$10 NGC Imaging Option

[jerseycat10]

I haven't seen any examples of these, so I decided to spring for the $10 NGC imaging option on my most recent submission.

 

The results are sub-par, in my opinion, and not comparable to the multitude of professionals that charge similar, and in many cases, less, money for higher quality images.

 

 

[messydesk]

Why the heck would they take the picture after the coin is in the holder, squandering the one advantage they have over anyone else?

[coinman_23885]

Since Shane lives in Florida, they should pay him to travel once a week or so and do their photography work.

[Coindude]

Why the heck would they take the picture after the coin is in the holder, squandering the one advantage they have over anyone else?

Exactly my thoughts.

[ldhair]

I thought they always took the images before it went in the slab?

[MarkFeld]

It looks like a nice image. But, since you have the coin, you are in the best position to know how accurate the photo is.

 

And, you can probably get images elsewhere for the same price or less, which are as good or better.

[physics-fan3.14]

Jersey - is this the full size image they sent you, or have you shrunk them down for our consumption? If this is full size, then these are incredibly small - I really enjoy the poster-sized pictures (often 3000x3000 pixels) that I get from Bob. The image quality looks like about the same level as I can do myself - for free. If I'm going to pay $10 for NGC to image them I expect three things:

 

1. Incredibly high quality images (even the best photographers often charge less than that - I'm talking Sir Messy, Goodman, etc)

2. Very large, high resolution images

3. Images without those blasted prongs covering up significant portions of the coin. Seriously, if the TPG is photo'ing the coin, it should be outside the slab. That is the true advantage of having them do it!

 

As much as I generally dislike the oversaturated, cartoonish pictures that PCGS puts out, I'll say this - they are much better than NGC's.

 

Sorry NGC, for most things you guys are far superior. Your photography department needs help.

[dimefreak]

 

As much as I generally dislike the oversaturated, cartoonish pictures that PCGS puts out, I'll say this - they are much better than NGC's.

 

Sorry NGC, for most things you guys are far superior. Your photography department needs help.

 

You ever get a truview before??? I doubt you have because the picture are spot on! Never have I had a single one saturated

[DirtyGoldMan]

I agree that this is not very good, but I am sure they will get better. I am glad that they are offering the service.

[MarkFeld]

 

As much as I generally dislike the oversaturated, cartoonish pictures that PCGS puts out, I'll say this - they are much better than NGC's.

 

Sorry NGC, for most things you guys are far superior. Your photography department needs help.

 

You ever get a truview before??? I doubt you have because the picture are spot on! Never have I had a single one saturated

 

Then you have been lucky. I agree with the previous comment about many of them looking "cartoonish". By the way, some collectors like that look, and if they are happy with it, that's their prerogative.

[physics-fan3.14]

 

As much as I generally dislike the oversaturated, cartoonish pictures that PCGS puts out, I'll say this - they are much better than NGC's.

 

Sorry NGC, for most things you guys are far superior. Your photography department needs help.

 

You ever get a truview before??? I doubt you have because the picture are spot on! Never have I had a single one saturated

 

I have not paid for one, no. The reason (besides the fact that I'm not a member) is because most coins I've ever seen in hand, and then compared to the PCGS pics - the colors are garish and unrealistic. Like, not even close. For some coins they might be good, but toned coins are just ridiculous in the PCGS pics - they bear little to no resemblance to the truth.

[mumu]

+1 @ not impressed w/ NGC photo

+1 @ truview = cartoonish / juiced

[dimefreak]

 

As much as I generally dislike the oversaturated, cartoonish pictures that PCGS puts out, I'll say this - they are much better than NGC's.

 

Sorry NGC, for most things you guys are far superior. Your photography department needs help.

 

You ever get a truview before??? I doubt you have because the picture are spot on! Never have I had a single one saturated

 

I have not paid for one, no. The reason (besides the fact that I'm not a member) is because most coins I've ever seen in hand, and then compared to the PCGS pics - the colors are garish and unrealistic. Like, not even close. For some coins they might be good, but toned coins are just ridiculous in the PCGS pics - they bear little to no resemblance to the truth.

 

This look juiced?

 

[MJ]

 

As much as I generally dislike the oversaturated, cartoonish pictures that PCGS puts out, I'll say this - they are much better than NGC's.

