Although I purchase dozens of coins each week for my booth at a nearby antiques mall, sending in coins now to NGC and ANACS as well as PCGS, I take extraordinary care in selecting examples that not only have good eye appeal but that also will grade well.
I purchase most of my coins via Proxibid, the online portal, which features estate auctions in towns and cities that are too distant for me to visit and bid there in person.
In judging luster online, I pay careful attention to the digital photography to ensure that pictures are not unintentionally or deliberately enhanced, which happens now more than ever because (a) photos of coins are often outsourced to photographers with no numismatic experience and (b) digital software now makes automatic image enhancements.
I’m a media ethicist as well as a numismatist. In journalism, enhancing documentary photos is an ethical breach, as this blog post discusses.
So I pay careful attention not only to the picture of a coin on which I will bid, but also to:
1. How other coins by the same consignor are typically depicted. For instance, if one coin looks cleaned, chances are others in a particular auction might be, too. True, auctions often have multiple sellers, but with practice you can group coins that seem to have been mistreated as sliders or that have similar toning or wear.
2. How a modern coin such as a Silver Eagle shows its luster in comparison with an older Peace Dollar, say. If the Silver Eagle glitters naturally, especially if slabbed by a top-tier company, you can make reasonable judgment calls on the condition of the older coin.
3. How the the auctioneer describes the consignment. I have come to know auctioneers by their numismatic knowledge. I know who is honest, who hypes coins and by how much, and who lacks any numismatic experience whatsoever.
I also bid wholesale rather than retail on each coin, to safeguard my investment in case I am wrong.
And despite all these precautions, I sometimes fail miserably, as I did with the pictured coin described in the online auction as follows: “1923 Silver Peace Dollar Smokin hot DMPL Coin WOW! You could shave in that mirror!”
The coin as depicted was gorgeous–probably the best Peace dollar luster I had ever seen–online or in person. And I knew and trusted this particular auctioneer, having purchased from him many times before. I won the coin for a modest $75.
When I received the coin, I was more than disappointed; I felt cheated. The 1923 not only was typical, but also damaged, with a distinct rim gouge at 6:15 of the reverse (obscured in part by the auctioneer’s sticker). Photos of how the coin was depicted on Proxibid are shown above with photos of and how it should have been depicted below.
The coin is worth $14.50 melt.
Because I am writing about it, I decided not to send it back for a refund. I also will give the auctioneer the benefit of the doubt because of my past dealings. Perhaps like me he was responding to pictures of a consignment posted by a photographer, rather than viewing the coin personally. Moreover, I won more than a dozen other uncirculated Peace and Morgan Dollars for $25 or less at this particular auction, so I can’t complain about my winnings overall.
Nonetheless, all that glitters online is not luster and descriptions accompanying such coins can be bluster, as this experience documents for Coin Update readers.
Michael,
The original coin photos do look appealing to a potential auction buyer. I am a numismatic photographer and would like to share a little information about this subject. A good numismatic photograph will show good focus and adequate lighting throughout the complete surface of the coin. It is very important to ensure that the white balance is correct. This gives a better feel for the true color of the coin. Quality photos from SLR cameras are always the best since they utilize the light gathering abilities of the interchangeable lenses that simply are not available for simple point and shoot cameras. One of these quality photos actually reveals flaws in coins that cannot be resolved through the use of a simple point and shoot lens. These high quality photos, if enhanced just for white balance, yield the best representations of what a particular coin actually looks like.
Another word of advice. Never purchase a coin online that has a sticker covering any area of the coin.
-Richard Stinchcomb
Thank you, Richard, for enriching the conversation. Moreover, I’m taking your suggestion of never purchaing a coin online that has a sticker covering any area of the obverse or reverse. Lesson learned!
Michael,
To my knowledge (and I specialize in silver dollars, among other coins) there is no such thing as DPL or DMPL Peace dollar. There are high relief proofs of the 1921, which are extremely rare and valuable, but Peace dollars, no matter how nice the luster, never have the kind of deep reflective mirrors that some Morgan dollars do. If you don’t have it already, I would suggest getting a copy of Roger Burdette’s Guide Book of Peace Dollars, which is a Whitman book. Also, you really need to see a DPL or DMPL in person to properly asses it because you need to hold it at different angles, but I know that is not always possible.
