PCGS TrueView V Holder Images 0

[Voltyris]

Hello Everyone,

Now PCGS' images are quite the glamour shots, we all know that. They seem to have enhanced a few marks on this Morgan : )

Left Corner, next to E & P Letters. Compare PCGS' TrueView to Holder Images. 

Any insight or explanation for this? 

 

Edited May 3, 2020 by Voltyris
Clarifying the question.

[Just Bob]

I must be slow. I am not sure what you are asking.

[Voltyris]

No, I am certain my question wasn't clear enough, and it has nothing to do with your overall speed : ) 

Check the holder images, top left corner of the coin, you will see some marks next to *E & P* Letters, then compare them to the TrueView image. They seem to disappear.

Contrary to the marks on the right side, found between the letters *N & U*, and next to *UNUM*. You can see them in both images.

Edited May 3, 2020 by Voltyris

[RWB]

Photos of coins in plastic holders will never be a good as ones made without the intervening plastic, reflections, distortions and severe limitations of lighting angles. As you are aware, slight changes in lighting can make a huge difference in appearance of distracting marks. The dark lines at upper left on the top photo seem barely visible on the yellowish bottom photo.  The upper photos slightly yellow in color balance, the bottom one looks strange. If you own the coin, which is the better photo - that is, most accurate in color and detail?

Edited May 3, 2020 by RWB

[RWB]

Is this closer to how the coin colors appears in reality?

Edited May 3, 2020 by RWB

[Voltyris]

Thank you for your input. 

I actually don't own the coin, and that's the idea. 

Of course, I understand the difference of raw photography vs holder photography, and also taking into consideration all the elements you've mentioned. 

Nevertheless, I find the complete disappearance of the marks on the top left in the PCGS TrueView image to be quite deceiving for any person who is buying the coin. 

Also its interesting, when you compare it to the marks found on the right side of the coin, which are somewhat similar, and still managed to appear in both Heritage's and PCGS' images. 

The holder image taken by Heritage show the coin better than the PCGS TrueView image for some reason. As you can clearly see the distracting marks, which could make a crucial difference in your decision to purchase the coin.

I was Pro-bidding on the coin based on the TrueView and decided against it after the Heritage image : ) 

Edited May 3, 2020 by Voltyris

[Coinbuf]

Its all in the light angle and bounce, photos of a raw coin vs one in a slab can be result in quite different looks.

[Voltyris]

@Coinbuf That's true.

However, in my opinion, it always seems that PCGS' TrueView is somewhat of an enhanced version of the same coin : ) 

 

 

 

[kbbpll]

In my limited experience, they do a decent job capturing fine surface detail, but highly reflective coins look brown in TrueView and nothing like their "true" appearance in-hand. Search Heritage archives for "cook collection george vi specimen", scroll through the silver coins and see how brown most of them look. That's quite a disappearing act on your example though.

[Coinbuf]

11 hours ago, Voltyris said:

@Coinbuf That's true.

However, in my opinion, it always seems that PCGS' TrueView is somewhat of an enhanced version of the same coin : ) 

Well lets say that you own PCGS, would you want your product represented in the best possible way or would you want the most unflattering photos to represent your company?  I think that for most business's you would want your product to be seen as close to actual but also in the most attractive way possible.  And I also expect that the customers that pay for the TV service also want the best or "glamor" shot possible so that they can show off their treasure.  So while I'm not really a fan of some trueviews I don't think I would use the term enhanced but certainly the photos are meant to give the best look.  I have used pro photographers to shoot some of my coins and I know that when I'm paying for a photo I want the very best image both in terms of quality and presentation for my money.

 

Also I think that what you see in the Heritage photos are not marks but rather toning streaks, basically the Heritage photo shows the coin is a much less flattering light.  But its difficult to say without seeing the coin in hand.

[Voltyris]

11 hours ago, Coinbuf said:

Well lets say that you own PCGS, would you want your product represented in the best possible way or would you want the most unflattering photos to represent your company?  I think that for most business's you would want your product to be seen as close to actual but also in the most attractive way possible.  And I also expect that the customers that pay for the TV service also want the best or "glamor" shot possible so that they can show off their treasure.  So while I'm not really a fan of some trueviews I don't think I would use the term enhanced but certainly the photos are meant to give the best look.  I have used pro photographers to shoot some of my coins and I know that when I'm paying for a photo I want the very best image both in terms of quality and presentation for my money.

