Gunbroker Photos

[Petrol & Powder]

From time to time I'll look at Gunbroker and occasionally I'll find something that I'm interested in.
Frequently when I look at S&W revolvers the guns with the internal lock will be photographed in a manner designed to hide the lock. Typically a very low angle shot of the left side of the gun so that the thumb piece obscures the "Hillary Hole".
None of my S&W's have the lock and I don't care for it BUT the lock is not the end of the world. I do care that the sellers are attempting to hide what they must feel is an undesirable feature. I'm a firm believer in Caveat Emptor [Let the buyer beware] and I wouldn't buy a gun until I had a good idea what I was getting. It's not the lock that I'm concerned about, it's the attempt to conceal that fact from the very beginning of the sales process. I find it to be a bit shady.
Anyone else have an opinion on that practice?

[brasshog]

I agree completely. Honestly, I laughed because I have never heard it called that.

What is this "Hilary Hole" that you speak of ? Is that the end that the anti-gun lies come from ? Funny, I always thought it was the other hole that she was talking out of lol. I can't stand shady deals when it concerns a gun. But enough of this talk, let us get out from under of this sun and under this big old oak tree out of site (j/k) Apologies, that last bit I was talking out of my Hilary hole

[rintinglen]

I won't buy unless there are multiple CLEAR photos. I had to send a Winchester 92 back that had looked halfway decent, in the photos, but in the ferrous flesh was badly pitted on the left side, and the bore was a sewer pipe. Neither fact was evident in the photos, though in fairness, the description did say there was some pitting in the bore. (like there is some water in the ocean, but at least the seller mentioned it.

[Petrol & Powder]

I don't mind when they're up front with what they're selling. The same seller will have great photos of other S&W's but when you get to one with the lock they have a great photo of the right side and one of those low angle shots of the left side. I know it has a lock just from the angle of the photo.

[square butte]

Much like what we call creative real estate photography - Great looking place with photos to prove it. They just somehow happened to omit the power substation 3 feet from the west side of the house, omit the toxic waste dump on the east side, and the high tension power lines to the south. etc, etc,... Lots of tricks with photography on Gunbroker. If there is any part of the gun that is not shown in the photos - you can bet that is where the issue is - and you had better ask about it. Every square inch shown on an old Winchester except the front sight. Hmmm - front sight a non original and poorly done replacement. Don't forget the holes drilled in top of the barrel - not mentioned or shown. Then there is the curios blueish lighting used to enhance the appearance of the remaining 10 percent of receiver finish to make it appear as if it were a 75 percent gun. Butt plate not shown on a nice saddle ring carbine to omit the poorly done replacement recoil pad. On and on with the tricks of omission slight of hand and deceit, Look carefully and with a skeptical eye. My guess is that probably at least 50 percent of the listings will have some hidden or disguised issue. Once in a wile something I am interested in has been thoroughly photographed and well described down to the last wart. These are the sellers I appreciate and look for again.

[dragon813gt]

Have you been on S&W's site? Even they don't show that side of the revolver.

[roadie]

It's not much different to any ad selling something....you seldom see rust in an ad selling a car, or the lil dings. It's just creative photography.....shady, yes....but the norm.

Now, if you want to hear about really creative photography, just ask any fella or girl that's on a dating site......them ads define creativity. Is that shady?

[square butte]

Now ya got me laughing.

[dtknowles]

I have bought a few guns from Gunbroker and the photos were never an issue, but what can a picture tell you about a used bench rest rifle that the description doesn't.

Tim

[Love Life]

Clear photos or I don't buy 99% of the time. I will not request clarification of something that would have been answered had better photos been taken. Phone photos make me groan out loud...

[Petrol & Powder]

Square butte - "creative real estate photography" Yep that about sums it up.

On a positive note, I purchased a gun from a GB seller and he was nearby so I picked it up in person. While I was there he showed me a nice Colt Woodsman that he was getting ready to list. The Colt was in great condition but had some small initials scribed into the lower edge of one grip panel. I thought it added to the history of the gun but he considered it to be a flaw. I later saw the listing and he had photographed the entire gun, including the initials. The accompanying description included a reference to the initials. Having examined the gun prior to seeing the listing I could say that he was extremely honest and that the gun actually looked better than the photos.

[DaveCampbell]

Recently I got burned for the first time on Gunbroker, and it was partially due to some lousy photos. A first-year-production S&W M48 was on the block. I've been jonesing for a .22 WMR Smith for quite a while. The images showing the right side of the revolver were sharp and well lit, but the left-handed side images were a bit out of focus and under exposed. The seller claimed it to be a 98- to 99-percent gun (in terms of finish), and I let the notion of a exquisite first-year Smith get to my head.

I won the auction, and we set up the transaction. When it arrived I was almost giddy as I opened up the package. Then my heart sank as I saw the left side of it. Somewhere along its 55-year history the revolver got wet on the left side. There are some pits in the cylinder and on the barrel toward the muzzle. To compound the damage, some idiot did a crappy reblue job on it and there are some purple swatches along the barrel. On the good side, it shoots like a house afire. I am looking into some proper restoration options.

So, gentlemen, learn from my mistakes. If the photos aren't any good, avoid it like the plague. Also, don't do business with anyone who will not let you have at least a three-day, non-shooting inspection option.

[enfieldphile]

Creative real estate photography: photo of the back yard that does not show the railroad tracks @ the edge of the property line!

Sometimes, bad pictures and a minimal description can work to your advantage.

But, it means risking your $$. You could take a hosing.

I was Jonesing for a Colt Diamondback .22 w/ a 4" barrel. There was one in GB. The photos disclosed a gun w/ either a worn finish or distortional pictures from camera flash. The discription basically said: "Colt Diamondback, 4" barrel." I knew I was risking the 1K opening bid. I won the auction for the opening bid.
When we opened the box @ the LGS, a 99% gun emerged! The gun store owner immediately offered me $1,100.00, then he upped it up to $1,200.00.

Another time, I was Jonesing for a Ruger Bisley .22, adjustable sights w/ a 6" barrel. There was one on GB. The pics were dark. The box was not shown. The description was minimal. I emailed the gun store. The prompt reply stated the box and manual were present and the gun was 98%.
I risked the $500.00 opening bid. The gun is everything the email said!

Once, I was looking for a Ruger Bisley SBH, adjustable sights, 7.5 barrel. There was one listed. NO pics. The description said 98%, no box. I figured for $269.00, what the heck!
When the gun arrived, it was a 98% gun. What the selling dealer never realized is fluted-cylinder guns like that were only made in 1986, and there are only 3000 of them! He pretty much gave the gun away!

I repeat, this is risky stuff! I have been very lucky. I could have got skunked on any one of those deals.