concern. Where lack of focus fails to disclose some details, their presence still may be detected from shadows. This goes for both design details and for contact marks. Be careful to take into account the location of perceived marks, as some may correspond well with die clash marks, and that possibility should be built into your assessment. I think I'd probably like this coin at low MS money, but the proof is in the pudding. As I like to say about buying raw coins on eBay . . . we're swimming with the sharks.
Excellent analysis. This isn't on eBay, actually. Seller uploaded a video of the coin (also poor quality) that I will attempt to upload here later along with other, grainy, yet telling, pics.
I think you can only infer some things from images like this. 1. probably genuine (at least 75% chance IMO) no glaring tells 2. maybe original surfaces- 50/50 on that- could be cleaned,retoned, AT'd, corroded 3. maybe attractive- again 50/50; central devices are lighter which looks nice. bottom line, I absolutely hate returning coins after receiving them if there is a problem or something I don't like, as it's a huge waste of my time.. and some money... and I may wind up blocked by a seller for doing it. I know that CBD has found some terrific raw coins at low prices from bad photos.. great! I love reading about those finds. But it's just not how I choose to play. Give me accurate, sharp photos, please.
My guess is the video will be good enough to really see the coin, but all the images will be potato quality.
I agree with @Beefer518's post about photo difficulties. If this were eBay, I'd want to look at the seller's other listings of dimes. If all the photos are like this, that's useful information. If most of the other photos are tack-sharp, that's even more useful information. I've gotten some (small-scale) treasures off eBay on the basis of bad photos. I've also gotten some trash. For that matter, I may well have gotten some things that I still think are treasure, but are actually trash.