Pros and Cons of Enhancing Images

#1 · July 8, 2025, 1:03 pm

I recently purchased a cover on-line. Its postmarks looked pretty good but when it arrived I was disappointed. The postmarks were not as sharp as the scan showed at the time of purchase. What had happened was that vendor had scanned the cover and enhanced it in an image editing program like Photoshop. This had the effect of making the image appear stronger and more detailed with brighter colours. See below for a Before and After example of the use of Photoshop's 'Enhance' tool. This is NOT the item in question.

Left: Unaltered scan. Right: Scan improved by the use of 'Enhance'.

Was I cheated? Yes, in a way I was. I was sold an edited item that looked better than the one I received. The Bottom Line is that I believe I have the right to return it and request my money back. No reasonable person can argue that I do not have a case for returning it and being refunded, particularly if I can show the manipulated scan seen at the time of purchase alongside that which I received. If this happens to you, cover your back by obtaining a copy of the vendor's original scan assuming it is still up on the internet.

When is it okay for a vendor to enhance an image for the purpose of sale? IMO, NEVER!

Okay, so is it ever acceptable to enhance an image? YES, UNDOUBTEDLY.

If you are not selling the image but are merely displaying it online for the pleasure of people to view, not buy, I would say that you are entitled to do what you want to with an image within bounds. First, you have every right to tidy it up. This can include not only enhancing it to make colours more vivid but also generally removing scratches, tears, dirt and stains. Postcards in particular benefit from this sort of treatment although one has to be very careful not to add detail to an image that was not there in the original.

#2 · July 8, 2025, 2:30 pm

A difficult subject- and increasingly so as technology develops. No scan or photo of a postmark looks exactly the same as the original - shade, contrast and sharpness may all change unintentionally, and scanners and cameras are often designed to optimise images. Deliberate enhancement of contrast, brightness and sharpness often help to show things more clearly. Editing an image by tidying up distracting elements - scratches, dirt etc. - goes even further.

I think people publishing images in the philatelic literature should feel free to enhance images by adjusting sharpness, brightness and contrast in order to make things clearer, and there's no real need to litter captions with comments about enhancement. But where images are edited by removal or addition, it's important to say so because errors may be introduced, and desirable, where possible, to publish an unedited image next to the edited one.

Vendors are in a different position. A responsible and reputable dealer will be careful to protect their reputation by publishing clear unenhanced images, and, when images are enhanced, saying so. But there are less reputable dealers - images are sometimes enhanced; more often, images are deliberately less than completely sharp, or incomplete, leading a buyer to imagine that a stamp or cover is better than it is. As always, it's important to know who you are dealing with. Some dealers offer no-quibble returns, which helps; but you can't expect that when buying at auction.

Were you cheated? I would guess that the cover you got is better than the unaltered scan, which isn't completely sharp, but less bright than the vendor's scan. I don't think I'd feel seriously disappointed or cheated, but I might be a bit cautious buying again from the same vendor.

Steve has reacted to this post.

#3 · July 9, 2025, 6:44 am

As a vendor, I couldn't agree more....

#4 · July 16, 2025, 1:09 pm

Bas raises a lot of good points, specifically the one where he says that "scanners and cameras are often designed to optimise images". In such an instance any image improvement cannot be the vendor's fault. However, on that basis if one receives an item that is not as described or in this case not as attractive as its scanned image seems to show then you must have a right to return it.

My beef, such as it is, is largely about vendors deliberately using an 'Enhance' tool to make an item look better than it is. Further, Bas' guess that the "cover you got is better than the unaltered scan" is not correct. If it was I wouldn't be moaning. The fact is that the vendor's image was better than what I got. However, the muddied Bottom Line is that despite my disappointment that led me to feel aggrieved enough to write so much about this matter I decided to keep the cover because for all its faults it met my needs.

Anyway.... further to the question 'when is it appropriate to use the Enhance tool?' see below the example of a 1915 cover from occupied GSWA. The vendor described it as follows: "11 Apr 1915 OAS envelope to Grahamstown with v fine dumb off-centre APO4 of Luderitz, boxed censor & hand drawn stamp of the Kaiser! condition not great but fun!". I cannot complain about the description nor its accompanying scan. It is almost too illegible to read the address. Howewver, my main interest in this cover is the hand-drawn stamp of the Kaiser. When I display this here foir your benefit, I will enhance it. When I sell it I won't.

1915. ORIGINAL COVER (UNENHANCED). WW1 Letter ex-GSWA to Grahamstown, SA.

1915. ORIGINAL COVER (ENHANCED). WW1 Letter ex-GSWA to Grahamstown, SA.

Note that while the enhancement has made the stamp and the cover's address more discernible, it has also resulted in the foxing / staining becoming more prominent.