Michael,
I am not surprised that the coin you received differs greatly from the photograph that inspired you to purchase it. I tried bidding on several items at Proxibid a few months ago but never went above or really at, what Greysheeet said the coin would be worth. I have bought other coins online at ebay which seems to be easier and better than the auctions at Proxibid. I rarely see an item on Proxibid that is not way above Greysheet (most times even before the bidding starts) by the timne the auction is over. I stopped even looking at items on Proxibid until I read another article by you that said you make purchases there often and that you were pleased with the items you purchased after receiving them and that even if the items you received were of a lesser quality than described, most times the price you paid for them still made them excellent purchases. What’s your secret?
You’re right, of course, Louis about there being no DPL or DMPL in Peace dollars. The auctioneer had written that in his description, but I should have called him on it. It’s getting more difficult to buy certain coins online, and in this case, I had bought from the auctioneer before. The best is to view coins in person, but we’re still adapting to methods to select coins via Internet where many bargains exist. Thanks for your contribution!
Hi, Eric–
You bring up good points about Proxibid. It is increasingly difficult to get coins at bargain prices because some folks new to the coin market bid outrageous prices. A newcomer last week who happened to know coins because he/she bid on key dates was overbidding retail. And many folks just bid on the false–yes, false, hyped and bad information provided live on audio feeds by auctioneers. I’ve complained about that to the auctioneers and to Proxibid. As for my purchases, I buy from:
Gary Ryther (knows coins but patrons overbid)
Western Auction (good selection, but he often calls sliders gem and sells cleaned coins but doesn’t note that as such).
Weaver Auction (a knowledgable numismatist but bidders usually overbid onsite)
Silvertowne (the best and most honest descriptions on Proxibid)
Silver Trades (terrible opening bids but if you attend the auction online you can get 50% lower than those bids and modern commems cheaper than anywhere else)
Midwest Coins (if you’re patient you can get a bargain as he holds auctions weekly)
Scott Auctions (good selection, mostly accurate descriptions)
Capitol Auctions (good selection, mostly accurate descriptions)
I am probably going to focus more on Silvertowne and Capitol, mostly Morgans,as well as auctioneers who charge 15% buyer’s fee. Leonard Auction, for instance, wants 20% buyer’s fee, and the bidding is the same as elsewhere. That said, Leonard and other auctioneers often will cut the cost if you do not use a credit card.
Michael,
That is an excellent point as it pertains to the use of credit cards. Most people don’t realize that businesses (including coin dealers) must raise their prices across the board just to handle the vendor fees charged to them by the credit card companies. The lowest is usually VISA which charges somewhere around 6% of the total sale to the vendor. American Express and Discover generally charge 12% and higher, up to 26% of the total sale of the product to the vendor. So, what this means is if the vendor fee is 12% on a sale of a $1000 coin, the vendor must pay the credit card company $120 for the vendor fee. Therefore, the vendor must raise the price of this $1000 coin to $1200 to $1400 for online sales that require such credit card transactions, effectively passing these vendor costs onto the purchaser who uses the credit card.
My suggestion is to visit coin shows in search of certain coins. Go with cash. Cash transactions will allow you to purchase these coins for the right price. You have to remember, banks and credit card companies don’t make their money from interest on late payments. They make their money from these vendor fees that are acquired through every transaction with these credit cards. This is what enables credit card companies to offer cash back rewards. It is this scam that costs you more money in the end.
-Richard Stinchcomb
I’ve had very good luck photographing coins in natural sunlight with a digital $200 camera. It really shows how a coin naturally looks. Any numismatic photographers out there had similar results?
Gregory,
I use a $200 digital camera (Nikon) to photograph coins in this column. My pictures above accurately depict the condition of said coin. Thanks for your response and question to our viewers.
Michael
Michael,
I wish I could post a photograph of one of my coins on here. Only then, would you all realize just what I am talking about. The same principle I speak of is known by astronomers as light gathering power as it relates to the light gathering and detail resolving ability of telescopes. This exact same principle is in play here. For example, an 8 inch telescope has a light gathering ability of 8 X 8 = 64. A 12 inch telescope has a light gathering ability of 12 X 12 = 144. So, the 12 inch telescope has 144 / 64 = 2.25X the light gathering (resolving power) of the 8 inch telescope.
This same method applies to standard interchangeable lenses. A lens on a point and shoot camera is only 4mm to 6mm wide. So, if you base the light gathering ability on the width of the lens (the same method as a telescope) it is clear which is better. The macro lens I use is 72mm wide. So, if your point and shoot camera uses a 5mm wide lens, its light gathering (resolving) power is 5 X 5 = 25. My lens has a light gathering (resolving) power of 72 X 72 = 5184. So, in comparison, my lens yields a resolving power of 5184 / 25 = 207.36X. This means that my lens that is 72mm in width yields an image that is a little more than 200 times more detailed than an image taken with a point and shoot camera.
