eBay rant about deceptive sellers who have high ratings

Yeah, you can make it out, barely. I suspect the diffused light that was used by the seller also tends to minimize the appearance of these features. Let me take a reverse shot with diffused light then resize. Gimme a few....

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Still can see it.... (Saved with JPG compression a 4/12 -- 12/12 is lowest compression)



And still.... With slightly different diffused light (closer to the first diffused light shot)



And a third... Resized to be the same approx size as the seller's and saved at JPEG level 4/12....



Getting really hard to see...

And the same shot with JPEG 12/12 (i.e. lowest compression)...



Still hard to see....

 

What you cannot emulate is putting it through the eBay converter when you up load it. I am not sure just how much, but you cannot convert jpg's without loosing at least some resolution. Additionally, from what I can see, your worst pic appears to have multiples better resolution than Eric's best.

 

Good point. Can someone try with my photos?

You can find originals here:

http://www.pbase.com/miker/lincoln_cents

 

How does this look? All I did was take your DSC_7476.jpg, shrink it to 180 X 180 and then return it to 250 X 250 (about the size of Eric's coin only). The scratch is basically gone and it looks real similar to Eric's resolution.

 

Very quick adjustments in PS, but I was quickly able to do this with your image. Mine is 1st, yours 2nd. He's doing something in the digital darkroom.

 

Here's HIS original image adjusted to reflect closer to what it probably looked like originally(minus restoring the clone-stamp tool edits he may have done). Even somewhat restored the oiled down look.

 

One could argue that he's simply shooting in a certain light at a certain angle and not correcting for white balance, but in my opinion there is something more than that going on however subtle it might be.

 

all these photo's , it's hard to keep up.

 

I'm an occasional lurker who's been following this thread and this one got me interested enough to register! So - thanks for having me.

I buy a fair amount on eBay, including Lincoln Wheat Cents. I've had good luck for the most part and learned a few things along the way.

Looking at this thread and the excellent pictures presented by Leadfoot, I make the following observations:

This is a nice coin.

The seller pictures hide most of the "hits" on the coin. Either the seller is Photoshopping the images or using lighting/angle to hide flaws. I suspect they are Photoshopped. On the Obverse, the large hit on Lincoln's head (that John Wilkes Booth really did a number on old Abe) is concealed; on the reverse, the hit between the N and E of ONE, the hit under R and I of America, and the nick on the right wheat stalk are all concealed. Regardless of whether the seller is manipulating the images or not (they would certainly not be the first to do so), the images in my opinion do not fully represent what you are actually going to get.

Anytime a seller's images all tend to have the same look, it gives me pause. If I had purchased this coin, I would have been generally happy with it, but I would have been less likely to buy from this seller again unless I was getting a really good deal. As I said, it's a nice coin that is 100 years old. You've got to expect a few imperfections. Unfortunately, the seller's pictures do not show these.

All just my opinion,
Ken

 

Welcome Ken & thanks for sharing your perspective!

 

Nicely stated. You could have just as easily said that some us need to go out and get a life. lol

 

So, the consensus is that this seller is purposely deceiving buyers by manipulating his photos to hide and or enhance details and color in order to make it more desirable?

The blue tinge and ding on his forehead will cause it to come back graded as genuine?

BTW - thank Leadfoot! Very well done.

JallenGomez - mad PS skills!

Ken Kat - Very good well thought out first post. Welcome!

 

Yes, as I have said all along, he presents his photos to his advantage - whether he shops them or it results from his setup remains an open question. But I think what leadfoot has best presented is that it is possible to show/hide most anything desired on a coin with just standard lighting and/or camera settings. Yes, it would likely come back net graded from a TPG as would nearly every raw coin sold on eBay. However, I have not idea why you think it has a blue tinge. Aside from jallengomez's admittedly shopped photo, none showed to be blue.

 

The coin clearly has a blue tinge when rotated into the light. I first saw it when I took it out of the 2x2, and the camera captured it perfectly. I will send you the coin if you'd like to see it in-hand.

My first guess would be that a soap was applied. Blue toning is very typical of copper being exposed to a soap. Being washed in the laundry is one example we've all likely experienced before. Applying MS 70 is something else which I've seen have similar results. However, before I throw any more barbs (and crow doesn't taste good), I need to complete a few experiments, and the coin needs to go to PCGS.

Stay tuned....

 

I think, like RLM says above, that it's safe to say the seller presents his photographs to portray the coins in a way that minimizes any problems. Beyond that, I'm not sure we've proven much.....yet.

 

p.s. I am still amazed by this thread (and thus my mood). I really, really expected to get a recolored coin that I can duplicate with a dip and deller's darkener. The photographs were a dead ringer for the look and tone of a coin treated thusly. However, that's not what I got in the mail. I got a coin which at first glance looked good, but now I'm not so sure, but it certainly isn't the monotone dipped and recolored coin I was expecting!

 

I really think that what you have already proven is how easily photos can be taken (either innocently or purposely) to show things not present on the coin or to obscure things present on a coin.

 

I was hoping for so much more.

Alas, my cynicism may have gotten the better of me. We shall see to just what extent....

 

This sellers photos have absolutely been retouched and a p**s poor job at that. Here's the seller's photo after my very easy corrections which more accurately reflected the color and temperature. This clearly shows manipulation and blur from an image editing program. The blur is obviously delineated(he didn't even bother to soften the edges). Compare this to Leadfoot's photos which show the marks to the fields which he was trying to cover up. The opposite field also shows the same manipulation. This is NOT jpeg artifact, compression, or Ebay resizing. This is basic, vanilla image retouching.