 

Also I think that what you see in the Heritage photos are not marks but rather toning streaks, basically the Heritage photo shows the coin is a much less flattering light.  But its difficult to say without seeing the coin in hand.

What you're saying, and your whole argument, is entirely against the ethics of a Third Party Grading company. A company that should grade and photograph coins accurately, to represent their true condition, state and imperfections. 

It's not their job to show the most attractive way possible, unflattering or flattering photos. It's their job to show an accurate reflection, a *TrueView* of the coin. Not *BestView* or *MostAttractiveView*. If the coin is beautiful, it'll show itself. Every mark and imperfection matter, and it should be there for you to see. 

"The product represented in the best possible way".

The coin is not their product. A photo of the coin is not their product as well. It's not a can of coca cola. Photographing the coin is the service or product. They sell a service, which is to authenticate, grade and verify coins. To act as an unbiased third party.  

They're paid to be the referee, not the marketing fellas. If they do what you say, then it hurts the integrity of their business. 

"The photos are meant to give the best look"

Sure, if PCGS are selling the coins : ) .. Just like you want your coins to look the best, because you're selling them. You own them, its in your interest, you're not an unbiased third party.  

The coins should look as they are, and true to their colors and condition, as not to deceive anyone being involved in the transaction.

Submit your Coins to PCGS now, and get the Best Possible Grade, and the Most Attractive Photo! Haha.

 

Edited May 4, 2020 by Voltyris

[Voltyris]

21 hours ago, kbbpll said:

In my limited experience, they do a decent job capturing fine surface detail, but highly reflective coins look brown in TrueView and nothing like their "true" appearance in-hand. Search Heritage archives for "cook collection george vi specimen", scroll through the silver coins and see how brown most of them look. That's quite a disappearing act on your example though.

Sometimes they get it pretty right, and sometimes you end up with a coin different in colors, and you wouldn't think it's the same coin. 

I checked the Cook Collection coins you've mentioned. It's quite strange how some of them are brownish in color. You see, without a second image by the Auction House, one could entirely avoid the coin altogether, thinking it got toned brown : )

It is quite the disappearing act, and I haven't seen one like it before, when comparing a TrueView to a Holder Image. 

 

[Coinbuf]

The photos are the property of PCGS and therefore one of its products, so yes the best most glamorous photos are what represent the image of PCGS.   You can like it or not and scream to the heavens about it but TPG's are not unbiased third parties and they haven't been so in a very long time.  TPG's are in business to make money and couldn't care less about if you think "The coins should look as they are, and true to their colors and condition, as not to deceive anyone being involved in the transaction".  True they are not selling the coins directly but they are selling a photo service, and unflattering photos are not good marketing.  Customers of TPG's who purchase imaging services expect value for the monies they spend for photos, do you think there would be a demand for a service that shows a coins flaws of course not.  Customers are paying money for images that they will show off, and the whales and wealthy collectors that fill the bank accounts of TPG's thru submissions and the purchase of extras like trueviews don't what realism, they expect glamor.

 

Rant and rave all you want but at the end of the day money talks and business's that want to thrive listen to what their customers ask for.

 

And just to add, with todays market grading the TPG's are in the coin selling business because they don't grade to strict condition standards, TPG's assign grades biased on what they think the coins value is.  So is reality TPGS are in fact involved indirectly in the selling of coins because they set the market price for each graded coin, TPG's are not unbiased third parties.

[Voltyris]

I am not ranting or raving. With all due respect to your opinion, its your opinion, and it's entirely against the idea of a TPG company, and against what they should be.

A beautiful coin is a beautiful coin, and it'll show itself in a superior photography setup. 

The whole idea of Money & Business can still be achieved with being a third party, non-biased, and with ethics. 

I never did try that, screaming to the heavens, wouldn't you think this is dangerous to my throat, after all, the heavens all the way up there, and I am down here : )

Enjoy your day.

 

 

[Revenant]

I give props to PCGS here for taking great photos. I can't see anything that suggests targeted retouching or editing of the photo. It just looks like favorable lighting.

