Why do people suck so bad at taking pictures of pool cues?

[skor]

I wonder just how much surface scratches……minor stuff you have to look carefully to even notice……matters?
Why not just step back 2-3 feet and look at the cue again. If those scratches aren’t apparent, it’s sort of picayune.

Now if you want museum quality, you better be prepared to only carry photos of that precious cue in your cue case.
I don’t consider myself a pool cue collector, just an owner. IMO, pool cues are meant to be played not just admired.

Good high qualify and detailed photos are important when buying and selling cues, a buyer wants to see what he’s buying and a seller needs to transparent about what he sells and to show real condition

 

[Bavafongoul]

I totally understand and agree with you. My curiosity, or uncertainty, is words used to describe a cue have different meanings to different people. Immaculate, pristine, like new, barely used, been in the closest the entire time, never even chalked….what do those references or connotations or mean?

What distinguishes being overly picayune from a discerning eye observation? Is there truly any diminishment in resale price or assignment of value. Let’s face it. Perfect is usually unattainable, especially with pool cues. I think that expressing fault with anything can often come from being a little unrealistic in your standards or expectations. That’s what I was referring to,