NGC Photovision - Giving credit where credit is due 0

[Coinbuf]

At the end of last year I sent in a small submission of coins and opted for the photo vision service rather than sending to Mark Goodman as I would usually do.  In part to see if the service was a good value as I had never used it before and partly for the sake of expediency.  Here is the thread where I originally asked and then posted the photos done by NGC on the second page of the thread. Photo vision photos  Since then I sent in a second group for grading during the covid special that NGC offered and while I was not in love with the first set of photos that NGC did I again opted for the service on this second submission.

 

I must say that I'm much happier with the photos that were done on this second submission than on the first.  This group captures the in hand look so much better than the first group, due to file size restrictions I will have to add each photo as a separate reply.

 

[Coinbuf]

[Coinbuf]

[Coinbuf]

[Coinbuf]

[Coinbuf]

[MAULEMALL]

That 1891 O is beautiful.. A great breast strike for an O mint Morgan

[Fenntucky Mike]

Very nice, it looks like they captured the luster on those Morgan's nicely. I've always been happy with NGC Photo Vision, the few times I tried it out (8 bucks each why not on a few coins).

I will say that the "stock" photos that NGC takes of coins in the slabs can very wildly in quality, but they are photos for verification not glamor shots.

How would you compare Photo Vision to True View? I tend to lean towards Photo Vision, seems to me that the images are more accurate with what the coin looks like in hand.

[Alex in PA.]

Very nice pictures.  Thanks for sharing.  The 91 O is nice.

[Coinbuf]

Thanks all, the 1878 is a VAM14-2, the 1885 is a VAM 7 dash under the second 8 (not a VAM that NGC will attribute) and the Lincoln is a D/D/D variety.  I was hoping for a 65 on the 1885 otherwise they all graded as expected.

28 minutes ago, Fenntucky Mike said:

Very nice, it looks like they captured the luster on those Morgan's nicely. I've always been happy with NGC Photo Vision, the few times I tried it out (8 bucks each why not on a few coins).

I will say that the "stock" photos that NGC takes of coins in the slabs can very wildly in quality, but they are photos for verification not glamor shots.

How would you compare Photo Vision to True View? I tend to lean towards Photo Vision, seems to me that the images are more accurate with what the coin looks like in hand.

That was my biggest issue with the photos that NGC did on the first submission, all the coins looked dull and flat/lifeless no luster at all.  This group of photos does a much better job of capturing the in hand look.  As to TV's I've never used the service, I submit maybe six or seven coins in a two year timeframe on average and very seldom to PCGS as I find their grading to be flawed due to their love for luster and disregard of marks.  But when I look at most TV's posted ATS I think those shots are glamor shots, very seldom do the TV's give you a good sense of the in hand look imo and have in some cases seen where the photos have masked or hidden some marks and flaws.  Maybe that is a good thing if you own the coin but I find I cannot rely on a TV when evaluating a buy/pass decision on PCGS coins.

[Coinbuf]

As a comparison here is one from my first submission almost a year ago, notice how the NGC photo looks dull and blah.  The other photo was done by Mark Goodman, same coin night and day difference.  

[MAULEMALL]

24 minutes ago, Coinbuf said:

As a comparison here is one from my first submission almost a year ago, notice how the NGC photo looks dull and blah.  The other photo was done by Mark Goodman, same coin night and day difference.  

getting That cobalt blue just makes it worth it..

Very nice

[gmarguli]

1 hour ago, Fenntucky Mike said:

I will say that the "stock" photos that NGC takes of coins in the slabs can very wildly in quality, but they are photos for verification not glamor shots.

The NGC stock photos are lifeless and the contrast is cranked way too high. The PCGS pictures have way too much light and the colors are overly enhanced. Too bad there isn't a happy medium.

I really wish that NGC would start to take pictures of the coins out of the slab like PCGS does. I bet they would get a lot more submissions. I know I send stuff to PCGS just because of the pictures. They are decent pictures that I can use for eBay auctions and I don't need to take my own pics when I get them back. Saves me time and money. I can't use the NGC pictures. Not only are they not good enough for online auctions, but NGC tries to prevent you from using them by blocking their download. I say they try because anyone with minimal knowledge of an internet browser can get around this. 

