I think i will be returning these!

[Kman]

Update- seller is being fully understanding of my issues with the coins and has said they will accept return and they will consider my imput for future listings, sent back today via special delivery and hopefully have a refund tomorrow. 

 

Bought a 1/10 proof Krugerrand instead and have 30 left to play with. 

 

Complaint received: take less brilliant pictures

 

 

[watchesandwhisky]

Haha just ones that resemble the coins natural tone would do

 

In reality maybe I'm being a bit picky, it does not seem to bother others but really bothered me, but lesson learnt here..Make sure i don't buy coins with scanned photos. 

[Murph]

I think one looks better in your pic than in his as it appears to still possibly have some mint lustre. I have had a lot worse from ebay and it's just the chance you take buying sight unseen. I do not pay usual ebay inflated prices for items in general unless i really want something and tailor my bids to buying without seeing. I've had worse from dealers like atkinsons re the actual coins i receive compared to th advertised pictures.

[Roy]

Hope you don't mind me opening up an old thread?

What are your thoughts on this a year later?

On scanned coins in general? I've been testing on my home scanner and I think they are quite a genuine representation.

But, I'm not an expert and couldn't grade a coin if my life depended on it!

Test: 

 

[sovereignsteve]

I like to see both if possible. They have different properties;

Scans make everything look nice and matt just how I like them. You can see more wear and imperfections when any glare is taken out of the equation.

Photos are much more difficult to take and get a good result, lighting is everything. They can show up general surface rubbing better than scans.

If I only could see one, I would choose a scan in order to see more wear, I know what a coin looks like in real life.

[JB3]

Agreed.