Why Is Realistic Photoshopping Unethical? How Bright Is Too Bright?

CACfan

Other dealers have told me that ANY photoshopping is unethical. But what is the harm in attempting to make coins look in photos as they do in hand?

This extremely successful seller has unusually bright photos yet has staggeringly good feedback. Maybe he is just aggressive with his camera settings, or perhaps he does indeed photoshop? Either way, I see absolutely nothing unethical about his photographs, nor do his customers as per his 100% positive feedback.

https://ebay.com/str/eternitycoins

DeplorableDan

I don't consider his pictures to be unethical, just overexposed and poor quality. I consider it to be unethical when photos are grossly and deceitfully enhanced to look way better than they do in hand. Canyon City Coin is a culprit that comes to mind.

CACfan

Nah, Canyon City just uses fancy lighting but I see no truly deceptive photoshopping. I look at coins under all types of light. White light can bring out beautiful colors. Incandescent can highlight luster. Etc.

CACfan

Notice that Canyon City changed their name to Denver Coins on Ebay.

DeplorableDan

CACfan said:

Notice that Canyon City changed their name to Denver Coins on Ebay.

Hmmmm, I wonder why they would do such a thing? 🤔

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1085830/interpreting-dealer-coin-photos-inspired-by-the-recent-peace-dollar-auction-thread#latest

FlyingAl

I find realistic photoshopping necessary. For example, if I overexpose a certain photo, I want to adjust it so the exposure is correct to the coin in hand.

The goal is to do as little photoshopping as possible. It is very rare that I make adjustments outside of white balance, clarity, and exposure.

Canyon City coins practices deceptive photography. It might not be heavily photoshopped, but it's certainly unrealistic and is unethical.

The OP pictures are just simply bad and overexposed. Nothing unethical about it, I could fix those to be correctly exposed with a few adjustments in photoshop.

CACfan

The allegedly "bad and overexposed" photos posted by eternitycoins may actually be a reason for their staggering success. They have more than 1,600 verified sales in the most recent 90 day period as per Ebay. Their average unit sale is roughly $1,400 as per my averaging of 20 randomly chosen coin sales.

Thus, they are doing about $9 million annually in rare coin sales, a gigantic number for any Ebay coin seller. And based on the amounts for which I have bought similar PCGS and NGC coins, they have hefty profit margins despite the fact that their prices are highly competitive by retail standards.

Congrats to eternitycoins for your gargantuan success. And 100% positive feedback rating on Ebay.

TomB

Electronically manipulating an image ("Photoshopping") isn't unethical at all if you are attempting, and succeeding, to make the image more true-to-life after editing. Those who suggest otherwise likely do not understand how modern dSLR or phone cameras work. Today's modern cameras already have editing software programmed into them and make determinations based upon those default settings. The settings are reasonably good for the vast majority of images taken by the great majority of folks, but numismatic photography is not one of those settings where everything works out of the box. The simple act of changing settings from A-mode to S-mode to M-mode changes how the camera records and subsequently displays the image, just as changing f-stops or bumping exposure settings, yet most folks would not think twice about that. However, these are in-camera digital editing tools that are employed vs. in-computer digital editing tools.

If the goal is to produce an image that is more true-to-life then digital editing is oftentimes required and the best of those images that folks praise as being accurate are edited both by the chosen camera settings and the end user.

CACfan

Canyon City certainly does post beautiful photographs. I could look at them all day. And their most recent year of Ebay feedback (8,910 ratings) is 100% positive with nary a neg or even a neutral. Thus, their customers apparently do not perceive any misrepresentation of any kind.

FlyingAl

CACfan said:

Canyon City certainly does post beautiful photographs. I could look at them all day. And their most recent year of Ebay feedback (8,910 ratings) is 100% positive with nary a neg or even a neutral. Thus, their customers apparently do not perceive any misrepresentation of any kind.

Or they are simply protected from angry buyers due to their return policy.

Canyon City coins posts highly manipulated and deceiving photos. They are the very definition of "bad photoshopping". If that's the gold standard for "beautiful photographs", PCGS TrueViews and every other professional coin photography is absolute garbage. I think Canyon City's photos are horrid.

I can make photos look beautiful, but I assure you they won't look anything like the coin.

There's a reason Canyon City's images of NGC coins look so much different from their images of raw coins. A buyer can easily compare the NGC images to the EBay ones, and when they're drastically different red flags start flying.

CACfan

I am NOT making any judgements or observations about any Ebayer in particular, but Ebay does have a little known way for sellers to remove negative feedback. Just saying.

mcpix

Overexposure to create washed out images hides all kinds of problems. They must have many returns.

Bushmaster

CACfan said:

Ebay does have a little known way for sellers to remove negative feedback. Just saying.

Can you elaborate?
I have left a few well deserved Negs only to have them disappear. I just assumed they are sellers with large $$ ebay volume and a whine receptive Ebay Customer Service Representative?