The Official Morgan Silver Dollar Thread

Then I stand corrected. It's just that the photos are both from heritage, so I assumed they were taken under the same conditions. I like both coins, I just think the deeper the mirrors the better. But I am always wrong.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Perhaps you can help with this coin I picked up raw. It's an 82 CC and I know NGC has been so tough on DMPL lately I don't know if it ha a chance. Take a look at the pics.

 

Very nice coin. I think it is PL, not a DMPL. I think the cameo on the obverse is a lot stronger, and deeper than the reverse. No matter what, I really like the coin. I would definitely send it in for the ribbon-- my guess is PL, but it could be close. Looks 65PL to me, even PL, it is a nice grab.

 

I have an 1898 MS-64 PL and it looks a bit less reflective. The DMPL I just got clearly shines more.

It's also got a confirmation via CAC, for whatever that means.

Hey, I like both coins.

 

Sean...can you post pics of that coin from FARTHER AWAY -- maybe 12-18" away -- with the coin angled below a lightbulb at 30-40 degrees ? Make sure all of the holder is visible. Use normal settings.

I think it will more clearly show the coin's reflectivity....with full-res pixels, anybody can zoom in if they want more of a closeup look. I think the original close-up is overkill.

 

People usually want close up photos to see detail. I don't know what you mean by normal settings. Every photo I post here is from my iphone 5s. I point and shoot. Every photo I post here is taken from the same location with the same lighting. I wasn't trying to denigrate your coin. I was trying to open a discussion about how DMPLs reflectivity can vary and those with deep mirrors tend to be more desirable. Morgandude has said in previous posts that coins in OGH holders tend to be more lenient with DMPL attribution, so I was just trying to understand if he has changed his stance on that but it seems like I was mistaken on my original assessment. The two previous coins were both photographed at HA, which has a consistent setup for their coins, so I thought it would be logical to compare the mirrors between those two coins. I think you got far better value with your coin, it's amazing how high HA bidders go.

Here is a photo taken from farther away that I didn't crop. I think Morgandude is right, it's probably not DMPL. Since yours received a CAC it most certainly is. I have no idea until it gets graded, it could come back with just a straight grade.

 

I heard scans are a good way to judge reflectivity. My scanner is kind of crappy, but I tried a scan of the coin.

 

I didn't take offense at your comments, relax. I'm happy with it. Paid a fair price, DMPL + CAC....guys here like it. I respect your opinion if it differs. No sweat.

I think you got the right idea with your recent pics...but look closely. You have to angle the coin and your angle of the shot to avoid seeing your reflection in the glass/coin. Also, if you click on your shots above you will see they already "zoom-in" so that's why I said you didn't need to zoom-in on the originals.

You have a nice coin....I know it's tough to get lighting to show the coin's reflectivity and not show any reflections. I used a lamp on a nightable....angled the coin against it (the higher it is -- the more vertical -- the less you need to lean over it)...and then took the shot from 12-18" away.

 

Great photo. Your coin is beautiful. I thought I showed the reflectivity in the first photo. I actually think the first photo makes the coin look great. The thing about the "zoom in" feature, is you are just zooming in on the original photo. Look at it this way, you have so many pixels on your sensor. The wider the shot, the less pixels for the area you are highlighting. The closer the shot, the more pixels are focused on that area. So while you can "zoom in" on the photos here, you can't add pixel density to the photo, which is what you can accomplish with a close up shot. All of the first photos were taken from 12" away with optical zoom (which adds pixel density). The second photos were taken from 18" away.

I think I'm done taking photos of the coin, but thanks for your suggestions. I'll keep an eye on craigslist for a nightable

 

Thanks, like I said, you never know with NGC. I think they are very strict with DMPL now, especially with the GSAs, but that's just my opinion.

 

Reading about the 'basining' tecqhinque in the Bowers book on MSDs was really informative about DMPLs. Might be more stuff later on, I just started the book.

 

Sean, where did you get the Morgan ?

 

I agree that people want to see detail on coins, but the closer in, unless you have a fabulous macro lens ( I have a Nikon dedicated macro lens, and even that isn't 100% consistent for the job), the closer you get, it shows more surface preservation, but less reflectivity. DMPLS and very shiny PL coins are very difficult to photograph--I think that your CC coin is PL, and very nice surfaces. Notice that even though it is a CC, I think it has a great shot at PL at MS 65, and that isn't exactly chopped liver--it really is a very nice coin. It could max out at 64 or 64+, but in my opinion it is clean enough to get the CC bump to 65 in this case. So, the closer to the coin that you shoot, the worse it will look for reflectivity. That is the paradox of photographing DMPL and PL coins,

 

The problem based on what I see above and what I struggled with was that you don't want to see your own reflection in the glass (and with his GSA OGP, he has more surface area to reflect). You also want to capture light hitting the coins.

That's why you need to make sure your reflection isn't in the glass/plastic/holder.

The key is to position yourself and the camera in such a way hovering OVER the coin/holder and in relation to the lightsource that you get a clear shot without your image showing up.

Solution: Angle the coin against something directly under the light source....move around with your camera....test out different positions.

 

It takes more than that. The normal lens does not focus well within the parameters of how close to a coin it needs to be. Kit lenses with most cameras do not have as precise close up focus as do separate Macro lenses. Also, what to do about lighting? If one uses flash, then there are reflections on the coin, due to the flash. If one uses incandescent lighting, the color temperature isn't correct enough to deliver an accurate surface rendering. It takes lots of experimentation, to avoid the "Great Southern Coins" effect of exaggerating contrast by accident, as the autofocus locks on to a portion of the coin, but not the correct point. The best light for photographing coins and getting it naturally would be outside, but few people take pictures of their coins outside.

 

Here's one of my 1921 MSD. My grandpa had coins stored away for decades (probably since the 1930s) and this was one of them. It's in a coinflip as can be seen. All the coins were in boxes just rubbing against each other.

..

 

If you're right, I'd be very happy with that grade. I just wish there was a foolproof way to judge reflectivity with these gsa holders. I have a DMPL for reference, but it looks the same as this one, although I doubt it will come back DMPL.

 

Ebay

 

Any interest in this one:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/201542507444?_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT

I wonder what the reserve price is