[brg5658]

15 hours ago, gmarguli said:

The NGC stock photos are lifeless and the contrast is cranked way too high. The PCGS pictures have way too much light and the colors are overly enhanced. Too bad there isn't a happy medium.

I really wish that NGC would start to take pictures of the coins out of the slab like PCGS does. I bet they would get a lot more submissions. I know I send stuff to PCGS just because of the pictures. They are decent pictures that I can use for eBay auctions and I don't need to take my own pics when I get them back. Saves me time and money. I can't use the NGC pictures. Not only are they not good enough for online auctions, but NGC tries to prevent you from using them by blocking their download. I say they try because anyone with minimal knowledge of an internet browser can get around this. 

The NGC stock slab photos are as you describe.  But, the NGC PhotoVision (similar service to TrueView) are quite good, and could be used for your auctions.  They are $8 each apparently (mentioned earlier above), but they are very high quality and are taken of the coin before it is holdered.  Well worth the cost IMO - especially if it saves you yet another trip in the mail somewhere to a photographer. 

I don't trust the USPS anymore - the last 4-5 months, I have received two damaged packages, one damaged to the point of destroying the NGC holder, but the coin was protected inside.  I had never received a damaged package in the previous 15 years of buying coins online...

[gmarguli]

2 hours ago, brg5658 said:

The NGC stock slab photos are as you describe.  But, the NGC PhotoVision (similar service to TrueView) are quite good, and could be used for your auctions.  They are $8 each apparently (mentioned earlier above), but they are very high quality and are taken of the coin before it is holdered.  Well worth the cost IMO - especially if it saves you yet another trip in the mail somewhere to a photographer. 

I've used the PhotoVision service and the results are fine. I'd be ahppy to use those in auctions. However, at a cost of $8 vs free, I can't do that. In the last year I've submitted around 2500 coins. That'd be an extra $20K in costs. 

[Jade Collection]

Love the NGC photo visions! They are getting better and better.

[Coinbuf]

1 hour ago, gmarguli said:

I've used the PhotoVision service and the results are fine. I'd be ahppy to use those in auctions. However, at a cost of $8 vs free, I can't do that. In the last year I've submitted around 2500 coins. That'd be an extra $20K in costs. 

An interesting side note, a handful of members ATS have publicly taken the stance that they will not buy a PCGS coin unless it has a TV.  I actually doubt the validity of this position by those who have pontificated this stance, but it makes me wonder if there are buyers on the net that are swayed by an official NGC or PCGS photo.

[bsshog40]

1 hour ago, gmarguli said:

I've used the PhotoVision service and the results are fine. I'd be ahppy to use those in auctions. However, at a cost of $8 vs free, I can't do that. In the last year I've submitted around 2500 coins. That'd be an extra $20K in costs. 

That's when you have the photovision on the high money coins to get the best out of them. Lol

[brg5658]

2 hours ago, gmarguli said:

I've used the PhotoVision service and the results are fine. I'd be ahppy to use those in auctions. However, at a cost of $8 vs free, I can't do that. In the last year I've submitted around 2500 coins. That'd be an extra $20K in costs. 

I don't think I'd say it's exactly "free" at PCGS.  My understanding is that PCGS forces all World coins (except "Modern" 1965-present) through their "Gold Shield" $5 per coin process and that also includes TrueView images...

PCGS Regular submission (non-Modern) fees:  $35/coin plus required "Gold Shield" service at $5 per coin = $40 per coin.

NGC Standard submission (non-Modern) fees:  $35/coin plus $8 per coin images = $43 per coin.

If I'm reading the price structures correctly, the $8 for PhotoVision would be partly offset by the fees PCGS requires per coin. 

In addition, depending on what specific years and price points you're submitting, the NGC "Modern" tier is more inclusive (1955-present) than is the PCGS "Modern" tier (1965-present).  Further, NGC has a value limit of $3,000 versus PCGS $2,500 limit before you have to move to a higher grading tier.

But, point still taken - even $3 per coin for 2500 coins is $7500 - and nothing to sneeze at.

