I want to write about photos. This post was inspired by a recent win in a Naville auction. Here is their photo: Roman Republican denarius of moneyer C. Coelius Caldus, 51 BC Portrait of an ancestor C. Coelius Caldus who was Consul in 94 BC and defeated the Salluvii in Gaul. C∙COEL∙CALDVS COS below neck. Spear and carnyx behind. The reverse is complicated: table with figure behind preparing epulum L∙CALDVS III VREP (VR ligate) on left, trophy with carynx and oval shield| on right, trophy with Macedonian shield IMPAX donw left, CCALD down right CALDVS IIIVIR below [He loved advertising his name. It is on this coin four times! Is that a record?] Crawford 437/4b. Sear I 406. The surface is bad--what I call "dry" and porous. They cited it as ex CNG in 2003 and I found an photo on-line at CNG: They only had this small image, but it confirms that the coin is dry and porous. It is rare enough that I wanted it anyway at the right price and I got it. When it arrived I was pleasantly surprised. I know my photos are not good, but I did my usual with a small camera on a copy stand and got this: This is much closer to the way the coin looks. This photo is more metallic and makes the coin look less dry. But, I still thought the coin was better, so I tried again at my desk. I propped my iPad on a 4" box and took this on a black background: This looks a lot like the coin. Sure, the coin is porous. I admit it could be a lot better. But, in hand it is not nearly as dry as the sale photos suggest. This post is about photos and compare this photo on black to the auction photos which were all I had to go on when I bought the coin. Quite a difference! (By the way, it sold for 57% of what it sold for in 2003, in nominal dollars, not inflation-adjusted dollars.) Show us another coin that turned out not to look like the sale photo!