 

Sorry NGC, for most things you guys are far superior. Your photography department needs help.

 

You ever get a truview before??? I doubt you have because the picture are spot on! Never have I had a single one saturated

 

I have not paid for one, no. The reason (besides the fact that I'm not a member) is because most coins I've ever seen in hand, and then compared to the PCGS pics - the colors are garish and unrealistic. Like, not even close. For some coins they might be good, but toned coins are just ridiculous in the PCGS pics - they bear little to no resemblance to the truth.

 

My experience has been much different on toned coins. MJ

[brg5658]

 

As much as I generally dislike the oversaturated, cartoonish pictures that PCGS puts out, I'll say this - they are much better than NGC's.

 

Sorry NGC, for most things you guys are far superior. Your photography department needs help.

 

You ever get a truview before??? I doubt you have because the picture are spot on! Never have I had a single one saturated

 

I have not paid for one, no. The reason (besides the fact that I'm not a member) is because most coins I've ever seen in hand, and then compared to the PCGS pics - the colors are garish and unrealistic. Like, not even close. For some coins they might be good, but toned coins are just ridiculous in the PCGS pics - they bear little to no resemblance to the truth.

 

The images PCGS takes represent the coins at the "optimal" angle of view to bring out color. The coins are tilted into the light source, and the coins are not behind plastic -- that's the only way they are able to make them look like they do. The angle of view with the coin in hand that looks like the PCGS TrueView images is so ridiculously small that I find them a bit misleading. This is particularly true of toned proofs.

 

I'm not personally a fan of the PCGS images -- I have never paid for one, but a few coins I own do have them available that someone else paid for. The coins in hand are FAR from what they look like in the PCGS images for the coins I own. I think if you collect images of coins, then TrueViews are pretty to look at on a computer monitor, but I prefer my coin images to look the way the coin looks in hand at 95% of the viewing angles.

[James_OldeTowne]

I haven't seen any examples of these, so I decided to spring for the $10 NGC imaging option on my most recent submission.

 

The results are sub-par, in my opinion, and not comparable to the multitude of professionals that charge similar, and in many cases, less, money for higher quality images.

 

 

To tell you the truth, I find these particular images to be rather decent, and substantially better than the numerous horrible and astoundingly useless PCGS TrueView images I've seen. If all of NGC's images are of this quality, then for ten bucks I wouldn't be able to complain much.

 

As others state, I've seen much better images of course (and maybe even managed a few myself), but these seem to convey very useful information about that Peace dollar.

 

Edited to add: I posted before reading other replies and see that other board members share my sentiments regarding TruView pics.

[mumu]

I think the OP picture is close. The lighting is just off. Would help tremendously if they didnt bonehead decide to take it in the slab,

[mumu]

Here are some cartoony truviews

 

[physics-fan3.14]

 

As much as I generally dislike the oversaturated, cartoonish pictures that PCGS puts out, I'll say this - they are much better than NGC's.

 

Sorry NGC, for most things you guys are far superior. Your photography department needs help.

 

You ever get a truview before??? I doubt you have because the picture are spot on! Never have I had a single one saturated

 

I have not paid for one, no. The reason (besides the fact that I'm not a member) is because most coins I've ever seen in hand, and then compared to the PCGS pics - the colors are garish and unrealistic. Like, not even close. For some coins they might be good, but toned coins are just ridiculous in the PCGS pics - they bear little to no resemblance to the truth.

 

This look juiced?

 

 

Compared to how the coin looks in hand, yes. The colors are oversaturated, there is absolutely no luster in the image, and the whole image is just too bright. For comparison, here are Shane's images from the auction where I bought the coin in question. Even Shane's images are a little more vibrant than the coin appears under most lighting conditions in hand (a common trait with Shane's images - you have to have just the right light at just the right angle to make the coin like his images, but they are far closer to the truth than PCGS). The single advantage that PCGS has over Shane is that they imaged it raw - and thus don't have those damned prongs in the way.

 

[dimefreak]

I bet that buffalo was done at a show where Phil Arnold didnt travel and attend. I also will admit I enjoy the cartoon look. But I hear way too often they are saturated and I have yet to have those results. Not saying its impossible just saying I havent had those results

[physics-fan3.14]

I bet that buffalo was done at a show where Phil Arnold didnt travel and attend. I also will admit I enjoy the cartoon look. But I hear way too often they are saturated and I have yet to have those results. Not saying its impossible just saying I havent had those results

 

Can you post some pictures that are realistic compared to how the coin looks in hand?

