Toned 1901 penny: why does it not look toned in real life?

I recently purchased this 1901 Indian head cent from ebay. As you can see, in the seller's pictures, it shows a lot of colorful toning. In my pictures it looks like a typical reddish-brown penny. My pictures more accurately depict how the coin actually looks. The seller said that they didn't realize the toning was there until after they took the pictures. My question is: why did the toning show up in their pictures but not mine? Is there a special filter you can use to bring out toning? I only gave a buck fiddy for it so it's not a big deal and it's still an attractive coin and I'm happy with it. I'm not good at all at taking coin pictures and I certainly don't know all the tricks. Were the pictures somewhat distorted for whatever reason? In real life, Liberty looks shinier than the fields of the obverse. It isn't some sort of proof, is it?

What would you guess the grade would be? To my unexperienced eye, I would guess an EF or an AU. There is a little bit of damage on the left side of the coin at the 9 o'clock position on the obverse but it doesn't bother me.

Seller's pictures:




My pictures:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Seller's pics vs. yours are a world apart! For $1.50 I probably couldn't be bothered to send it back, but I would not be happy. I have no idea what sort of photography or photoshop tricks they used, so sorry, no answer to the question.

 

I would hazard a guess that it is more a lighting and camera angle issue then photoshop. I'll post some examples Wednesday to illustrate my point.

 

I'm happy with the coin, I just wondered why their picture came out the way it did. Like Jwt708 said, it's just $1.50 and it's a pretty good looking penny so I'm not going to raise a stink about it.

 

Maybe it is glow in the dark.

 

Background and lighting. Try it yourself. Take a photo of the coin against a white background and again with a black background. Notice the difference. Also camera settings and lighting will have an effect.

 

If you don't see toning with the coin in hand while inspecting under various lighting conditions, then there's no toning regardless of what pictures tell you. Seller's pictures look over-saturated, which may have been accidental or deceptively accidental.

 

I agree. Changes in contrast can also give a funky look.

 

Sometimes the difference in appearance from photo to photo is as simple as using a flash vs no flash.

I'm amazed at how different the same coin can look when I use a flash or natural lighting myself. Add another variable as in using a different background, which can radically affect the contrast, and that could easily explain the difference in appearance of the two pics in the original post.

 

Contrast (too much or too little) can certainly alter the appearance of a coin. And flash can take contrast to an extreme, blowing out highlights for instance. What a change in contrast will not do however is change colours to an astonishing degree. That's why I believe saturation has been mismanaged in the coin in question here. Look how intense the reds and blues are to the right of the head.

 

@GDJMSP: I guess my question would be does your coin posted above ever look toned in hand (at different lighting angles) or is it just the camera that captures the toning effect?

 

also, the seller's pictures show an ugly coin.

 

seller's photos were juiced.

 

Fine details. You'd think with as harshly as they cleaned it, they would have taken the verdigris off.

 

You owned this coin?

 

Meh, I like it. I don't care what you think.