 

[Fenntucky Mike]

17 minutes ago, Coinbuf said:

An interesting side note, a handful of members ATS have publicly taken the stance that they will not buy a PCGS coin unless it has a TV.  I actually doubt the validity of this position by those who have pontificated this stance, but it makes me wonder if there are buyers on the net that are swayed by an official NGC or PCGS photo.

I don't know if people are swayed by the stock photos but if I'm bidding on a PCGS coin and I see the "gold shield" I'll give it a couple dollar premium over a non gold shield or NGC coin. Reason being, is that I believe the only thing you need to access the gold shield images is to have the cert # (someone correct me if I'm wrong on this). I still prefer the Photo Vision images over the TV images but it's the ease of access with the TV's and that they travel with the coin, you don't have to try and get them from the original owner. I can see those two things making TV more popular, ease of access to images and a symbol on the label telling you that there are images available.

Not buying a coin because it does not have a TV image, well that just sounds silly to me.

[Coinbuf]

1 hour ago, Fenntucky Mike said:

I don't know if people are swayed by the stock photos but if I'm bidding on a PCGS coin and I see the "gold shield" I'll give it a couple dollar premium over a non gold shield or NGC coin. Reason being, is that I believe the only thing you need to access the gold shield images is to have the cert # (someone correct me if I'm wrong on this). I still prefer the Photo Vision images over the TV images but it's the ease of access with the TV's and that they travel with the coin, you don't have to try and get them from the original owner. I can see those two things making TV more popular, ease of access to images and a symbol on the label telling you that there are images available.

Not buying a coin because it does not have a TV image, well that just sounds silly to me.

As far as I know that is correct you just use the cert number and you can access and view the TV with that on the PCGS homepage.  As to silly, well I have heard many silly things on forums before, as I mentioned I cannot say for certain if that was just pandering to the host over there or a real stance by those members.  And to clarify I am referring to the TV and Photo Vision photos, PCGS does not take stock photos like NGC does.

[physics-fan3.14]

3 hours ago, Coinbuf said:

An interesting side note, a handful of members ATS have publicly taken the stance that they will not buy a PCGS coin unless it has a TV.  I actually doubt the validity of this position by those who have pontificated this stance, but it makes me wonder if there are buyers on the net that are swayed by an official NGC or PCGS photo.

I know at least a couple of people who won't buy a coin unless it has a TV or equivalent photo. I've personally seen this person pass on coins that would have been a great fit, just because it didn't have a TV. 

 

I must say, though, the new NGC photos look pretty good. I'm curious to see how they do with some nicely toned coins - the problem I have with the PCGS truviews is that they are often oversaturated and red-shifted. 

[brg5658]

By the way, @Coinbuf great looking coins! 

[Coinbuf]

Thank you Brandon  

[Cat Bath]

10 hours ago, Coinbuf said:

An interesting side note, a handful of members ATS have publicly taken the stance that they will not buy a PCGS coin unless it has a TV. 

That's me.

Or, I should say, a decent high resolution photo. GC photos are terrible and Heritage is hit or miss. US Coins & DLRC are pretty good.

These new PhotoVision shots are looking pretty darn nice though. (Rim dings freak me out so I have serious prong-phobia)

It's hard to catch staples on TrueViews ATS & I have been disappointed a couple of times.

Edited October 14, 2020 by Cat Bath

[brg5658]

On 10/12/2020 at 5:31 PM, Coinbuf said:

As a comparison here is one from my first submission almost a year ago, notice how the NGC photo looks dull and blah.  The other photo was done by Mark Goodman, same coin night and day difference.  

What is this beautiful coin graded? That is a stunning coin, and I agree 100% that NGC photos in this case missed the mark. 

[VKurtB]

On 10/12/2020 at 6:31 PM, Coinbuf said:

As a comparison here is one from my first submission almost a year ago, notice how the NGC photo looks dull and blah.  The other photo was done by Mark Goodman, same coin night and day difference.  

The fact that these are the same coin explains why I never buy any coin from photos. I have to see it in my own hand, or I'm not buying it, full stop.

[Coinbuf]

4 hours ago, brg5658 said:

What is this beautiful coin graded? That is a stunning coin, and I agree 100% that NGC photos in this case missed the mark. 

NGC gave it MS62FB, lets just say I found that to be conservative.