[dimefreak]

Physicsfan- I disagree completley, I submitted that coin and its the brightest toning I have ever seen on a Lincoln Cent. I was sweating bullets that it was going to ruin my 100% average and body bag

[Nutmeg Coin]

Here are some cartoony truviews

 

 

I completely agree with these concerns; this represents the pornification of numismatics as if collectors need to have their collectibles aggressively fantasized. When collectors encounter real coins without the color enhancement it leads to a letdown.

[TonerGuy]

Actually I like the image. IMHO the photo should represent what the coin looks like in hand... not what we wished the coin looked like.

 

$10 seems a little steep for the image but overall I would take that over the PCGS saturated pics...

 

Edited to add: I think Shane does a great job hitting the reality of coin while capturing the luster and color. I think he's by far the best toner photographer.

[coinman_23885]

Actually I like the image. IMHO the photo should represent what the coin looks like in hand... not what we wished the coin looked like.

 

Yes, but I have seen coins in hand that the NGC images do not look anything like image. They weren't even close and the photos had shadows. Overall, I agree that they are of poor quality. Frankly, I'm not sure why NGC ever bothers with imaging if it isn't going to hire a good photographer.

 

If my memory serves me correctly, I believe that I have some toners where NGC images made the coin look horrible, but the coin in hand was far superior. If I can remember which ones they are, I will post new images when Shane is done imaging them.

 

Edited to add: The images I am referring to are those that appear under the certification verification tool used by NGC. I'm assuming that these are comparable.

[messydesk]

Any photo taken for hire should look like what the person paying for it wants it to look like. When I take a picture of a coin with toning, I use my judgment and any guidance that was given (usually people that like toners want to see the toning) for the first shot, then ask the owner of the coin if they approve or want me to reshoot for a different effect, even if it isn't my favorite. I'm guessing the instructions given for toned coin TrueViews usually amount to, "show me the color!"

[coinman1794]

I haven't seen any examples of these, so I decided to spring for the $10 NGC imaging option on my most recent submission.

 

The results are sub-par, in my opinion, and not comparable to the multitude of professionals that charge similar, and in many cases, less, money for higher quality images.

 

 

 

I was thinking of trying some of these $10 images, but I find these shots very dissapointing. The resolution is very low, the pictures have shadows, and the coins were photographed in the slab. I noticed that even NGC's $25 imaging service is done in the slab.

[Coinbuf]

I really dont think the image is that bad, far better than I can do myself. But I will admit that for the same price I can get better shots from Mark Goodman, and yes thay really dropped the ball by not taking the pic raw. I also am no fan of the trueviews that PCGS puts out, recently Phil respondd to a thread ATS and offered some reasons/excuses why some that were posted had a red tint. Personaly if those had been mine I'd have wanted a refund.

[Keigwin]

I think Phil at PCGS is an excellent photographer who tries too hard to please.

 

I have said many times ATS that his images are too often color-incorrect and sometimes look more like op-art paintings than photos of coins.

 

We have had photo contests here and you have seen some of the best. Any one of those photographers can twist an image into anything customer wants.

 

Personally I feel it is wrong to enhance photos to give customers what they want. They should be true representations of coins. But I've been wrong a lot lately.

Lance.

[robec1347]

I think Phil at PCGS is an excellent photographer who tries too hard to please.

 

I have said many times ATS that his images are too often color-incorrect and sometimes look more like op-art paintings than photos of coins.

 

We have had photo contests here and you have seen some of the best. Any one of those photographers can twist an image into anything customer wants.

 

Personally I feel it is wrong to enhance photos to give customers what they want. They should be true representations of coins. But I've been wrong a lot lately.

Lance.

Most toners have a multitude of different looks depending on how light is hitting it. Just flick the coin back and forth and see how many looks you can see.

 

I don't think taking photos that show colors such as these are enhancing the photos......the colors are there, bright and beautiful. Enhancing would be showing color that doesn't exist.

 

Why is it ok to have an image showing it as it looks with lighting hitting it one way but not others?

 

If I have a toned coin I want to see the toning.