I try my best to get good lighting for photos on my 10G and '32 set. I take pride in the presentation of those sets as I'm sure the people paying for these photos want to take pride in theirs. I don't think there's a problem here.

I think I actually do "worse" with my Zimbabwe set because I'll pull those into photoshop to straighten the note in the image and adjust the white balance to try to get the colors right, even through the holder. Some generations of PMG holders tend to cause photos of the notes to blue shift pretty bad.

[Jade Collection]

When I see a true view I like to ask the seller to show me a slab shot because the true view a lot of the time makes a coin look much better than it truly is

[RWB]

RE: Plastic holder distortions.

While researching Saint-Gaudens Eagles for a book (similar to the Double Eagle book) I came across a slab photo of a perfect D/S mintmark - this thing was clear and both letters looked equal in strength. Only found the one coin photo. More digging turned up the same holder and coin -- but the mintmark was a normal "D." What happened?

I then checked other coin photos made through slabs from the same authenticator and in a similar accession range. I found more....not doubled mintmarks but distorted letters or features covering very small areas. The distortions were clear with one lighting angle and invisible from another.

My "find" was merely an optical illusion.  :(

[Voltyris]

12 hours ago, Jade Collection said:

When I see a true view I like to ask the seller to show me a slab shot because the true view a lot of the time makes a coin look much better than it truly is

Exactly, I agree. Its not advised to make a purchase based on the TrueView alone. Seeing the coin in its holder is a must in my opinion. 

Quote

I give props to PCGS here for taking great photos. I can't see anything that suggests targeted retouching or editing of the photo. It just looks like favorable lighting.

I try my best to get good lighting for photos on my 10G and '32 set. I take pride in the presentation of those sets as I'm sure the people paying for these photos want to take pride in theirs. I don't think there's a problem here.

I think I actually do "worse" with my Zimbabwe set because I'll pull those into photoshop to straighten the note in the image and adjust the white balance to try to get the colors right, even through the holder. Some generations of PMG holders tend to cause photos of the notes to blue shift pretty bad.

Thank you for weighing in with your opinion. I agree with the favorable lighting part. Whether that's the thing to do or not, is up to debate. 

I know this seller on eBay, he takes great photos, every coin comes out as PL/DMPL. Really super photography. 

Zimbabwe ha? I bet all these zeros are quite attractive : )

Edited May 5, 2020 by Voltyris

[Voltyris]

10 hours ago, RWB said:

RE: Plastic holder distortions.

While researching Saint-Gaudens Eagles for a book (similar to the Double Eagle book) I came across a slab photo of a perfect D/S mintmark - this thing was clear and both letters looked equal in strength. Only found the one coin photo. More digging turned up the same holder and coin -- but the mintmark was a normal "D." What happened?

I then checked other coin photos made through slabs from the same authenticator and in a similar accession range. I found more....not doubled mintmarks but distorted letters or features covering very small areas. The distortions were clear with one lighting angle and invisible from another.

My "find" was merely an optical illusion. 

Interesting story, thanks for sharing it.

Your investigative skills must have been offended, right : ) 

 

[Voltyris]

@RWB

I take the previous comment back. It's based on my recent findings, that you turned out to be a really important person in Numismatics : )

If you want that Morgan to look as you posted it, consider it done, we will buy it and confirm!

[RWB]

The color adjusted Morgan was just an attempt based on assuming the white highlights were neutral gray and allowing the others to fall in place.

As for the slab distortion - it was a good learning experience. Being a "really important person in Numismatics".... naw, I just bumble along as best I can. Knowledgeable and interested collectors, such as the OP, are the truly important persons.

[Voltyris]

17 hours ago, RWB said:

The color adjusted Morgan was just an attempt based on assuming the white highlights were neutral gray and allowing the others to fall in place.

See, this is why you're important. For me, this part is Alien Technology : )

Quote

As for the slab distortion - it was a good learning experience. Being a "really important person in Numismatics".... naw, I just bumble along as best I can. Knowledgeable and interested collectors, such as the OP, are the truly important persons.

It's very tricky. A coin can have multiple faces, and the holder complicates matters. I shall add my comment about the book in the thread where it belongs.