This is a simple physics lesson that I love to share with photographers. I don’t have a website, so I cannot send a link to one of my photos. I wish I could share one on here with all of you.
-Richard Stinchcomb
Richard,
Keep sharing your thoughts and enhancing the conversation.
THANK YOU.
Michael
I am a Peace dollar connoisseur and when I saw the auctioneer’s photo the red flags instantly jumped out at me. To me, any Peace dollar that extremely “white” screams of having been dipped. Peace dollars should always exhibit a patina of some sort, if they still retain their original surfaces. Whether it be a rich golden hue or a slight silvery glaze, there should be some degree of oxidation present. Although I don’t find the heavily toned Peace dollars attractive and feel they lack eye appeal, I find the unnaturally white coins to be even less attractive. In the beginning of my Peace dollar phase, I searched out these blazingly white coins, but once I learned to appreciate Peace dollars with original surfaces, there was no turning back.
Interestingly, unlike the auctioneer’s photos, your photos shows an abundance of gold patina and may indeed retain its original skin. Although I suspect some of the toning in your photos may be due to the white balance needing to be adjusted to your light source, the difference is shocking. So much so that if it weren’t for the rim nick on the reverse, I would ponder whether indeed you received the coin that was in the original photos. I am of the opinion this was not a fluke and that the photo was purposely enhanced. That said, I’m not sure I would have been so gracious and kept the coin despite using it in this article. In fact, were I to have been in your shoes and given the auctioneer’s DMPL reference combined with the seemingly unnatural whiteness of the coin, I think I would have avoided this coin for the all the reasons mentioned. Nevertheless, this article written around this particular coin clearly illustrates the challenges inherent in judging coins based solely on a small photo. I would advise all on-line shoppers to buy only from sellers willing to accept returns, otherwise the risk is just too great to justify any purchase priced significantly above melt values.
Michael,
I don’t know how much more I can cover on this subject right now. However, I can say this. Even when dealing with photographs of graded coins on the internet, one must be very astute to the quality of the photograph that depicts a certain coin. Most photos in internet auctions are of poor quality and don’t reveal the flaws that are used for determining grade of the coin. Your article and this discussion has given me food for thought for a potential future article myself. I will need to take some time and cover in detail some of my main concerns and provide the supportive photographs from the separate types of lenses that have been discussed above.
-Richard Stinchcomb
Just a word of thanks to both TequilaDave and Richard Stinchcomb for their contributions in the comments section. I’m worried that in this age of outsourcing auctioneers aren’t even handling the coins but writing descriptions based on photos by non-numismatists. In any case, I fully endorse TequilaDave’s suggestion of not buying from online vendors unless they are willing to accept returns.
Micheal:
Thank you for responding to my inquiry regarding Proxibid. I am new at coin collecting but I learned very quickly that I was overpaying for coins and rarely make that mistake today unless it is for a coin that the seller has described inaccurately. I will take a look at some of the auctions you mentioned and perhaps make some purchases. Thanks again.
Eric,
Thank you for writing again. Some more tips:
1. I only bid on holdered coins I know are gradable. Those include PCGS, NGC, ICG, ANACs, PCI, Dominion.
2. I only bid on coins in other holders (apart from our crossover series here) if the coin is a key date or semi key date.
3. I will bid on most Carson City silver dollars.
Also, there are folks who are new to Proxibid and bid over retail until they see the final bill with buyer’s fees, shipping, insurnace and charges far exceeding those on eBay. (Currently there is a Lonnie22 bidding ridiculously. At times another calling himself Gilgamesh will keep bidding on a desired coin that he wants no matter how high the price.)
Here’s the lesson: Bid low, bid on good bets, and realize that credit-card heroes who outbid you will fold sooner rather than latter. There will be better coins tomorrow.
Michael
Michael,
There is one more thing I need to add about online auctions. People usually have more than one e-mail address. This means that they can create separate accounts on these sites and bid on their own auctions and get their friends to bid also, running the prices up. Be very skeptical whenever you see someone like this Lonnie22 and Gilgamesh bidding that you just mentioned.
-Richard Stinchcomb
Good tip, Richard. THANKS.