The images below are of an AU58 Indian Cent that I bought in May of this year -- photographed by two different professional coin photographers. This is probably only an issue with colorfully toned coins ... but it's really amazing to me how different two top-notch professional coin photographers can make a coin look. It's important to note that the photo on the bottom was taken with the coin out of the slab, while the top photo was hindered by the slab plastic. So the top photographer did have a significant handicap. Both of these photos are WAY better than what I can do, so kudos to both photographers. I sometimes feel just a single photograph, which is what you typically get on eBay or on an auction site, just doesn't do a coin justice, especially with colorfully toned coins. It's noteworthy that the coin in hand looks more like the top photo in typical (room) lighting conditions, but it does light up like the bottom photo at one special lighting angle with enough bright light. I wonder why most professional coin photographers only deliver a single photo, when often you need a few photos to see the range of colors and truly capture the totality of a coin. I bet if I put the coin up for auction with the top photo only, I would get a nice premium, perhaps 1.3x. But if I put it up with the bottom photo only, I am thinking I might get close to 2x, but probably have a higher chance for a return, since the buyer might be expecting a bluer coin. It's pretty clear that only if I provided both photos would I be giving a prospective buyer the best sense of the coin in hand. (This is probably why so many people don't like to buy stuff off the internet, based on a single photo only).
TrueView photos, those PCGS shoots (the bottom photos), tend to emphasize color and deemphasize luster. It's just the way Phil does things. Todd's photos are usually strong with luster and contrast. People have different tastes and styles. Here's a Trueview that came with a '51-D 65RB I bought, along with photos I shot that I felt were closer to reality. Lance.
hmmm interesting, if I were to bid on that ihc, I would pay a greater price for the first picture and personally, I like the toning better on it
I would want the best representation of what it looks like in hand. That alone keeps me from bidding on a lot of ebay coins. Then again nothing beats having the coin in hand.
Lance, excellent post about TrueView's photographic philosophy. Also your photos were enlightening. Yes, it's interesting how different photographers impart their signature style on their photos. I bet someone could write a guide to coin photographers booklet about this sort of stuff so that you could match the style of photo that you like best (or that would show off a particular type of coin best). For example, send deep mirror proofs to photographer X, for max color of toned coins use photographer Y, for more standard room light photos use photographer Z. As it is now, most of us are forced to find this kind of stuff out by trial and error. It was fascinating when I recently got to see the results of a coin photography "contest" where a group of photographers all shot the same coin and the images were posted and voted upon. That was a really great way to see different styles. I find your use of the term "closer to reality" sort of interesting though. Certainly if a coin has a color that pops at a certain angle in bright light, that is just as "real" as the way the coin looks from other view angles in more standard room light. I don't think there is anything wrong or fake with showing this optimal color angle photo. However if you ever want to sell a coin, I do think it's important to show both the optimal color angle and a more standard shot. I had this Proof Liberty Nickel on consignment in my hands a few months ago -- and this coin would radically change colors depending on the viewing and lighting angle. Talk about a chameleon coin! I took BOTH of these pictures with my iPhone. Just a slightly different viewing and lighting angle. I am sure some might think the 2nd image is UGLY, however it's a true representation of the way the coin would change color in indirect bright sunlight. By the way, I ended up not buying this coin because it was expensive at $1475 and I didn't really like the "flash" color of the coin (as shown in the 2nd photo). It was just a bit too carnival for me. However it certainly was a unique and interesting coin -- if I could have gotten it much cheaper, I might have kept it.
Doom, yes i totally understand your point. Photo 1 certainly looks more normal in terms of colorfully toned copper. Seems more real and believable. Mark, yes I also prefer to see photos of what a coin looks like in more typical viewing conditions. However it is nice to see the "pop" photo. Actually my favorite toned coins are those that show their color at ALL view angles, they are better in my opinion as you don't have to tip the coin and catch it just right to see the color.
The problem with this is that most coins will look different in hand depending on the perspective of the viewer. I have to say that the attempt of some to show a video of a coin as it moves relative to the light source may be the best of several inadequate solutions. But so far, most of these short clips are are underexposed to begin with.
You can learn more about how to judge a coin photograph by taking coin photographs than can by doing anything else. You can take 10-20 even 50 shots of the same coin from the exact same position and with the exact same lighting - not moving a thing - and all 50 will look different when you view them. Now imagine the changes if you make adjustments. Now as to what you see when you view a photograph will depend largely on the person who chose that particular picture to share with you. For they almost always pick the one that they like best. But that doesn't mean you will like it best - had you been able to choose from among them. Everyone is different in their likes and dislikes because everyone has different things that appeal to them. So when looking at a coin picture keep in mind that it only looks that way in that particular picture.
