Enhancing or editing scans when selling

[Throttlesteer]

Has anyone purchased a card where the scan seems to have been processed to hide a flaw. Sometimes the color balance, brightness, or contrast is manipulated to make the borders seem more white. Or, it's purposely darkened to make the colors look less faded or washed out. Worst-case-scenario, flaws are actually photoshopped out.

I recently had a transaction that appears the photo was processed to make things more bright and vivid, with borders much whiter than in-person. It may not have been intentional, but cards usually look better in person...not worse. It could be like Dean's, where their scanner or camera just happens to make everything look psychedelic florescent.

I don't want out the seller by showing the scan vs. the actual card, in case they're on here. I'm not sure it was intentional, but I guess I should always look for the option to return.

[swarmee]

Yes, use the search to look for threads containing the Auburn Tigers loving family from Alabama who used to sell on eBay.

Sometimes it's unintentional. I know eBay has recently added a "magic" photo tool to improve the look of photographs in its listings. Could be someone just pressed the easy button and it set the contrast that way. You could also message the seller before purchasing for additional pictures taken with something in the background to show how the card actually looks.

[7nohitter]

Battlefield....and every other incarnation thereof.

'Nuff said.

[JollyElm]

Never for a moment think it is not purposeful. Sure, many sellers don't have any nefarious intent in cleaning up their auction images (like removing dust particles, etc.), but so many of those who dive into photoshop are deliberate in their intentions. They simply think the buyer won't be motivated enough to wade through the entire return process (and pay the postage) to send back the 'fake,' so it's a winning move for them. Pathetic.

[Johnny630]

If I have doubts or questions about a scan from a ebay seller I walk away. Nothing to see here keep searching lol.

[Fred]

I've seen scans of N172 (OJs) that have been enhanced to show a darker image for the card.

[steve B]

When I was selling on ebay I rarely did any adjusting other than cropping the image. It's easier to scan the entire area of the scanner and crop out the ones I want - if it's low res images. I tended to go with more detailed images and host them myself.


I think maybe once I modified an image, but the reverse of what's usually done. Boosted contrast to show a small crease, rather than hide it. I would have included the unmodified scan as well.

[Thromdog]

In all honesty, I've scanned graded cards (CCD) where you cannot see creases well at all. I've tried rescanning, changing settings, etc, and they just are not as pronounced.

Typically raw card scannings show every little thing possible.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by steve B

When I was selling on ebay I rarely did any adjusting other than cropping the image. It's easier to scan the entire area of the scanner and crop out the ones I want - if it's low res images. I tended to go with more detailed images and host them myself.


I think maybe once I modified an image, but the reverse of what's usually done. Boosted contrast to show a small crease, rather than hide it. I would have included the unmodified scan as well.

Steve,

It seems like you and I are/were doing it all wrong.

Not only would I crop, I'd often put a contrasting paper behind the card to better show the borders. White for things like '71 Topps. Gray, brown, or blue for 'white' bordered cards.

[Peter_Spaeth]

There is nothing like the trifecta -- an overgraded or altered card, with an enhanced scan, at a shilled price. Welcome to collecting.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by tschock

Steve,

It seems like you and I are/were doing it all wrong.

Not only would I crop, I'd often put a contrasting paper behind the card to better show the borders. White for things like '71 Topps. Gray, brown, or blue for 'white' bordered cards.

On my scanner I just leave the top open. If there isn't much light, like if I do the scanning at night, the background is black.

One time I had to redo a scan because I had a lamp on too close to the scanner. It actually took a passable picture of the lamp, wall and ceiling, as well as the cards

[Leon]

When I did auctions my goal was to have the card look on the screen the way it did in hand. You would think it's difficult by looking at some auctions. Something has been done here, I believe..

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1933-Goudey...0AAOSwaf1boaAr
.

[Throttlesteer]

Originally Posted by Leon

When I did auctions my goal was to have the card look on the screen the way it did in hand. You would think it's difficult by looking at some auctions. Something has been done here, I believe..

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1933-Goudey...0AAOSwaf1boaAr
.

They must have borrowed Dean's scanner

[irv]

Originally Posted by Leon

When I did auctions my goal was to have the card look on the screen the way it did in hand. You would think it's difficult by looking at some auctions. Something has been done here, I believe..

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1933-Goudey...0AAOSwaf1boaAr
.

I played and played with my settings trying to mimic the best I could with how my cards looked in hand but gave up.
Once I was told about the dark room lid up/open option, and with no plans to sell my cards, I never played anymore with my settings.
Looking back now in the thread, I am glad I decided to write my settings down at least.
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=224696

Just the other night I received this card. After I scanned it I thought WTH? The scan/pic the seller used was clearly manipulated imo. I went back and looked and sure enough, if I had of looked more closely, I would have seen something but the scan they took/used looked nothing like the card I received.
Needless to say, I highly doubt I will be purchasing from them anymore.

[Leon]

That is a huge peeve, when I get a card and it has issues that can't be seen in a pic when buying. Sellers need to disclose things that can't be seen on the screen but can be seen in hand.

Originally Posted by irv

I played and played with my settings trying to mimic the best I could with how my cards looked in hand but gave up.
Once I was told about the dark room lid up/open option, and with no plans to sell my cards, I never played anymore with my settings.
Looking back now in the thread, I am glad I decided to write my settings down at least.
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=224696

Just the other night I received this card. After I scanned it I thought WTH? The scan/pic the seller used was clearly manipulated imo. I went back and looked and sure enough, if I had of looked more closely, I would have seen something but the scan they took/used looked nothing like the card I received.
Needless to say, I highly doubt I will be purchasing from them anymore.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by Leon

That is a huge peeve, when I get a card and it has issues that can't be seen in a pic when buying. Sellers need to disclose things that can't be seen on the screen but can be seen in hand.

I have noticed the opposite with my scanner. It makes the cards look actually WORSE than they do in hand.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

I have noticed the opposite with my scanner. It makes the cards look actually WORSE than they do in hand.

We must have the same scanner. It is really bad on bright colored cards. I have a Clemente that in hand is amazing and my scanner makes it look dull and ugly.

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by bnorth

We must have the same scanner. It is really bad on bright colored cards. I have a Clemente that in hand is amazing and my scanner makes it look dull and ugly.

Mine is an Epson V something .......It does horrible on SGC slabs...even with the dust filter on it shows a ton of lint in the background.....and the raw cards, it makes the corners look all fuzzy on the old Leafs and Bowmans and in hand they don't look bad at all.

[JollyElm]

Mine is an Epson (without that component for scanning slabbed cards), too. I bought this Seaver with a qualifier, because it was pretty cheap and gum residue doesn't bother me much at all. In person it looks beautiful, to the point that you wouldn't even know it had a 'stain' (in and around his last name on back) if there wasn't an ST on the label. But, man, my scanner makes it look like the card has gangrene (no offense to any gangrenous people out there). I think the folks at Epson program their scanners to find flaws and make them the focal point of the scan.

1970seaver300st.jpg

[RedsFan1941]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

I have noticed the opposite with my scanner. It makes the cards look actually WORSE than they do in hand.

then buy a new scanner

[Leon]

Originally Posted by redsfan1941

then buy a new scanner

lol